-
Downton’s Class System — and Ours
May 20, 2013 | 9 comments
-
The Mexican Kleptocracy: July 1989
April 19, 2013 | 0 comments
-
The Mexican Kleptocracy
April 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Black Plight: In Conflict With Unions
April 6, 2013 | 0 comments
-
An Assist from the Press
March 16, 2013 | 0 comments
Capitol Ideas
Barque of St. Peter in Troubled Waters
First we need to recognize that something has gone seriously wrong.
(Page 2 of 2)
A PARTICULARLY TROUBLESOME CASE was that of Hans Hermann Groër, who was appointed archbishop of Vienna in 1986, having been plucked from the obscurity of a Benedictine monastery and later made a cardinal. Then the press reported that he had sexually molested boys in his charge, maybe as many as 30 of them, and lied about it.
We are often told these days that we need a hierarchy more sensitive to the victims. We do, but a more fundamental point is that we need priests and bishops who fear God. Groër was forced out in 1995 and replaced by Christoph Schönborn, the current archbishop of Vienna. He has told journalists that when Ratzinger earlier tried to launch an inquiry into Groër he was blocked by “the diplomatic side,” by which he meant Cardinal Sodano and John Paul’s private secretary, Stanislaw Dziwisz. The reporter John Allen put it less diplomatically. In attempting to do something about Groer (who died in 2003), Ratzinger was “blocked by John Paul II.”
Is there not a pattern here?
It was detected by the National Review film critic and (now) New York Times columnist Ross Douthat. He wrote in April that while “the high-flying John Paul let scandals spread beneath his feet, the uncharismatic Ratzinger was left to clean them up. This pattern extends to other fraught issues that the last pope tended to avoid — the debasement of the Catholic liturgy, or the rise of Islam in once-Christian Europe. And it extends to the caliber of the church’s bishops, where Benedict’s appointments are widely viewed as an improvement over the choices John Paul made….As unlikely as it seems today, Benedict may yet deserve to be remembered as the better pope.”
George Weigel, the author of Witness to Hope, the best-known biography of John Paul, wrote in a recent column that it was “virtually inevitable” that the “media firestorm” over Pope Benedict’s handling of clergy abuse would “spill backwards toward the late John Paul II.” Maybe that is where it belonged all along. Weigel, who among writers had an unrivaled access to the pope, said that John Paul “did not believe” the charges against Fr. Maciel. Some Catholics, Weigel added, “may find it shocking that envelopes of cash were left in the papal apartment.” (Count me among them.) He made it clear he was referring to the “support” given to Stanislaw Dziwisz, now the cardinal archbishop of Krakow.
Weigel concedes John Paul’s “failure of governance,” but assures us that this failure was neither willful nor venal. I am sure that John Paul himself had no interest in money, and it is also highly likely that he didn’t know what was going on in his entourage. But maybe that’s because he didn’t want to know. Maybe he turned a blind eye? And if so, would that be a willful act? That is the question in my mind, especially now that John Paul has been put on the fast track to canonization.
THESE ARE IMPORTANT issues. It is clear that the anti-Catholic strategy is to make Pope Benedict out to be the guilty party. He is more conservative than his predecessor, who is in any event dead and of no concern to the media. Nonetheless, it was John Paul II who tolerated in principle that crimes within the church should remain internal.
The goal seems to have been to protect the laity from scandal and the hierarchy itself from embarrassment and exposure. I hate to bring it up, but recent developments remind me of nothing so much as Watergate. Cover up a crime and now you have two crimes. Also, in an age of unprecedented sexual laxity, the possibility that the Church might actually have been attractive to sexual deviants because they knew their bishops would cover up for them is appalling. But the trial lawyers will expose them, if the bishops won’t. If not God, the hierarchy will at least fear bankruptcy.
There is also this. Some of the Church’s enemies are eager to show that the real problem in the Church is institutional: the unreasonable imposition of celibacy, for example, or the obstinate refusal to adopt the world’s indulgent view of homosexuality. So conservatives who misapply papal inerrancy to whatever is decided in Rome only encourage the view that the fault must indeed be institutional. But it isn’t. It’s human.
As to the event at the Shrine, it was standing room only and everyone agrees that Bishop Slattery did well. (His sermon can be heard on the web.) Maybe the substitution of Slattery for Castrillon is a sign that in times of trouble, and not for the first time, the Barque of St. Peter is capable of righting itself.
About the Author
Tom Bethell is a senior editor of The American Spectator and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, The Noblest Triumph: Property and Prosperity Through the Ages, and most recently Questioning Einstein: Is Relativity Necessary? (2009).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (163) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Tom Bethell
More Articles From Capitol Ideas
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/06/29/barque-of-st-peter-in-troubled
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The End of the Castros?
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- A President Loses His Power
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Brian Mc| 6.29.10 @ 7:09AM
Years ago, while attending our local cathedral's gradeschool, we had a priest that seemed creepy even to my young, six or seven year-old eyes. He was suddenly gone. Rumors started and then, ended and life went on.
Just recently my oldest brother revealed that he had been abused by same. His torturous life suddenly made sense.
Now, factor in the mindset of my local parish. At one point during the "Prayers of the Faithful", one of those in charge of such 'prayers' had snuck one in that was glaringly socialist in nature. I, and many others, was shocked by its content.
On the day of 9/11 I went to the church as so many others did. The reading was Cain and Abel and the sermon was about pacifism and appeasement, the evil of vengeance and retribution. I was stunned. What about righteous indignation and our 'right' to exist in liberty; to defend our homeland from evil? The first job of government was and is poo-poohed as beneath recognition but the non-existant job, the welfare state, the job of the church, is vehemently and arduously 'prayed' for. There is no fighting this mindset; the institution has became a tool of the left.
I have not been back in quite some time as I feel alienated from the one, true faith. The rot in the Church as in this culture, is evident: God is still a jealous and righteous God.
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 10:47PM
I've been there. I fell away for nearly ten years, and the years before I was so poorly catechized, that I may as well have been pagan.
Then, I don't know, but something happened one spring, and I felt a craving...for Lent of all things.
I looked around, but all these whiny lefty parishes where I lived just was unbearable. One day I was driving, and I don't know why, but I walked into this beautiful church restored to its baroque, pre-SoVII wonder. The priest was preaching perhaps one of the best homilies (sermons) that I had heard. It wasn't a difficult homily for intellectuals, or senseless blathering at that. It was simple yet profound. Whether it was a third grade student or a senior citizen, it had meaning. I knew I was home.
Finding a good parish requires time, research, and a good helping of grace. Look for the younger priests, as they grew up in the fallout of the "kumbaya" age, and tend to be far more conservative than their elders. Also, look into parishes run by the religious orders, sure some are filled with quacks, yet others are more valuable than gold.
Fr. John Jay Hughes| 6.30.10 @ 11:07AM
At all 3 Sunday Masses on July 4, 2010 the faithnful and Christ the King Parish,St. Lois will hear this homily:
INDEPENDENCE?
14th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year C. Luke 10:1-12, 17-20.
AIM: To warn against nationalism and encourage patriotism.
We celebrate today the 234th anniversary of our country’s independence. The gospel reading we have just heard speaks, however, not of independence but of dependence. “I am sending you like lambs among wolves,” Jesus tells his disciples. Sheep are grass eating animals which spend much of their lives grazing. Wolves on the other hand are meat eating, always on the prowl for unsuspecting prey. Sheep, and especially young lambs, are among their favorites.
So when Jesus tells his disciples that he is sending them like lambs among wolves, he is reminding them of their vulnerability. Far from instructing them to outfit themselves with equipment to reduce this vulnerability and make them independent, however, he orders them to do the opposite. They are to leave behind even such basic necessities as shoes, food, and money – items which would make them inviting targets of wolfish greed. They are to remain sheep-like and vulnerable, completely dependent on him as shepherd.
