Is it just me or does it seem to anyone else that Fr. Andrew Greeley — priest, novelist, sociologist, Catholic progressive — is mellowing in his old age? A few months ago, he was in the press defending Francis Cardinal George of Chicago against unfounded allegations of apathy on the priest abuse issue; now he’s come out swinging for Pope Benedict XVI:
"These have been rough days for the pope. It was inevitable his visit to Auschwitz would stir up complaints from Jewish spokespersons and commentators. No matter what he did or said, they had to criticize. The critics were a minority. Moreover, one can hardly blame Jews for sticking it to Christians for the long history of anti-Semitism and to Catholics for the long history of anti-Semitic popes. If I were Jewish I might be reluctant to believe the stand of the Second Vatican Council even after 40 years, especially if I had read some of the debates that preceded the endorsement of the document on anti-Semitism. Nevertheless, one would hope that they would give Pope Benedict a break.
"In a major article in the New Yorker, ironically titled "Forgiveness," the case was made that the pope has been complicit in the Holocaust because he prayed at cemeteries in which SS troops were buried and did not indict the whole German people for the Nazis’ crimes. The complaints against his failure to condemn the whole German people during his visit to Poland follow the same theme, accompanied by a picture of the pope as a frightened-looking teenage conscript in his Wehrmacht uniform.
"The Catholic Church, one must insist, is committed to forgiveness by the very words of the Lord’s Prayer. It cannot accept the notion of unforgivable collective guilt because it believes that final judgments on guilt belong to God. (Moreover, if everyone is guilty, then no one is guilty.) We pray for all the dead in hope that God’s mercy and love embraced them before it was too late — even if they were members of the SS.
"If we are good Christians, we pray for Islamic terrorists who have blown themselves up in the act of murdering innocent women and children. We should pray even for the World Trade Center assassins. We do not put any limits on God’s mercy. Do not expect this pope or any pope to condemn the Christian theory of forgiveness or embrace the notion of collective guilt."
(Nod to Mark Shea for the link.)
I might bracket out and quibble with bits and pieces of Fr. Greeley’s analysis. For example, he really ought to read Rabbi David G. Dalin’s The Myth of Hitler’s Pope before making unqualified statements about "the long history of anti-Semitic popes." But for the most part, I was pleasantly surprised and cheered by Fr. Greeley’s defense of B16.
I’ve also found it interesting that, in the months since Pope Benedict’s election, more often than not Catholic progressives have been defending the Pope while those commonly thought to be orthodox (click here and here for examples) have been raking him over the coals. Is it perhaps because the orthodox were indeed expecting SuperPope?
Poor Dale Vree,
Ever since he had to give up his liberal views (as in morals, not politics) for the faith, he has gone steadily to the right and has decided to just keep on going.
I’ve read some of B16’s books and, contrary to what the media reports, he isn’t all that conservative. (Read for example his liberal book on Genesis.) A bit more conservative than JP II, but no reactionary.
Some people called John Paul II a reactionary.
“Conservative/liberal/etc.” are meaningless. This is the Church. He is either orthodox, or he is not.
So the question: is he orthodox?
Another question: will he govern the Church?
Nehaus, et al, make some good points and have some legitimate concerns.
(Besides, when the heterodox start liking, and even defending the pope, that’s enough to make us orthodox folks nervous–probably why they do are doing it!)
However, I still have faith.
The pope is solidly orthodox. Wherever his intellectual flights may have taken him at various times, when it comes down to it he will adhere to the Catholic Faith.
So, my only real question is, will he govern? He’s a nice guy, and he surely doesn’t like the idea of confrontation or having to discipline. But I believe he understands his responsibilities, and has the courage to carry them out. God will provide him whatever he lacks in himself.
I think, though, that besides our constant prayers, he needs our support. If he knows he has countless faithful that support him; indeed, are depending on him, he will do the right thing.
I don’t think progressives were the only ones defending the Pope.
You are Kephas
I loved Pope John Paul II, but imprefections in Rome
Have you read Greeley’s The Making of the Pope 2005? OK, probably not.
It’s a daily log of gossip and speculation, including the belief that Joseph Ratzinger would never win for historical reasons (oops!), and ending with guarded optimism because of the choice of papal name. I don’t get the sense that Greeley actively dislikes the man or doubts his integrity and spirituality, although he dislikes who he saw as Ratzinger supporters. He uses the term “Scary Guys” to refer to “well-heeled American reactionaries who feel that they have power and money on their side and that if Cardinal Ratzinger is elected, all they need to do is turn over their hit lists and there will be a clean-out of the American Church.” Another group he dislikes is the Roman Curia, who he charges with institutional inertia that has harmed the Church.