We Americans need no reminder of our vulnerability on this Independence Day. The morning headlines, and the evening television news, show us daily the terrorist wolves which surround us. The limits to our cherished independence are painful for us Americans. For well over a century, roughly until the First World War of 1914-1918, we were confident that two broad oceans protected us from foreign wars and enemies. No more. The terrorist attacks of 9/11, 2001, removed forever any doubt on that score. What is the appropriate response?
To that question there is no lack of answers. In the end they come down to two. The first is the response of nationalism. The second seems similar, but is in reality quite different: patriotism.
A spokesman for nationalism is the American naval hero, Stephen Decatur. Born in Maryland as the son of a naval officer in 1779, he entered the navy himself age the age of nineteen. In 1804, when only twenty-five, he commanded an American warship which sailed into the harbor of Tripoli in North Africa, where the U.S. frigate Philadelphia had been captured, after running aground. To prevent those who had taken the ship from enjoying their prize, Decatur set the frigate afire and bombarded the town. This was the first of many similar exploits which, in the words of the encyclopedia article from which I have taken this information, earned him a reputation for “reckless bravery and stubborn patriotism.” Whether Stephen Decatur was truly patriotic I want to consider in a moment. There is no doubt, however, that he was reckless. He died in 1820, when only forty-one, from wounds suffered in a duel: an attempt to prove who was “right” at the point of a gun – something not merely reckless but insane.
Decatur is best remembered for his frequently quoted toast at a banquet in Norfolk, Virginia. He asked the guests to drink to “Our country! In her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be in the right; but our country, right or wrong.” That is a classic expression of nationalism. Nationalism recognizes no standard higher than that of one’s own country. It finds expression today in the mindless simplicity of the bumper sticker: “America. Love it or leave it!”
Nationalists resent and repudiate any suggestion that criticism of one’s country might be an expression of love for country – for failing to live up to the highest and best in its history and tradition. Few forces in the world today are more destructive of peace and happiness than nationalism – the exalting of one’s own country over all others, regardless of the cost in human misery and suffering.
Patriotism, on the other hand, is love of one’s country not because it is in every respect “best”; and certainly not because it always has been or always will be “right” – but simply because it is ours. Isn’t that how parents love their children? Last Christmas a friend of mine who is a law professor in one of our southern states sent me a Christmas card with a picture of his five children. In an e-mail I said: “How proud you must be of your children.” He responded: “I’m proud of them 90% of the time.” When I told that to a father of teenagers here in our parish, he commented: “That’s a very high percentage.” Both those fathers, however, dearly love their children; not because they are “the best,” and certainly not because they are perfect, but simply because the children are the fruit of their parents’ love.
Patriots love their country in a similar way. A spokesman for patriotism is the German-American Carl Schurz. Born in Cologne, Germany, in 1829, he came to this country in 1852. An admirer of Abraham Lincoln, Schurz fought for the Union in our Civil War, rising to the rank of Major General. After the war he was owner and editor of a German language newspaper here in St. Louis, the Westliche Post. From 1869 to 1875, Schurz was one of Missouri’s two Senators in Washington, where he opposed the punitive “Reconstruction” policy imposed on the South by his own party after the Civil War. Taught as a schoolboy at his Jesuit school in Cologne that there is a higher law which stands above all human laws and judges them, Carl Schurz believed, like his fallen hero, Lincoln, that this higher law required not punishment for the southern states but reconciliation, to bind up the nation’s wounds.
In a Senate speech Carl Schurz quoted Stephen Decatur’s words and responded to them. “Our country, right or wrong! When right, to be kept right; when wrong to be put right!” That is the voice of patriotism, which is a Christian virtue. Nationalism, which is pride on a public scale, is incompatible with our Christian and Catholic faith.
On this Independence Day we need to recall that as Catholic Christians we have dual citizenship. We are citizens of our country, which we love because it is ours. But we are citizens also of a higher realm: the invisible and spiritual kingdom of heaven. As citizens of our country we work with all people of good will for justice and peace: in our community, in our nation, and in the world. As citizens of God’s kingdom we acknowledge a higher law than those made by Legislatures or Congress. When those human laws command – or, as in the case of abortion, when they permit – what God’s law forbids, we respond as the apostle Peter (whom we celebrated with his companion Paul last Tuesday) responded to the unjust commands of authority in his day: “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).
Appeal to this higher law evokes today the angry protest that it amounts to imposing our special morality on a pluralist society. Slave holders brought the same charge in the 1850s against those who wanted to abolish slavery. “We’re not forcing you to own slaves,” their opponents said. “But don’t force your special morality on us.” Those who call themselves “pro-choice” make the same argument today. You have probably seen the bumper stickers which say: “Against abortion? Don’t have one!” Would the people who display that slogan put a sticker on their cars which said: “Against slavery? Don’t own one!” No way. Today we are ashamed of laws which permitted slave holders to treat human beings as property. The day will come when we will be no less ashamed of laws which permit us to treat unborn babies as disposable bits of tissue which can be cut out like an appendix and thrown away.
The Declaration of Independence, which we celebrate today, lists in first place among those truths which it calls “self-evident” the “right to life.” Defending this right for all – not just for the strong, the healthy, and the self sufficient but also for the unborn, the aged, and the gravely ill – earns us today the scorn and hatred of people who consider themselves sophisticated and enlightened. They too are among the wolves that threaten us today. In confronting them we have Jesus’ assurance from today’s gospel reading: “I have given you power to ‘tread upon serpents’ and scorpions, and upon the full force of the enemy and nothing will harm you. ... Rejoice because your names are written in heaven.”
Donna| 7.1.10 @ 8:21AM
With all due respect Father, you have lost me here with this sermon. It’s all over the place in narrative and incomprehensible. If I sat through your sermon to the conclusion, I would be hacked off and offended by your leftist activism. The reason I could not follow this sermon is you’re fighting the leftist battle in the disguise of abortion and think you have a forum here with conservatives because of the cause. You don’t want to come right out and preach your socialist views because you’d be in deep trouble with the Pope, IRS and the constitution regarding separation of church and state. Instead, like Obama, you call upon your congregation to be agitators against the constitution because we answer to a “higher” rule of law. We Catholics don’t get abortions and if we do, like the priest who have debauch the Catholic youth, ask for forgiveness. Your sermon is not how God directs us in responding to opposing views, surely you know He and His Disciples did not rise up and agitate Pontius Pilate’s court of law. No, instead they prayed as we should for all those who find themselves wrestling with this decision. Your Pulpit and how you and many other Priests use it is why the Church continues to lose its treasure. Paul’s quote used here is taken out of context and is dangerous usage for the mind that may not have benefited from a Catholic education.
C Segura| 7.1.10 @ 11:10AM
The weekend after the 2009 election we had a "visiting priest". An old priest who resides in a nursing home. Drives a convertible. Anyway I digress. His sermon. The catholic church had o business discussing the fact that they needed to consider and educate themselves that certain candidates were pro-abortion. He railed and railed. Then preached how happy he was that a black man had been elected as president. His closing words were in song. God Bless Obama, man that I love. The congregation gave him a standing ovation. Yes, I know this has nothing to do with the posted article. Just saying.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 7:50AM
The problem ought to be recognized, but not exaggerated-- it isn't rot in the sense the entire Church is rotted; and there is no more molestation inside the Church than outside. Though there are more priests molesting than just a few, the molesters are in the minority. Most of all, there is too much anti-Catholic propaganda entangled in this important issue-- and not merely propagated by liberals.
The NYT is not the only anti-Catholic bunch around, if indeed the NYT are truly anti-Catholic. But, yes, they probably are.