Greeley also seems to have a negative stereotype of theologians. Particularly, he gets outraged over theologians who he feels argue against a straw man representation of society which social science would easily show does not actually exist. One example would be Greeley’s belief that the extent of secularism is overstated and vastly exaggerated in the mainstream media. He has misgivings because of B16’s “German Platonic theological method,” although he also expresses a an optimism that the current pope wouldn’t be what “the Scary Guys” want. He also defends the Pope in the case of the dismissal of his “good friend” Father Thomas Reese as editor of America.
The Greeley I have read seems most passionately angry when people are disagreeing with his research. If he has mellowed, perhaps it’s because he just hasn’t been doing as much research recently.
Oh, on the long history of anti-Semitism, one could make that case even ignoring whether or not any 20th century pope was actually an anti-Semite, although one could not reasonably make the case that the Catholic Church has been inherently or consistently anti-Semitic. It seems that some popes have been more tolerant of Judaism, and other popes have been like Paul IV and some of the single-digit Piuses who I really can’t defend on the Jewish front.
If we are good Christians, we pray for Islamic terrorists who have blown themselves up in the act of murdering innocent women and children.
If we are good Christians, Andrew, we fight against those who murder the innocent by fighting — and, hopefully, destroying — the ideology that makes such abominations possible. Or haven’t you heard of WWII?
We should pray even for the World Trade Center assassins.
This is utterly moronic excrement. The World Trade Center assassins are dead. Their fate is in the hands of a just, righteous God Who hates the shedding of innocent blood — and, by extention, hates those who shed it. Who are we to even ask such a God to spare them from the consequences they have so justly earned? I believe that to intercede for such unrepentant evildoers is to revile the innocent and their families in a profound way.
Unfortunately, Greeley’s comments reflect the kind of sentimentality toward evil that permeates the Church. It’s a sentimentality that allows the Church to engage in moral revisionism concerning capital punishment — and to ignore the legitimate complaints of those sexually abused by priests and those victims’ families.
The previous post was mine.
Joseph,
You don’t know if the men who committed the mass-murders on 9/11 are in hell. It is likely, but none of us can be sure of the fate of anyone. It is the duty of every faithful Catholic to pray for his enemies, living and dead. If one finds himself unable to forgive his enemies, his should refrain from saying the Our Father (as we forgive our just debts) until he decides to forgive them. If you think this is impossible, you are right, humanly speaking. Only with God’s grace can we forgive evildoers and pray that they will ask God for mercy.
Joe, Joe, Joe,
Do not reject that prayers for the dead are meritorious. Your god of human justice is not the God of Jesus Christ. You are very quick to claim that any sort of hierarchal structure within the Church is merely a vestige of the Roman Imperial government. Can you not accept that your cosmic worldview is nothing more than Constantinian Lex writ large? Praying for sinners isn’t about punishment and prevention of evil deeds in this life (something which we are called to do). It is about the mercy of God and our obligation to work towards the inner disposition that would allow us to, like Christ, pray for those who are torturing and killing us.
There is a profound difference between hating evil and hating evil people. The incarnate god of cosmic retribution is Krishna, not Christ. Yes, God requires us to prevent all those who have done evils from continuing to do them (whether through incarceration or legitimate captial punishment), but we can kill and incarcerate all the evil people in the world without beginning to do the will of God. You, sir, DESERVE a prolonged and bloody death for your sins (although perhaps not as prolonged or painful as the murderers or abusers you cite). Do you deny this? The fact that you do not actively seek such a death is, by your own system, “sentimentality toward evil.” Either work consistently within your own Karmic system or turn to Christ. I suggest the latter.
I must admit that when B16 was elected I had high hopes that things would get better in the Church straight away. More than anything else I hoped (and still hope) he would grant a universal indult to say Mass in the traditional rite. But of course these things don’t happen overnight. I certainly think the Pope is orthodox, and I think he’s well aware (perhaps a little more aware than his predecessor was) of the problems that relativism and dumbed-down liturgy present for the Church. But I also have the impression that he is a very cautious man who won’t make sweeping changes on a whim.
One other thing I notice is that pretty much everyone who has ever personally kown the Pope, including theological opponents like Hans Küng, has been very impressed by his gentleness and humility. Fr. Greeley’s words sound like those of someone who has taken the man, and not the caricature, seriously.
You don’t know if the men who committed the mass-murders on 9/11 are in hell. It is likely, but none of us can be sure of the fate of anyone.
Nobody has God’s knowledge, David. But God doesn’t want us to be imbeciles, either. Do you seriously believe that Islamic terrorists who consider it a religious duty to murder the innocent in the name of their evil agenda would repent at the last minute? If so, then why didn’t the 9/11 hijackers turn the planes around?
Do you seriously believe, David, that a God who values justice toward the innocent would let such men “off the hook,” given the damage they did — damage that will be felt for generations?!?
It is the duty of every faithful Catholic to pray for his enemies, living and dead.
It is an even greater duty, David, to pray for the victims’ families, who are widows, widowers and orphans. God specifially demands support for such people in His revealed Word. Where do you find any Catholics advocating that? The fact that fewer Catholics advocate praying for the victims rather than the perpetrators of evil demonstrates just how morally bankrupt the Church is.
Then again, a Church that has abandoned its committment to the values and ideas expounded in Scripture is a Church of Greeleys and other amoral ostriches.
more to come….
Your god of human justice is not the God of Jesus Christ.
Bovine excrement and flatulence, Jay! I’m talking about divine justice, not human, and the God of Jesus Christ made His moral demands for humanity clear throughout the OT (which is not contradicted by Christ’s words or mission, despite what ignorant Catholics and other Christians believe, especially those who have been charged with teaching and preaching!).
Praying for sinners … is about the mercy of God and our obligation to work towards the inner disposition that would allow us to, like Christ, pray for those who are torturing and killing us.
I would more readily agree, Jay, if the Church busied itself with fighting for the innocent as much as it advocates praying for evildoers. But it doesn’t do that. Just look at the clerical sex-abuse crisis. Just look at how the families of murder victims have been abandoned as the Church engages in moral revisionism concerning capital punishment. For that matter, just look at Greeley’s, David’s and your responses to the question on the floor.
This isn’t about “karma” or about the Lex Constantinius, Jay. This is about active, committed resistance to moral evil, something the Church has lost sight of (unless that “evil” happens to fall withing “politically correct” categories that the Church defines to further its desire for secular political influence).
You, sir, DESERVE a prolonged and bloody death for your sins…
So, Jay, do you. So does every man and woman who ever inhabited this planet. The whole purpose of Christ’s mission was to enable people to escape God’s just retribution through blood atonement.
That does not mean to say, however, that I or others are equivalent to the 9/11 hijackers. The Church teaches about gradations of evil (“mortal” v. “venial” sin). The Church also teaches that repentance is mandatory for forgiveness; otherwise, why do we have a sacrament of confession or even a notion of Purgatory?
Tell me, Jay, would you pray for Hitler’s soul? For Stalin’s? For Mao’s? For Cromwell’s? Do you do so now?
I pray for victims, we all do, but I also pray for Fr. Greeley as I do for Madonna Ciccone — another confused entertainer (tho’ non-ordained) who betrayed the crucifix.. as did Gestas (whom I am sure both Jesus and Mary prayed for, as did perhaps John, as did perhaps Dismas). And I pray for all who advocate meting out violence and death, especially those who represent their own Church, not Christ’s. Catholics know who the real enemy is.
Really, I don’t think there is a conflict between fighting the terrorists and praying for them.
I don’t think so either, Bill. And why can’t one pray for both victims and victimizers – that the former are healed and comforted, that the latter repent? To think yourself above praying for anyone’s soul, no matter what they did, seems very strange.
Totally off topic, but what is that thing Greeley is wearing? It looks like he might have a white ferret around his neck.
Really, I don’t think there is a conflict between fighting the terrorists and praying for them.
Technically speaking, Bill, there isn’t. However, I suspect that so much rhetoric has been spent about “praying for our enemies” that we forget about those enemies’ victims.
Joe,
You are limiting God’s mercy. Some Al-Qaeda members really believe in their cause. Your contention that Catholics don’t pray for the victims is upsurd! We take it so much for granted to pray for them that it’s silly to remind one another.
Jesus Said He came to call sinners, not the just. Remember also the story of the Good Shepherd, Who left the 99 to go after the one lost sheep. I don’t know whose God you worship, but he is not the same God Catholics adore.
“There is no conflict between loving our enemies and fighting them – so long as we fight them fairly and in a good cause.”
– Chesterton, “St. Francis of Asissi”
“Christianity came in like a sword,and cleft the criminal from the crime. The criminal we must forgive unto seventy times seven. The crime we must not forgive at all.” – “Orthodoxy”
I quote from memory, but that’s the gist. The passage in “Orthodoxy”, perhaps more than any other, helped me back to the Church. (To paraphrase C.S. Lewis, an earnest young *deist* can’t be too careful what he reads!)
I offer the above words of wisdom in the hope that they might help reconcile some of the above arguments and arguers.