JP| 6.29.10 @ 8:02AM
To put things in perspective: in the 16h Century most if not all of Northern Europe broke away from the Church. Convents, monastaries and church propterties were seized by Junkers, Danes, Swedes, and other followers of Luther. Priests were flayed, nuns raped, and churches descecrated. To make matters worse, Muslim pirates raided Sicily, Sardinia, and Muslim armies attacked the Balkans drving out or enslaving Catholic and Orthodox alike.
Heresey was preached from Bohemia to France, and even that "Defender of the Pope" as he was known), King Henry VIII decided to get out. This rift, which threatened to destroy the old order, continued into the 17th Century reaching its peak during the 30 Years War. When peace was finally signed in 1639 most of Catholic Central Europe was utterly destroyed (the German population was halved). The Counter Reformation was well under way, but the damage was done.
Perspective. The sex abuse scandals are serious indeed. But, nothing can compare horrific chaos of the 16th and 17th Centuries.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:23AM
I became a Catholic when I saw how the "Pope is Antichrist" nonsense is white trash eschatology.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:41AM
... and, again, it is also calculated anti-Catholic propaganda. It is both.
In the context of abuse, it would only be valid if a majority of molesters were Catholic, and NAMBLA members, say. If such were the case then it could be said a Catholic pederast plot existed.
But concealment isn't enough to attack the Church, only individual priests, and only those priests breaking the law.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:51AM
Apology for posting 3x in a row, but let us have it clear: concealment is only heinous if laws are broken; you can't go after every priest who bends the rules; even in pursuit of a higher standard for the Church.
Do Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, want outside agencies examining themselves in microscopic detail? Transparency doesn't mean the Church has to have glass walls so that everyone can watch Catholics go into Church rest rooms.
AMENBRO| 6.30.10 @ 2:56AM
Thats like being a little pregnant.
EITHER YOU ARE A PEDERAST OR YOU AREN't ALAN
Which are you???????
Ryan| 6.29.10 @ 8:03AM
I have a great amount of respect for JPII (Vatican II was a major accomplishment, and his opening of the Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament to non-Catholics) as well as Benedict (who fought well against liberation theology); however, we're finding that JPII's great failure as Pope was his mishandling of the entire sexual abuse scandals - he never seemed to be all that proactive in fighting them.
I'm a reformed Baptist who attends a Presbyterian-PCA church; however, I view the papacy as the representative of Christians to the world. All Christians have a vested interest - whether or not I believe that the Pope holds any spiritual authority - in a good man holding that position.
PJ| 6.29.10 @ 9:46AM
JPII definitely had weakneses. In terms of the current sex abuse scandals, he was still living in his communist Polish past. I've been reading snippets here & there, describing how the communists in Poland tried to destroy innocent priests by accusing them of various sexual improprieties. JPII of course witnessed all this.
Any normal person would take what was learned from the past & apply it to a current seemingly similiar situation. I read that JPII thought originally that it was a "conspiracy" against the priesthood. To give the man some credit, he changed his attitude when he saw the overwhelming evidence coming from the USA.
Jeremiah| 6.29.10 @ 3:57PM
The thing about JPII and Benedict XVI is that this type of behavior on the part of priests is, literally, unimaginable. They both came of age in societies where the Catholic Church was a bulwark against tyranny and terror. To be a priest in those societies took genuinely heroic courage. The development of posturing degeneracy in the priesthood is a consequence of 'modernization.'
There have been such periods before, starting with Judas Iscariot.
But what is interesting is that, you start studying stats on the occurrence of abuse in other social institutions and you discover that the rate of incidence in the Catholic Church is much lower than the norm for almost any other major institution (public schools, other types of churches, etc.) This is NOT to excuse inaction. The Church must be held to a much higher standard - and must so hold itself.
But our media culture are using these things to try to discredit JPII and Benedict XVI who, when they realized the gravity of what was for them, an unimaginable crisis, reacted with vigor. Benedict, as Cardinal Ratzinger, warned of the "filth" he was finding when JPII assigned him to the task.
One wonders if the forces of the left, which wax eloquent over the need for unlimited power in government, are not letting this crisis go to waste. Stalin, who once famously asked how many divisions the pope had, found with other tyrants that the Church has resources they could not imagine. Given that experience, the left may well be engaging in a pre-emptive strike against an institution that has successfully resisted and thwarted their totalitarian designs in the past.
They should fear the Catholic Church's institutional heft. A few years ago a friend who is a judge asked me which bishops in this country I was most impressed with. I mentioned Jose Gomez of San Antonio, Charles Chaput of Denver and Tim Dolan of Milwaukee. Now Dolan is the Archbishop of New York and Gomez the Archbishop of Los Angeles. Pope Benedict is quietly but decisively filling the key diceses in this country with solidly orthodox bishops who are focused on the fundamentals of the faith. The battle lines are being drawn and become clearer by the day.
Jeremiah| 6.29.10 @ 4:02PM
Oh, and to my dear fellwo Christians among Evangelical Protestants (among whom my father is a pastor), I know very well that your faith is as deep and grounded as that of orthodox Catholics. It delights me that when I speak with someone from either faith heritage, I am speaking with someone who believes that God is actually God - and not a pretty fairy story as so many 'mainstream' Protestants and 'progressive' Catholics make Him out to be. What I am emphasizing in my previous post is the institutional heft the Catholic Church has in resisting tyranny.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 7:54PM
But, Jer, how CAN Catholics be held to a higher standard if they are of the terrestrial-- of the flesh.
Priests aren't supermen.
A bad apple exists in every barrel, in every house of worship, in every community-
in every single neighborhood in fact.
Jeremiah| 6.29.10 @ 10:57PM
Yes, Al, we Catholics are human and, more importantly, always to some degree affected by the culture we inhabit. In the writings of even the greatest saints one can see that they are influenced, for better or worse, by the times and culture they inhabit along with everyone else of that time and culture.
But a hallmark of the Church has been that, particularly in evil times, she has produced leaders who are profoundly counter-cultural. When the dark ages descended and all relationships were defined by raw power, it was the Church that preserved the light of reason through the rise of monasteries where the great works were laboriously copied by hand so that they would not be lost in the mists of time when better days came. It was the Church which produced the forerunner of the modern university. In a time of great brutality, it was the Church which instituted the forerunner of the modern hospital.
In the various murderous 'isms that intellectual trendiness has produced in the last century, the Church was one of the greatest institutions resisting the shackling of man in the false name of enlightenment.
In almost all times the great majority of Churchmen have been much like their fellows. A great charism of the Church has been that, in the most tumultuous and evil of times, she produces the greatest abundance of profound saints.
We live in terrible times. The elite class is ignorant of history, ignorant of religion, ignorant of economics and downright contemptuous of the foundations of human liberty. Yet we are fortunate to live in the time when God is raising up the greatest profusion of great saints.
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 11:09PM
Even the Apostles were beset with treachery. Human nature hasn't changed.
zolon5| 6.30.10 @ 12:02AM
What we are perhaps forgetting is JPII's illness and age. I suspect he was not functioning to the best of his ability the last ten years of his life.
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 11:06PM
Well, it's not that Pope John Paul II was a failure, just very human.
He had great charisma, was a profound philosopher, and recognized that the West was set on a course for a schism towards the far left.
He also had a tin ear (he couldn't hold a key if he had it on a ring), was liturgically tasteless, a poor administrator, and a fair to poor judge of character.
Even so, he helped defeat the Soviet Empire, shored up popular support for Rome against the "trendy" ultra-leftist bishops, and by the time he came into his reward, completely changed the face of the College of Cardinals so that we would have Pope Benedict.
He was a holy man, yet holiness does not mean flawless.
Old Believer| 6.29.10 @ 8:04AM
Of course the New York Times is Anti-Catholic.It's also Anti-Zionist (since 1945) and Anti-Orthodox Judaism. It doesn't think much of Protestant Evangelicals either. In essence if your church doesn't teach the 10 suggestions, they're against it.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:28AM
"and Anti-Orthodox Judaism."
Well, sure: you wouldn't expect NYT liberals to be PRO-orthodoxy, would you?
Like, you also wouldn't expect NOW to be pro-life, right?
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 11:31PM
(Book of Liberalism 20:2-7)
Thou shalt maybe, sometimes, entertain MY existence, when you feel like it.
Thou shalt only use MY name in vain when you are really mad, or when cursing Repugs, or in a traffic jam, or whatever.
Thou shalt try to keep holy the Sabbath, but well, thou art busy and stuff. So, if you feel like working on the Sabbath, even if you don't have to, remember to complain and whine for MY sake.
Thou shalt feel somewhat guilty throwing thy parents into a nursing home and never visiting. Well, unless visiting would increase Global Warming, of course.
Thou shalt make guns illegal.
Thou shalt do whatever feels good for thy genitals. Yes, even that....yes, and that too...yes, that kink is fine as well.
Thou shalt steal from business, because they are all owned by evil bourgeois. Tax them, sue them, it is all good in MY eyes.
Perjury isn't that bad okay? It was only sex, and everyone lies about that, right?
See #6? Yeah, three up, yeah. Uh, there's nothing wrong with porn. It's art. Well that can be artistically done too. What's wrong with zoophilia? Come on, look at the camera technique, it's art.
People richer than you are stealing from the poor. Show the poor how much you care by taking it from those *&%^s, tax them to hell and spend it on social programs. Heck, that was hard work, take a cut for yourself.
Melvin| 6.29.10 @ 8:11AM
Where's Mother Superior when we need her?
Bruce | 6.30.10 @ 6:13PM
You mean Margie?
Ted| 6.29.10 @ 8:24AM
"Roman concealment had been the essence of this corruption..."
Really? The essence of the corruption was that some priests abused their authority to take advantage of young people. That's the essence of the whole problem right there.
John - TMF| 6.29.10 @ 8:40AM
You present much to ponder.
The worst problem faced by the Church in the modern era is, for lack of a better term, modernity.
The reforms of Vatican II have been a decidedly mixed bag. This is normal for any institution; however for any institution to survive such change it must confront the deficiencies and failures openly and honestly. It must make corrections swiftly and fairly. Above all it must maintain the core Christian principles.
The issue of priestly celibacy will not go away any time soon. It is a discipline that was always problematic, and might just have outlived its usefulness to both the hierarchy and the laity.
The ending of celibacy is not, however (as Stuart has most thoughtfully pointed out.) a trivial undertaking. There are many good things that come from a married Diocesan clergy; but there are major issues that make the move a major undertaking. Those issues are not for this discussion. The point is that the ending of priestly celibacy is not the cure-all for clerical abuse.
There is a movement within the Church hierarchy and laity that is a grave threat and is causing more harm than any dogma, doctrine, canon law, or discipline. This is the Christic-Marxism increasingly being preached by the clergy.
Call it what you want, when you strip off the various convenient labels (Seamless Garment Doctrine, Liberation Theology, or Social Justice Ministry) one is still faced with the reality that many priests, bishops, and theologians have appropriated Marxist economic, social, and political ideology. They paste a symbol of a fish on the Communist Manifesto, and preach it as a practical corrollary to Biblical Scripture.
As was noted above, the Prayer of the Faithful has become a dumping ground for wishes and hopes of government intervention, social justice, and pacifism. It is rapidly becoming my least favorite part of the Mass, and I am not alone.
This is where the sheep are led to the Valley of Hinnon to graze on the poisoned grass of human sacrifice and the refuse of the ages.
John Paul II castigated Liberation Theology but never institutionally moved to wash it from the mouths of his clergy. They merely changed the labels and continued apace. John Paul slowly withered, a great but declining man. All too human an end. I do not place the blame at his feet, but neither can anyone give him credit for much reform.
Benedict's symbol might just be the mop and bucket. He is indeed the poor soul left to clean up. It is a pity that the disengaged and unobservant come late to the party, and blame him for the mess that he toils to disinfect.
Peace,
John - The Mighty Fahvaag
JP| 6.29.10 @ 12:06PM
If one is to poll younger Catholic Priests, one would find over 80% of them would chose to remain celibate (by young, I mean those under 50). These are the so-called JPII priests. They correctly see thier vocation (and celibacy) as a gift from God. These priests have no problem with being celibate.
JPII wrote extensively about human sexuality and its relation to Christ. Celibacy is both a gift and a discipline. But so is marriage. Christ gives graces to both the married and the celibate. For both have vocations that are God given.
I do find it amusing to hear Catholics talk about the need to end celibacy. Especially from the married. I think part of the problem has to due with the desire for some in the Church who wish to see females ordained as priests.
John - TMF| 6.29.10 @ 12:55PM
1. An invalid poll is no proof. It is invalid because it polls the choir about the quality of its music, not the audience. Priests a) have already become priests so the question is moot and b) the trail of priests who leave the priesthood is long and littered with good men who changed their minds. Vocations are fragile, since humans are.
1300 parishes in the US have no priests, no regular Mass said, and very often no Eucharist.
Celibacy is not a gift (the notion is silly on its face) nor is it is not a curse. It is merely a human construct, an opinion offered as to a work that would make someone's service to God somehow different, exclusive or special in some way. God neither demanded nor even required it.
As to the apostasy of priestesses, you are imputing motives not in evidence for the amelioration of your adamant opinion.
A married clergy has nothing whatever to do with ordaining priestesses. In your logic, mother's milk leads to heroin... (h/t to George Carlin - a decidedly funny but not very faithful Catholic.)
There are many Permanent Deacons who have raised their families and would be more than well received as full priests in unpastored dying parishes.
Politeness in debate, Grace and perspective in all things.
-TMF
Ed| 6.29.10 @ 2:31PM
Celibacy is a gift - given to some. (Why is that ' silly on its face' ??).
It is also a discipline of the Roman Catholic Church for clergy (and far all churches in union with Rome for monks and bishops, as I understand it). As Jesus said in Matt 19:12 - 'the one who can accept this should accept it."
All of the evangelical counsels - poverty, chastity (celibacy for consecrated life), and obedience are witnesses to the world that there is more both to this life and the life beyond than wealth, autonomy, and sex.
While I have little doubt that many deacons would seem likely to be well received as pastors, if we take 'vocation' seriously then the vocation of - the call to ordained as - deacon (married or single) is not the same as that of priest.
Mainline Protestant clergy - married or single - are shrinking in number. Allowing Catholic priests to marry would likely change little in terms of numbers. And would likely create as many problems or more as it 'solves.'
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 11:41PM
A Protestant minister can have a wife and a personal life. Such cannot be said for a priest.
A parish priest is always on call. The job consumes his life. I would not seek to force such a marriage upon any woman.
Bruce | 6.30.10 @ 6:20PM
There are MANY vocations that place a sometimes unbearable burden on a spouse and family - why is a priest any different? Is he any less holy because he has a wife? I would think that would bring him closer to understanding the difficulties his parishioners sometimes face. It always amused me having priests conduct marriage encounter sessions. What does a priest know about marriage if he has not experienced it?
But then I'm not Catholic, so take it for what it's worth. All I know if my dad left the church - or as he called it "the church left me" - when they abandoned the Latin Mass, turned mass into hullabaloo singalongs, and spent time preaching politics instead of the gospel of Christ.
Patrick| 6.30.10 @ 6:46PM
It does not make a priest less holy to be married. It does makes such a priest conflicted.