It is terribly easy to fall into thinking, (or at least giving the impression to someone else of thinking), that only if the criminal-AND-crime is pardonable is it feasible that the criminal-AND-crime be pardoned. This tends to lead to excessive harshness OR excessive softness. It is no longer (or may no longer appear to be) the dynamic exciting Christ-ian orthodoxy that Chesterton hymns so well.
You are limiting God’s mercy.
David, I’m not limiting God mercy. God limits it. He limits it to the living in their opportunity to adopt Christ as their Savior; why else would St. Paul say, “Now is the day of salvation”?
Yes, Jesue came to call sinners, not only the “just.” But since nobody is truly “just” in God’s sight without redemption through blood atonement (which was the fundamental purpose of Christ’s mission in the first place), Jesus came to call everybody. That doesn’t mean, however, that everybody will come; indeed, many have rejected Him — including (and especially) the barbarians who hijacked those planes on 9/11 and incinerated about 3,000 innocent people, including their fellow barbarians who commit suicide bombings for their obtuse causes. Do you not think that a holy, righteous God watches them?
Some Al-Qaeda members really believe in their cause.
So what, especially when that cause revolves around the murder of the innocent? Tell me, David, would you make the same excuse for Nazis or practitioners of abortion?
I don’t know whose God you worship, but he is not the same God Catholics adore.
David, I worship the God Who revealed Himself through Scripture, the God Whom Jews and Christians have worshipped for centuries. If that is not the same God Whom Catholics adore, then Catholicism has a mighty big problem on its hands, to say the least!
I agree with Bill and Sonetka. I pray for the repose of the souls of the soldiers and for consolation of the families who have lost sons and daughters in Iraq as well as the insurgents/terrorists that they would see the truth and repent. I know it’s a big order but God can fill it.
Joseph D Hippolito
The US also kills innocents, women and children.
I am NOT pro-insurgent. BUT I am anti this invasion of Iraq. I am NOT pro-Saddam Hussein but the country was better off with him than now.
Many people who do not want the US there are not insurgents. Iraq is devestated, hundreds of thousands have died, they don’t want the US there, they are not threatening you or the US.
The US occupation is breeding more terrorism.
To the anonymous poster above, who spoke about U.S. involvement in Iraq:
What does 9/11 have to do with U.S. involvement in Iraq? What do the bombings in London, Madrid, Bali and Istanbul have to do with U.S. involvement in Iraq? What does the Beslan massacre have to do with U.S. involvement in Iraq? What do suicide bombings against innocent Israeli civilians have to do with U.S. involvement in Iraq?
All the events I’ve mentioned have one thing in common, and it’s not U.S. involvement in Iraq. It’s the behavior of a satanic religion that seeks to impose its totalitarian will on the world and either to enslave or murder those who don’t follow their program.
Do you seriously think that U.S. behavior in Iraq, even at its most egregious, would change these fanatics?
It’s about time that Catholics, especially our dumbass priests and bishops, recognize the true nature of Islam and start fighting it instead of compromising with or enabling its adherents.
Joseph D’Hippolito,
Every time I read your post I feel sorry for you. God have mercy on your soul and mine.
St. Cyril pray for us!
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
Ditto.
Joe, even when you are correct (as occasionally happens) it’s hard to swallow what you say because you wrap it all in the most bileous, self-important, contemptuously abusive chat-room bluster.
You end up shooting yourself in the foot.
Cool yer jets, man.
Fr. Greeley has never been that easy to peg.
Inocencio and Tim J., do either of you seriously believe that, if I took a far different rhetorical, ideological or intellectual approach on my posts, any of the facts I present (such as in my last post) would change to any significant degree, if at all?
Islam is evil. It is religious Nazism. It doesn’t take a theological genius to see that. In fact, the theological “geniuses” are the ones who are defending or making excuses for Islam.
As far as our “dumbass” priests and bishops go, what word would either of you use to describe a group of professionals who generally 1)display profound ignorance of the theology they are called upon to teach and uphold 2)value personal prestige and privledge over accountability, transparency and fidelity 3)isolate themselves in a vacuum governed by intellectual fashion 4)don’t care about any of the other three points?
The American bishops have more in common with Kenneth Lay than with Jesus Christ, apostolic succession notwithstanding. Again, it doesn’t take a theological genius to see that. Again, it’s the theological “geniuses” (cf, Richard Neuhaus) who make excuses for this brood of vipers.
Joseph D’Hippolito,
Do you believe that you can not only ignore but be disrespectful to bishops and priests?
Do you think their authority comes from you or God?
Do you expect to stand before God and let Him know that you were just too intelligent and independent for respectful obedience to the Church hierarchy He established?
The words I use for a bishop are “Your Excellency” and for a priest “Father”.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
Inocencio, Christ Himself used terms such as “brood of vipers” and “whitewashed sepuchres” to describe the corrupt religious authorities of His day — authorities to whom, as a Jew, He was supposed to be subordinate to. Moreover, Jeremiah and Ezekiel were no less harsh in their appraisals in their day.
The point is not to equate myself with Christ or the prophets. The point is to point out that God doesn’t expect us to be naive or imbecilic when it comes to ecclesiastical corruption.
My conscience is clear before a holy, righteous God who not only expects but demands the highest standards of behavior from those who hold power in His name.
Worry not for me, Inocencio. Worry for yourself, because you appear to give all these corrupt prelates a pass merely because they *are* prelates.
Pope Joe has spoken.
Yes, his mind not the matter is closed.
Again, God have mercy on his soul and mine.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
“My conscience is clear before a holy, righteous God…”
Wow, you’ve got it bad. I fear God’s righteousness. I trust in His mercy, but I try to remember to beg for it every day.
Believe me, Bill, I pray for God’s mercy more often than you might surmise, because I know I cannot survive without it. Nevertheless, I will not play the fool for episcopal malfeasants and their cronies. God doesn’t want anyone to do that.
Joseph D’Hippolito,
“God doesn’t want anyone to do that.”
Our Blessed Lord’s (Matt. 23:1-3) very own words contradict you.
1: Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples,
2: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat;
3: so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.
And before you talk about irony and twist the Sacred Scriptures to your own destruction (2 Peter 3:16-17) read what The Catechism of Trent taught about The Honour Due To Bishops And Priests:
The Apostle also teaches that they are entitled to obedience: Obey your prelates, and be subject to them; for they watch as being to render an account of your souls. Nay, more. Christ the Lord commands obedience even to wicked pastors: Upon the chair of Moses have sitten the scribes and Pharisees: all things, therefore, whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do; but according to their works do ye not, for they say and do not.
And from St. John Chrysostom:
Hom. lxxii: “But that none should say, For this cause am I slack to practice, because my instructor is evil, He removes every such plea, saying, “All therefore whatsoever they say unto you, that observe and do,” for they speak not their own, but God’s, which things He taught through Moses in the Law.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
So, Inocencio, when bishops enable clerical sexual predators by passing them from diocese to diocese, when those same bishops fail or refuse to teach what the Gospel really means, when those same bishops fail or refuse to uphold basic Church doctrines, when those same bishops (such as Tod Brown in Orange County, Calif.) publically upbraid faithful people who kneel instead of stand while receiving the Eucharist, when those same bishops support pastors (like Martin Tran in Huntington Beach, Calif.) who say that kneeling before the Eucharist is a mortal sin, when those same bishops abandon Church teaching for intellectual fashion, your suggestion for the faithful is to shut up and take it, perhaps “offer it up,” is that right?
Inocencio, I would like you to visit the website of a man named Stephen Brady. He is the head of Roman Catholic Faithful (www.rcf.org), *not* to be confused with Voice of the Faithful, a far more liberal organization. I am tame in my assessment compared to Brady, who has given up his job to defend the innocent and to criticize those bishops and Vatican bureaucrats who fail or refuse to act against misfeasant bishops.
Visit that site, then tell me what you think of the man.
For that matter, I’d be interested in your opinion of Rod Dreher.
> when bishops enable clerical sexual predators by passing them from diocese to diocese, when those same bishops fail or refuse to teach what the Gospel really means, when those same bishops fail or refuse to uphold basic Church doctrines, when those same bishops (such as Tod Brown in Orange County, Calif.)
I reply: You MUST obey ALL their lawful commands & instructions. Their sins & failings are irrelivant to your divinely imposed obligation to obey.
>publically upbraid faithful people who kneel instead of stand while receiving the Eucharist, when those same bishops support pastors (like Martin Tran in Huntington Beach, Calif.) who say that kneeling before the Eucharist is a mortal sin,
I reply: It is not a mortal sin to knee before the Eucharist no bishop has said that rather it is wrong to knee at certain points during the liturgy when the bishop tells everyone they must be standing. As far as I can tell it is a lawful instruction but one can instead of promoting sinful disobedience simply make a formal appeal to Rome.
>when those same bishops abandon Church teaching for intellectual fashion, your suggestion for the faithful is to shut up and take it, perhaps “offer it up,” is that right?
I reply: Since when are you intellectual Joe? Also you are a extremely unlearned when it comes to Catholic doctrine so you are unfit to judge.