Ed| 7.1.10 @ 5:47PM
"What does a priest know about marriage if he has not experienced it?"
John Paul II wrote about this in 1959. He admitted to a lack of first-hand experience, but pointed out that a priest hears the intimate details of thousands of marriages - sometimes hearing things even the spouse does not know. Most of us know our own marriage, maybe one or two others if we are true intimates - while a priest knows about hundreds.
A priest has 'data' that most sociologists would likely kill for. That seems a reasonable basis to speak on the topic.
Ken (Old Texican)| 6.29.10 @ 8:49AM
I wish the Roman congregations well. There is always danger when Christians "delegate" their faith to fellow fallible men, instead of bowing at Jesus' feet themselves.
Different "branches" of Christendom all have our own dangers to face. Some congregations are led far afield by a charismatic pastor for instance.
All of us Christians need to humble ourselves at times, and ask forgiveness, but not not ask that forgiveness except from God in Jesus' name...and the person/s we sinned against.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 11:04AM
Catholicism leads people astray in that is is false doctrine. But what do you mean by a "charasmatic" pastor?
David T.| 6.29.10 @ 8:45PM
Margie--The Catholic Church has been around since Jesus gave the keys of his kingdom to St. Peter and promised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against it. Satan has buffeted her walls, but the Catholic Church stands to this day because Christ lives within her. Her doctrine is true and eternal. Throw off the blinders of fundamentalism and open up to all that is good and true and beautiful in the Catholic Church.
Margie| 6.30.10 @ 1:40PM
David T.
According to the Bible, Christ lives within those who have received Him. My eyes have been opened, thanks.
Read John 1:12.
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 11:46PM
Many a minister has developed a cult of personality unto himself. Perhaps it is not always intentional, but sometimes it is.
How many parishes have crumbled when a certain beloved pastor moves on, retires, or passes away? This is often a thousandfold more true in televangelism.
Margie| 6.30.10 @ 1:44PM
If a "parish" perishes, heh, due to a pastor or other church official and or leader messing up, it is because the individuals themselves had their hope in the man, and not in Jesus. Televangelism or or not. And who cares how many nah nah nah thousands more or less it is?
God warns us about putting our trust in man. It's actually sin to do so!
Patrick| 6.30.10 @ 10:48PM
I suppose that happens. I believe the original post by Ken was directed towards the strengths and weaknesses in the anarchic method of Protestantism.
I suppose my own post was slightly off topic, yet that has more to do with the cutthroat competition parishes have over talented ministers and the problem of the third generation.
It's profoundly sad that so much of the past, both Catholic and Protestant, have been discarded like garbage. The old hymns, the old churches, thrown away like the faith of their fathers was rubbish. The Word of God has not changed - we have, and rarely for the better.
Bruce | 6.30.10 @ 6:28PM
True, Ken, and indeed many of us - increasingly more yearly in my opinion - don't need an edifice or faiths name to humble ourselves at His feet. I see too much contradiction in organized religion to want to align myself any longer with one institution of another. That doesn't make those like me any less religious or worthy of Gods grace. I've received Last Rights from priests and prayers from ministers of Protestant faiths - even from a Rabbi once. I've had priests and sisters ask me if I would mind - being a protestant - if they could pray with me before emergency surgery.
My thinking? It's all good!
William Z| 6.29.10 @ 9:01AM
A “growing roster of enemies…”?
Protestantism by its nature is anti-Catholic, and the secular world itself is anti-Catholic because it doesn’t have anything to offer, especially endless joy.
The sexual crimes of certain clergy are horrible and inexcusable, and they must be punished, but in the secular world, sexual crime, from politicians to film makers, is excused and rationalized.
The Church is a church of sinners, for sinners. If those in the church were perfect, there would be no purpose for the Church. The Church has had enemies since the beginning. The founder was innocent and executed just that same, and He is the great uncorrupted, and thank God we have him. Remember Jesus sat with sinners to help them become saints.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 11:27AM
"but in the secular world, sexual crime, from politicians to film makers"
Whoopi said Polanski didn't commit "rape rape". The 14 year old was merely forced into a consensual assignation. If you or did that we'd be whacked.
William Z| 6.29.10 @ 12:23PM
Whoopi is a secular woman, so her nonsensical statement makes perfect sense.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 7:59PM
"Whoopi is a secular woman, so her nonsensical statement makes perfect sense."
You are on-target.
Still! for Whoopi to say what she said...
No wonder her name is Whoopie.
William Z| 6.30.10 @ 10:06AM
Yes, we're dealing with a metaphor here.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 9:01AM
The strangest case of shall we use the umbrella-terminology 'gender-bending' is Workers World Party, the hosts of ANSWER and now FIST. They are pro-gay Stalinists-- though they would never admit it. Can you imagine if they ever did a revolution? what would they do to their revisionists? place them in prison cells to hit them with whips wielded by S & M queers?
Louis Jenkins| 6.29.10 @ 9:13AM
So what is going on? I’m not neatly honed in my opinions, nor am I as beautified as most of you guys. But there’s something amiss here in Denmark. If a man takes a vow of celibacy then he needs to stick to it. None of this parking your bedroom slippers under the bed of a woman or a man, or in this case, boys. You people are missing the point. In spite of dressing up in the garments of the office, giving prayers or sermons, these guys have sinned. And that negates it all. The whole Catholic thing is a mystery to me, but if it smells and looks like BS, then that’s usually what it is. Better to get right with God and Jesus, and not dally with the youngsters.
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 11:52PM
Honestly, there are no few priests and seminarians that would love to use that post as motivation for the cleanup that needs to be done.
Of course, such people are unsung heroes, who will live and die unnoticed to a great many. Even so, their reward is not meant to be in this life...
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 9:16AM
... btw, that is way offtopic, but it is so bizarre, and demonstrates how unpredictable (or predictably unpredictable) the Commie mind is. Gay Stalinists, that is a real gut buster. Look at their site, it will give you a stomach ache; they want any illegal to enter America (but of course not into nations they like, such as N. Korea).
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 9:20AM
"The whole Catholic thing is a mystery to me"
But why are Catholics more sinful, more "mysterious" than others? How does Catholic amorality differ from protestant, muslim, hindu, etc, amorality?
William Z| 6.29.10 @ 9:50AM
“Catholics more sinful, more "mysterious" than others…”
I don’t know that … but I like that mysterious part. Being a Catholic, I didn’t know that either. It’s not like the ‘sin’ list is hidden. Anyone can look it up. My guess is that it isn’t ‘more sinful,’ it’s the outsider’ expectation level, and the fall of a Catholic is seen as farther. The drum roll is louder when a Catholic—a practicing Catholic’s indiscretion is made public.
JP| 6.29.10 @ 12:11PM
The "sin list" is contained inside of the 10 Commandments. This list extends to those things that are not "mortal sins". Essientially anything that a person puts before God should be contemplated, even if it doesn't need to be confessed. In the old days, Catholics had Confessors to whom they could not only confess to, but also discuss the person's spiritual life.
William Z| 6.29.10 @ 12:25PM
First, Yes, and second, I do live in the 'old days.'
Patrick| 6.29.10 @ 11:54PM
There are good and holy Catholics who do take the time to be spiritual advisers, even in these dark days.
Dan Hirsch| 6.29.10 @ 9:51AM
Hi, Alan;
There is only one sin in the secular world: your hypocrisy. Mine isn't a sin, only yours.
Look around, you'll see it called out everywhere.
And maybe, the Biblical concept that we are all sinners, Jews, Christians, even you Catholics, doesn't sit well with the secularists because they wish to rule everyone else's lives from their self-presumed position of rightness.