Joseph D’Hippolito,
Our Blessed Lord said He is “meek and humble of heart” (Matt. 11:29) and Acts 13:22 says David was “a man according to my own heart”. We should follow David’s example when dealing with the “Lord’s anointed” who has God given authority over us.
When Saul the King of Israel hunted David to kill him, David refused to harm Saul because he was the “Lord’s anointed” and a father to him. David would not let his men harm Saul. David addresses King Saul directly and in a respectful manner even bowing with his face to the earth to show him reverence. Saul’s unworthiness did not stop David from showing honor to the “Lord’s anointed”. David placed his trust in the Lord to judge the matter rightly, but would not raise his hand against Saul.
When David learned of Saul’s death, he tore his garments, mourned, wept, and fasted for his fallen king, and he even put to death the young Amelekite man who “desecrated the Lord’s anointed” (2 Sm 1:14-16).
“your suggestion for the faithful is to shut up and take it, perhaps “offer it up,” is that right?”
Offering it up as penance and prayer is part of my suggestion. I would suggest and have brought my concerns directly to the priest in private with an attitude of charity and respect. I do everything I can to point to the teaching and documents of the Church while discussing the situation but I know I cannot override their decision nor ignore their authority over me.
I accepted the decision of each priest even though I disagreed with it. My confessor told me that I need to be obedient to the decisions of those in authority over me and pray for them.
I will visit that website and post a comment later if you are really interested in my opinion.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
Joseph D’Hippolito,
As for the abuse of children ALL the proper authorities should be contacted, starting with the police and DA.
If you have knowledge of a bishop covering up abuse then you need to contact the Holy See. We cannot build up the Mystical Body of Christ by tearing down the hierarchy He instituted or pretending to assume authority we do not have.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
Ben Yachov:
1. You say that the faithful should obey every lawful episcopal command. You do not say, however, what the faithful should do when bishops try to impose their will in an arbitrary manner without regard to the faithful’s canonical rights.
Again, I refer to the situation in Orange County, Calif. (where I live and where, to the best of my knowledge, you don’t). A woman at a traditionalist parish knelt before Bishop Brown as she was going to receive the Eucharist. Brown, after gently asking her to rise, publically embarassed her during Mass. The pastor of this church, Martin Tran (whom Brown appointed) said that kneeling to receive the Eucharist is a mortal sin (despite the fact that Rome said the faithful have every right to kneel in such a situation). Brown and Tran suddenly backed away from their positions on the issue. Tell me, Ben, do Brown and Tran provide an excellent example of a “lawful” command that “must be obeyed”?
Moreover, Brown has been accused of using his episcopal position for personal enhancement (such as hiring a sushi chef for himself) and of either encouraging homosexuality in the priesthood or of ignoring its presence. Tell me, Ben, if such accusations are true, should the faithful do nothing?
2. Your last comment about my lack of doctrinal knowledge is nothing but a cheap personal attack designed to avoid the question I asked — a tactic that says a lot more about you than it does about me.
Nevertheless, I’ve run into such tactics before. They are legion in St. Blog’s, especially among people who consider themselves “faithful” Catholics. Well, Christ Himself said that “you will know them by their fruits” — and if such “faithful” Catholics such as you, Ben, are examples of Catholicism, then Catholicism is more than an unholy mess. It is an abomination before a righteous God that deserves to be destroyed!
Inocencio:
1. When I talk about the faithful not having to “sit and take it,” I’m not talking about a violent uprising (which basically nullifies your example involving David and Saul). I’m talking about using canon law to protect the faithful against abusive, arbitrary episcopal tyranny. The faithful *do* have rights, even vis-a-vis “God appointed” authority, especially when that authority abuses its rank and power.
Tell me, Inocencio, was Christ being “meek” (as you define it) when He overturned the moneychangers’ tables in the Temple, or when He challenged the Pharisees’ manipulative rhetoric when they met with Him?
2. Your suggestion to “offer up” such tyranny as part of penitential prayer does nothing but create a sense of unjustified victimization. Yes, we should all look after our own respective spiritual conditions. All too often, however, Catholics have used that as a cop-out to discourage people from speaking out against legitimate episcopal tyranny. A good idea is being manipulated as an exercise in spiritual narcissism to protect misfeasant bishops.
3. It is good that you challenge your priests charitably. But you are under no obligation to submit to clerical or episcopal authority that either misrepresents the Gospel or the teachings of the Church, or is ignorant of them. That doesn’t mean you engage in violent reprisal. That means you are ultimately responsible for your spiritual development, not your priest or your bishop. If you received the Sacrament of Confirmation, then you’ve received the Holy Spirit, Whose responsibility is to provide comfort, wisdom and direction while serving as an Advocate for you with the Father (and vice versa).