We people of faith need to avoid circular firing squads. While I am Lutheran, I respect the faith of the Catholics, I even respect the Jews who sadly seemed to have missed what they have been waiting for. Remember Luther originally meant to save the Roman Church from its own excesses, some of which seem to be recurring.
Ultimately, I know that God loves His creation and He gives us a chance at eternal salvation, how He does it is not really my concern - I just try to follow His commands, which to Missouri Synod Lutherans is to be found in a straight reading of the Bible...
Veni, vidi, vici...
DH
Mimi| 6.29.10 @ 9:54AM
ALAN .....There is no difference....It just gets more attention in the MSM. The sunshine in all this is...CLEANSING! When a mother reports to a Priest or Bishop her child's sex/abuse, the response should have been " CALL THE COPS " period. To grow and mature we need to drop the " What will people think " mentality. To follow the will of GOD is difficult and made easy with GRACE.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 10:41AM
How far can the cops go, Mimi?
If all the underage incest (even grandfaters involved in some cases) was reported, there wouldn't be enough holding cells in the entire country.
But as long as you understand I do not share any of the optimism concerning morality that some here at AS and elsewhere possess. IMO Gingrich is terribly overly-optimistic.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 11:00AM
"If all the underage incest (even grandfaters involved in some cases) was reported, there wouldn't be enough holding cells in the entire country."
We build them higher, then.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 11:32AM
"We build them higher, then."
Oh I get it!:
skimp on materials by hiring the very lowest bidders-- and then the buildings collapse.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 11:41AM
No. I meant exactly what I said. The vengeance part belongs to God, not any of us.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:04PM
'No. I meant exactly what I said. The vengeance part belongs to God, not any of us."
Can't argue with that. But Law is almost exclusively about tradition, precedent,- not justice.
Mimi| 6.29.10 @ 12:46PM
ALAN.... By " CALL THE COPs "....I meant it is a Legal, Civil authority matter. My optimism has been with me since BIRTH.. and admit to a pollyannist nature. It has served me well during the MOUNTAINS (yes..mountains) and Valleys of life. YOU ARE better than you think...You are here on AS and I believe you are truly one of the " GOOD " guys.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:21PM
"I meant it is a Legal, Civil authority matter."
Agreed. Justice and Law are not one and the same.
To say the least.
Jenny| 6.29.10 @ 9:55AM
The root of the problem is sin. Sin affects each and every one of us. How do we deal with sin and temptation? What do we do when we sin? Do we repent or do we cover it up? This is a question facing both Catholics and Protestants.
Anti-Catholics and anti-religious people don't think of sin as personal. They view it as institutional. Some Catholic clergy and bishops sinned, therefore the whole institution is corrupt. Protestant clergy sin as well, but the Catholic Church is a world wide church, an easy target. Protestant churches are diffuse, and don't present the big bull's eye that the Catholic Church does. So when Protestant clergy sin, the scandal is usually geographically or denominationally contained. When Catholic clergy sin, it's a world-wide scandal.
Patrick| 6.30.10 @ 12:01AM
True, however, remember that it was a mere fifty years ago when it was considered a truism:
"To be Catholic is to be Democrat."
When the Church started changing courses, it became a matter of personal revenge.
After all, no heretic [in this case of liberalism] is hated so much as an apostate.
Tim| 6.29.10 @ 10:14AM
I have stated before that the whole 'Church Sex matter" needs to be continousely rooted out and purged and the" guilty" hung from the rafters until the flesh falls off their bodies.
That said, if the Church supported the far left agenda of Gay Marriage, abortion on demand in all stages including partial Birth abortion and supported other things like teen sex, condom use and open satanic worship in the public square ...
The world Wide press would not be reporting squat about who is goosing who in church halls, pews or under the alter of worship.
Patrick| 6.30.10 @ 12:04AM
And that is what is happening. The Left _owned_ the Catholic Church, or so it believed.
Humanae Vitae was ignored, but when priests started praying in front of abortion mills, the Left demanded satisfaction.
Doctor Right| 6.29.10 @ 10:21AM
Catholics should be banned from writing about the sexual abuse of children within their own Church - they just can't see the forest for the trees.
In this Castrillon fellow we have:
a) A high Church official...
b) ...acting in his capacity as a high Church official...
c) ...to COMMEND another high Church official...
d) ...for covering up the sexual abuse of children by a priest, and...
e) ...willfully circumventing the civil authorities!
NICE WORK!!
But it get's better!
We also have:
a) A paper trail (irrefutable), and...
b) ...potentially, the knowledge that Pope JP II knew, and approved of Castrillon's actions.
And what does Mr. Bethel have to say about this, after HE HIMSELF reports it???
QUOTE: "It was deliberately publicized just as Cardinal Castrillon was due to arrive in Washington for an event celebrating the pope's anniversary. The goal, surely, was to add to the negative publicity already heaped on Pope Benedict."
Hey, Mr. Bethel! MAYBE it was deliberately publicized to inform Catholics, and the public-at-large, that the cover-up is wide, deep, and ongoing!!
Then Mr. Bethel states: "THE CHURCH TODAY has an ever growing roster of enemies."
The implication here is that if you're an investigative journalist following a lead in a HUGE story, or merely someone concerned about the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priest, and the ongoing cover-up, then you're lumped in with "evil" Protestants and churches that ordain homosexuals. You're an "enemy".
Then, adding insult to injury, Mr. Bethel says "As the rot spreads" in reference to what's going on in denominational churches. But then in a way that would make BIG BROTHER proud, he fails to understand the very REAL rot that's going on in the Catholic Church!
In other words, it's always some other "evil" that we should pay attention to, or blame for the problems within the Catholic Church, but NEVER the Church itself.
But of course...Even a video of the Pope approving these cover-ups, and a signed confession stating "I, the Pontiff, engaged in the cover-up" would NEVER be enough for the sycophantic Catholic-apologists on this board like "Teflon93", "Stuart Koehl", and the other guy who thinks that Catholics engage in ritualistic cannibalism when they partake of communion.
The Bible says in MATTHEW 18:6 "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
Aiding and abetting the sexual abuse of children, and covering it up, is just as bad as doing it.
Soon, the apologists will chime in. They will attack those who disagree with them, they will use long, cut-n-paste tracts from Catholic websites to look smart, and they will ask all the same, old predictable questions, such as "What Church do you belong to?"
They will also use Alinsky-ite tactics to smear anyone who criticizes tha Catholic Church as bigots.
They're sad. And so is the state of the Catholic Church when it covers up the abuse of children, and then covers-up the cover-up.
Doctor Right| 6.29.10 @ 10:29AM
Mr. Bethel is apparently the Prince of irony; here's another gem from this article that is quite absurd:
"...the Catholic Church will become ever more conspicuous as a bastion of unfashionable truth."
Huh????
"Truth"???
Mr. Bethel...Please go sell crazy someplace else.
Doctor Right| 6.29.10 @ 10:33AM
Here's another gem!
"Faced with the recent crisis, the dominant impulse of the orthodox Catholic -- to maintain solidarity with the pope -- is one that I certainly accept."
Mr. Bethel, the dominant impulse of a Catholic - indeed, of anyone who claims to be a Christian - is to follow the teachings and example of Christ...PERIOD!
To place your faith in a man (the Pope) is NOT the same thing. It is folly and error that leads to situations like...Well, like what's happening today in the Catholic Church...
John II| 6.29.10 @ 12:14PM
But Doc--your tone suggests that you expect me to place my faith in YOU.
Look, the Christian God is not, for example, the Muslim god. He's not some gigantic fur-ball of Divine Will expecting groveling submission from His lowly creatures.
When the Protestant thing started big-time (it's always been there and always will be--until the Final Passover, anyhow) in the 16th century, the Catholic thinkers blinked and said, in effect, "What is THIS about, right here in Europe? It's just like Islam!" (The Catholics understood Islam to be a Christian heresy rather than a distinct religion like, say, Hinduism.)
Why that reaction? Because the whole Protestant business of going toe-to-toe with God without any intercession or intermediary is not Christianity in the sense that most Christians have always believed. Christ Himself is not just an Arian exemplar, or, in the pathetic formula of the Muslims, a "great prophet." Christ is God Incarnate, and that understanding of Christ goes a long way towards explaining what the Triune God is about.
For one thing, the Christian God is a God who delegates. In the Christian scheme of creation, the sheep-shepherd thing as played out in history is part of what it means to say that we humans are made in God's image.
So go ahead and blast away at us Catholics. St. Paul and St. Augustine both remark that heresy is necessary to the well-being of the Church, as it forces the faithful to get up off their butts and think more clearly about what they really believe. But when you do so, you'd display a more generous disposition if you'd make an argument--an ARGUMENT--to show you know exactly what you're attacking.
Oh what's the use? Sometimes I think I will just go mad. (Groucho Marx quoting Greta Garbo, 1929)
Ryan| 6.29.10 @ 3:35PM
I Tim 2:5
"For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,..."
Doctor Right| 6.29.10 @ 3:53PM
I'm sorry, but your post, while well-meaning (I guess) is so full of gobbledy-gook and mumbo-jumbo I don;t know where to start.
First of all, I never asked you, or anybody, to put their "FAITH" in me. That would be stupid, for both of us. However, that doesn't mean that what I say about the Catholic Church is wrong, either.
The "Protestant things" has NOT always been there. That would imply that Catholicism has "always been there", when in pint of fact, IT HAS NOT.
Catholicism is NOT the church of Christ. It DOES NOT have a direct line to Christ, although Catholics (falsely) like to claim that it does. Catholicism did not exist until Constantine converted to Christ on his deathbed, and forced the Empire to adopt Christianity. The merging of Christian beliefs with pagan, Roman idolatry created the Catholic Church.
As far as Islam being considered as a "Christian Heresy"..??? WTH are you talking about?? No doubt they viewed it as a false faith, but since Islam is in NO WAY Christian, it would never have been considered as you describe it.
The "sheep-shepard" thing is an analogy...It's NOT "delegation". God does NOT delegate.
I'm not attacking; I am criticizing, yes, but that is NOT an attack. Infantile cries of bigotry that arise whenever the Catholic Church is criticized are predictable and tiresome.
John II| 6.29.10 @ 7:04PM
Hi Doc. Sorry for the delay in my response--I had to do a lot of yard work today, interrupting my movie-watching. To respond:
1. Well, I'm a Catholic--what do you expect? You know, bells and candles and genuflection and all that stuff. But at least MY mumbo-jumbo is literate--and TRADITIONAL! I mean, there's nothing like a little traditional mumbo-jumbo to keep modernity (child of the Reformation) at bay.
2. But Doc--I DO put my faith in you. I trust you when you attack the Catholic Church. I believe you're completely sincere. And I'm not stupid. In fact, I have a very high IQ. My kids have even higher IQs because my wife is even less stupid than I. (I usually say "than me," but I'm showing off right now.) Anyhow, I don't believe that my IQ can get me into heaven, so I don't see what my not being stupid has to do with anything important. Where was I?
3. The "Protestant thing" has "been there" since the inception of the Church--cf. the Letter of Jude just before Revelation. I suppose the first formal Protestant was Tertullian, but the impulse is always there, so that Protestant thing began when Adam bit into the apple, in effect saying, "Not YOUR way, Lord--but MINE!" That's the Protestant thing, broadly defined. We Catholics believe that everybody is a heretic, but that the Church provides an anchor for those who intermittently accept the Lord's Way. I mean, I didn't invent it, you know. So don't blame me. (Everybody's always blaming ME, just because I'm a Catholic!)
4. "Catholicism" is a term invented by Protestants (and unfortunately picked up on by a lot of otherwise thoughtful Catholics) in the belief that Catholics are just making it all up, the way the Protestants are. That's what the morpheme "-ism" means. For an analogy that we should both appreciate, Doc, cf. "capitalism." Now, there IS such a thing properly called "socialism" because it's an idea (or rather a cluster of ideas) made up by busybodies who don't think very deeply about the human condition. But "capitalism" is a word misapplied to the market economy, which happens to be, not an idea that someone made up, but the way the world works when productive people aren't under the thumb of busybodies.
Similarly, there is no such thing as "Catholicism" because nobody made it up. The Greek word katholikos means "universal"; the Catholic Church (together with its more exotic eastern tributaries) is the universal Church founded by Christ when Christ gave Peter the keys to the kingdom. The term was already being used by the late first century AD, antedating Constantine by more than three centuries.
5. Well, among many other things, I guess I'm talking about a famous letter written by Peter Cluny to Bernard of Clairveaux in the mid-12th century, commenting on Peter's recent translation of the Koran from Arabic to Latin. If you can find time to read any English version of the Qur'an (chic spelling), I don't know how you can miss the utterly derivative nature of Islam. The Arab Christians with whom Mohammad had some personal contact were themselves probably Arian heretics, which might help explain the Koran's peculiar take on Christianity. Anyhow, for a more recent exposition of Islam-as-Christian-heresy, you might be interested in Hilaire Belloc's famous 1938 essay on "Mohammedanism," in which he anticipates what we're dealing with now.
6. God does TOO delegate--He's doing it right this very moment in our exchange. So there!
7. No--criticism employs argument, not angry recrimination. And I didn't accuse you of bigotry, although I am indeed fond of a certain intermittent rhetorical pose that I suppose you could dismiss as infantile. In fact, I merely took umbrage at your discourse; for your heresy, I can only express gratitude.
And now back to Groucho Marx.
David T.| 6.29.10 @ 12:22PM
Dr. Right--I'm trying to be as charitable as possible when I say please stop exposing your biases against and ignorance of the Catholic Church.
Doctor Right| 6.29.10 @ 2:13PM
David:
Why do I understand more about your Church than you do?
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 10:49AM
Frankly, if you can't do much about familial abuse, you wont go very far with rooting out pedopriests, unless you want to give police extraordinary powers to arrest and interrogate anyone who even owns a Michael Jackson CD or a Roman Polanski DVD.
You remember the daycare centers that were falsely prosecuted.
Doctor Right| 6.29.10 @ 11:52AM
"Familial abuse"...
Another canard...Another attempt at deflection.
And one that has NOTHING to do with the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests, and the endemic, systematic cover-ups of the same.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:09PM
I happen to disagree. "NOTHING" whatsoever? the Church exists on a magic isle entirely separate from the worldly mainland??
PolishKnight| 6.29.10 @ 11:01AM
"Aiding and abetting the sexual abuse of children, and covering it up, is just as bad as doing it. "
Certainly that's a serious offense especially in an institution dedicated to setting a moral standard but, really, "just as bad as doing it?"
Let's put it in this context: Terrorists who attack civilians justify their actions based upon the logic that civilians in a democracy "aid and abett" military actions taken by that government hence they are equally culpable.
Doctor Right| 6.29.10 @ 11:50AM
Yes...Just as bad.
After all...WHY would someone aid and abet the sexual abuse of children, unless from evil motives and intentions??
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 11:09AM
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung round his neck and he were thrown into the sea." Mk. 9:42.
"Is covering it up as bad as doing it?"
You have cause, and you have effect.
I sure wouldn't want to have to find that out.
Joe D.| 6.29.10 @ 11:45AM
Tom, please don't tell me and others about the Episcopalian leaders problems. You need to get your own house in order first. And the Catholic Church has still not done that. You still have cover ups(enablers) who are not punished or the Priests who abuse boys (homosexuals). This is a homosexual problem on 95% of the cases. So the problem is that the Catholic Church is not listening to the Bible or God in putting homosexuals in leadership of the Catholic Church.