Too many Catholics view themselves as second-class citizens when compared to priests or bishops. I can assure you that God doesn’t see lay Catholics as such. I’ll bet that He views them with greater value that those priests and bishops who corrupt His revelation.
JD’H: Your claim of intimate knowledge of the mind of the Almighty is flabbergasting.
Bill,
I think another decree ‘ex cathedra’ will forth-coming from Joe. Just ignore him.
Bill and David, what I’m saying is nothing but common sense and knowledge gained from studying Scripture (except concerning my final remarks to Ben Yachov, which I will explain momentarily).
As far as my comments concerning the Holy Spirit are concerned, all you have to do is read the NT, especially the Epistles. Do you seriously believe that that the Holy Spirit resides exclusively in the hierarchy and clergy?
Regarding Bishop Brown, I suggest you look up http://www.romancatholicblog.com and onelacatholic.blogspot.com. The controversy surrounding him and Tran are well documented both places — and both sites are run by devout Catholics who are neither liberal nor sedevacantist.
Now, concerning Ben Yachov: All too many of the Catholics I’ve encountered in St. Blog’s react to legitimate challenges with personal attacks — and I’m not just talking about myself, here. I’m referring especially to reactions to one Rod Dreher (do a Google search on him and John Paul II if you don’t know what I’m talking about). Given how frequently such attacks occur, they reflect either 1)the emotional immaturity of the attacker or 2)a cultlike mentality encouraged by the religion to which the attackers belong. Far too many Catholics in St. Blog’s value mere Catholic brand loyalty over fidelity to the Gospel (they’re not the only Christians who do so, of course; so do Evangelicals who attack Catholics as an avocation). In any case, God did not create us nor did He send His Son to die for us so we could be “good little Catholic (Protestant, Orthodox) robots.” They did these things so we might have eternal life. Anybody who constantly issues personal attacks in the name of his religion reflects the nature of that religion — and if the nature of that religion is to demand cult-like behavior, then it truly is an abomination before a God Who created humanity in His free image.
Does that mean that Catholicism was intended to be a cult? Of course not. Nevertheless, that doesn’t stop the more zealous from reacting as if they were in one — and Ben Yachov fits that bill.
You may mock me, gentlemen, but by doing so you are only mocking yourselves.
I thought we were talking about Father Greeley here???
Dave
Joseph D’Hippolito,
“I’m not talking about a violent uprising (which basically nullifies your example involving David and Saul).”
What violent uprising????
David was respectful and reverent to the “Lord’s anointed” even though Saul was unworthy.
As we should be when dealing with our bishops and priest.
May I ask if you have respectfully and privately asked Bishop Brown about your concerns?
What is your opinion of the quote from the Catechism of Trent “Christ the Lord commands obedience even to wicked pastors: Upon the chair of Moses have sitten the scribes and Pharisees: all things, therefore, whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do; but according to their works do ye not, for they say and do not.”
What respect and obedience do you think is required of a Catholic to the hierarchy the Lord established?
Food for thought:
15:22. And Samuel said: Doth the Lord desire holocausts and victims, and not rather that the voice of the Lord should be obeyed? For obedience is better than sacrifices: and to hearken rather than to offer the fat or rams.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
>You say that the faithful should obey every lawful episcopal command. You do not say, however, what the faithful should do when bishops try to impose their will in an arbitrary manner without regard to the faithful’s canonical rights.
I reply: Tradition has unanimously taught us we must submit TO ALL lawful judgements handed down by the bishop & church authorities no exceptions. If we believe the bishop has delt unjustly with us & has not afforded us our rights we STILL must submit (like ALL THE SAINTS OF OLD WHO where in similar circumstances) till we have cleared our names & persuade a higher authority to uphold our rights. That is what has been done for 2000 years. Who are you to challenge that?
>Again, I refer to the situation in Orange County, Calif. (where I live and where, to the best of my knowledge, you don’t). A woman at a traditionalist parish knelt before Bishop Brown as she was going to receive the Eucharist. Brown, after gently asking her to rise, publically embarassed her during Mass. The pastor of this church, Martin Tran (whom Brown appointed) said that kneeling to receive the Eucharist is a mortal sin (despite the fact that Rome said the faithful have every right to kneel in such a situation). Brown and Tran suddenly backed away from their positions on the issue. Tell me, Ben, do Brown and Tran provide an excellent example of a “lawful” command that “must be obeyed”?
I reply: The command is lawful since the Vatican says the Bishop may dictate our posture during Mass at this point even if admited this command is petty & unnecissary it is still lawful. One gives NO HONOR to God by flouting it.
>Moreover, Brown has been accused of using his episcopal position for personal enhancement (such as hiring a sushi chef for himself) and of either encouraging homosexuality in the priesthood or of ignoring its presence. Tell me, Ben, if such accusations are true, should the faithful do nothing?
I reply: The Faithful must obey all his lawful commands. No exceptions. His personal sins can never be used as an excuse. Every Pope who has ever live has taught as much.
Anyway if you have a video tape or similar hard evidence documenting his malfesence by all means turn it into the media. That is neither unlawful for you as a Catholic or disobedience. If I see the bishop shoplifting I can turn him into the police. If he orders me not to I can refuse since that order is unlawful.
But if he issues a Command from his jailcell(assuming for the sake of argument he hasn’t resigned or was removed from his See by the Pope) that instructs me to stand instead of kneel at a certain point during Mass well then I am BOUND BY DIVINE LAW to obey. I dishonor & sin against Christ who authority he granted the bishop which I must obey. Tell us Joe if Christ himself ORDERED YOU to stand before him to worship him would you DISOBEY HIM & say “I prefer to knee”. Ever read the OT sometime? What happened to Moses when his disobeyed God 7 struck the Rock? Or Uzzah when touched the Ark? God DID NOT reward their behavior. Neither will God reward those who disobey Bown’s lawful Commands.
>2. Your last comment about my lack of doctrinal knowledge is nothing but a cheap personal attack designed to avoid the question I asked — a tactic that says a lot more about you than it does about me.
I reply: It’s the truth Joe. Your sinful pride will not let you admit your own limitations. You are clearly theologically ignorant. Now I don’t know everything theologically but I’m not gonna act like I do. That’s your blatent public vice. It’s getting old. It’s also hypocritical that you grant yourself the unlimited right to criticise to point of heresy but anyone who offers critcism of you is “making a personal attack”. I am not moved by such dishonest double think.
>Nevertheless, I’ve run into such tactics before. They are legion in St. Blog’s, especially among people who consider themselves “faithful” Catholics. Well, Christ Himself said that “you will know them by their fruits” — and if such “faithful” Catholics such as you, Ben, are examples of Catholicism, then Catholicism is more than an unholy mess. It is an abomination before a righteous God that deserves to be destroyed!
I reply: Your fruits are very bitter Joe & your obstinate pride will never let you accept correction. The scripture says “be angry & sin not”. You are good with the first part the second part OTOH……….
Ben, I refer you to the Book of Revelation, which says that “every knee shall bow” before the risen Christ. Now, Christ is truly present in the Eucharist, correct? So kneeling before Him is a command, right? Then who is Tod Brown — or, for that matter, any bishop — to command people to stand before the Eucharistic Christ?
Christ would never order anyone to stand before him as opposed to kneeling. Peter, however, was a different matter (see Acts 10). Unfortunately, the bishops have things confused; they think that they deserve more honor than Christ!
Moreover, there’s a difference between obedience and obsequeiousness. Catholics have rights under canon law. The faithful of the Orange and Los Angeles dioceses should get together, hire a canon lawyer, file a class-action suits against Mahony and Brown for episcopal malfeasance and take that suit to Rome. Both men have brought the faith into ill repute and if that’s not cause for discipline, let alone removal of their titles or positions, then what is?
Ben, you are nothing but an obsequeous follower who has no brains of his own. The only thing you can do is reiterate nonsense and insult people. Go back to the Hell from which you came!
“Christ would never order anyone to stand befor Him as opposed to kneeling.” Please tell us how you know.
Inocencio, you fail to answer my question about Christ’s behavior with the moneychangers or the Pharisees. Instead, you offer a verse that’s taken out of context. The context happens to be the Israelites’ propensity to substitute ritualistic behavior for a committment to God that extends beyond the ritualistic, a committment that extends to aspects of the Mosaic Law concerning everyday life.
People like you, Inocencio, would have Catholics become blind slaves to corrupt authority merely because that authority claims apostolic succession. You essentially value the conventional wisdom that has brainwashed Catholics for centuries rather than God’s revelation, which states that Christians will rule with Christ when He returns and that those who hold authority in His name will be held to a higher account by a holy, righteous God. You think as men do — and as the Church would want you to think — not as God would have you think.
“You think as men do…not as god would have you think>” Please tell us how you know.
My friends, since it is clear that it is a waste of our time to argue with Joseph D’Hippolito any longer, I urge all of you to resist the temptation to respond to him any more.