They have a sexual and sin problem. You don't make them members let alone leaders. Episcopalian leaders are wrong but you should get the log out of your own eye so you can see clearly to get the speck out of your brothers eye.
This is why I, my wife and others walked away from the Catholic Church years ago (hypocracy).
Seek| 6.29.10 @ 11:48AM
With priests around the world playing "ball in the pants" with 12-year-old altar boys, you begin to realize why people are leaving the church in droves. Tom Bethell, true to form, can't quite get it.
JP| 6.29.10 @ 1:02PM
Actually the number of new converts continues apace (about 115,000 a year). The demographic of the people who are leaving the Church are usually college age kids. But, this problem has been around since the late 1960s and predates the priest scandals.
Another demographic that is interesting is the number of second vocation priests. These are widows or unmarried me between 30-40 who are entering the priesthood. They now represent over 15% of all newly ordained priests.
Old Believer| 6.29.10 @ 12:04PM
We all sin,we all need to pull up our socks.However we who are serious about grounding our being in a transcending faith--a faith that truly believes in life and the dignity of man, need to stand together agains a militant secular nihilism that threatens us all.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 12:24PM
"Blessings are on the head of the righteous, but the mouth of the wicked conceals violence." Pro.10:11.
"The mouth of the righteous is a fountain of life, but the mouth of the wicked conceals violence." Prov. 10:18.
"He who conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy." Prov. 28:13.
We should always go to the Bible concerning everything!
God says what He considers sin, and exactly how He looks at it. He says you are wicked if you conceal sin, and that He considers it violent. That's pretty serious and I wouldn't want to be that person.
But look also at Prov. 28:13. God promises that if a person confesses and forsakes sin, they will obtain mercy. So that means that even a pedophile Priest can be forgiven, but that God's requirements are that they must confess and forsake.
Thank you, Lord Jesus. Because of your mercy, we live. If it weren't for your mercy and love we would all go to Hell.
Patrick| 6.30.10 @ 12:15AM
The Church is indeed beset with those willing to cover up evil, or betray the Lord whom they have sworn to serve.
But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? (Luke 22:48)
There are always traitors within.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 12:53PM
The Elephant In The Middle Of The Room .
" According to a draft report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education, in compliance with the 2002 "No Child Left Behind" act signed into law by President Bush, between 6 percent and 10 percent of public school children across the country have been sexually abused or harassed by school employees and teachers."
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 1:02PM
" Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant, and most of the alleged abusers are not clergy or staff, but church volunteers.
These are findings from national surveys by Christian Ministry Resources (CMR), a tax and legal-advice publisher serving more than 75,000 congregations and 1,000 denominational agencies nationwide. "
Ann| 6.29.10 @ 1:09PM
You know, it's strange. None of this has shaken my faith in the Church. I grew in an alcoholic home with two paranoid schizophrenic brothers. I'm saying this not for the usual narcissistic pity party, but to say that my faith in God, in Christ and the Church has never left me. I believe that there is a reason for even the horrific life and death of my oldest brother.
As part of my biography, I have lived among conservative devout Catholics, affluent high WASPs, Jewish leftists and blue collar populists. For the past 30 years, I've also lived among the dogmatic secular humanists of the Eastern professional classes, whom, at least in my milieu, are often angry recovering Catholics who are stunned, simply stunned by my religious faith.
I've found no premium on moral righteousness in any of these groups. And no premium on the capacity for good and evil. I saw plenty of the latter in my early life, in the societal abandonment and soul murder of my brothers.
The abuse and the politics behind it were horrific sins. But it is Christ, who left this church to us, that matters. It is His beauty and love, expressed in the Mass, that for me far outweighs the sins and faults of the temporal world.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 1:11PM
" For decades, prosecutors in Brooklyn routinely pursued child molesters from every major ethnic and religious segment of the borough’s diverse population. Except one.
But in the past year, there have been 26. District Attorney Charles J. Hynes has brought charges against a variety of men — yeshiva teachers, rabbis, camp counselors, merchants and relatives of children. Eight have been convicted; 18 await trial.
If the sudden spike in prosecutions is startling, even more surprising is the apparent reason: ultra-Orthodox Jews, long forbidden to inform on one another without permission from the rabbis who lead them, are going to the police and prosecutors on their own."
Evanston2| 6.29.10 @ 1:17PM
You're right, Tim, flagrant sin in other institutions justifies that committed under the robes. The protestations here are sickening, particularly of Alan Brooks. If the Roman church would obey Romans 13:1-7 or the "first pope" in 1 Pet 2:13-16 then you wouldn't have these problems. Instead Rome seeks to be a kingdom in this world and betrays the King. Enjoy your sacerdotalism, for all the good it does your priests and you.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 1:25PM
What's The Matter Boy ?
Ya got a problem with rounding up the other Sex Abuse Perverts.
Hmmmmmm , Hypocrite Agenda Boy ?
ruthanne| 6.29.10 @ 1:44PM
I was raised Catholic since 1954 and perhaps I'm lucky,well, blessed, because I always had kind, hardworking nuns at school and never knew or heard of anyone (in 3 states where I lived) who was abused by a priest. Even with all the proof of sinful priests and cover ups within the Church, my faith cannot let me go anywhere else. The Church is made up of fallible humans, why should we expect to not have coruption? It doesn't mean it shouldn't "clean house" from time to time, but it doesn't have to be condemned. What other Christian church can trace it's leadership back to St. Peter? Please, understand, that statement doesn't mean the other religions are somehow wrong (God has His plan, afterall). I know some Baptists who are better people than some Catholics. It just means that an institution so old and so large is going to make big mistakes. Those priests should have and should be turned over to civil authorities. Didn't I read somewhere that the Church is looking more closely at the men who apply for ordination?
Clay F| 6.29.10 @ 2:42PM
I ponder this: could the ongoing sex scandal in the Catholic Church be yet another scary example that the End of Times is not only imminent, but rather has already started? I'm not saying that I believe the Anti-Christ will be revealed as the Pope, however, will the ongoing charges against the Church, the cover-ups, and the scramble to clear its name cause the Vatican to implement or change a doctrine (or perhaps fail to correct a doctrine) which unwittingly is a sin before God, incite cataclysmic events for all Christians, and too, the world?
Though not Catholic, just a middle of the road Presbyterian (who, by the way, despises the stance on Israel taken by Presbyterian leadership), I am fascinated with the story and alleged cover-up of the Fatima prophesies and how they relate to the End of Times. I encourage anyone not familiar with the event to visit Fatima.org (I have no association or personal ties with the group).
When I look at the Middle East and see practically all the nations standing against Israel, read all the blood libel presented against her, and witness the troubled waters of the Catholic Church - and need I mention the onslaught of Islam's desire to subjugate the world - it gives me a great, fearful pause.
By the way, to one of the earlier posters who doesn't understand why the Jews didn't embrace Jesus as the Messiah. Let me remind you, Saint Paul wrote that God made them blind to his role for them, however their eyes will be opened during the End of Times.
Louis Jenkins| 6.29.10 @ 2:45PM
Sin is transgressions against God. Whatever the flavor, love of money, love of food, love of women or boys. Yes, it is easy to point towards Catholics and shake your finger at them. But sin also abounds in every aspect of our life, including Protestant congregations. But why is it that priests, et al, are targeted by the news media? Down here in the south we have the news media at least once a week jump on the shoulders of some secular ‘preacher’ and give him “what for” because of his sexual dalliances with a female. Still doesn’t negate the Catholic image.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 3:14PM
Well, I think the media targets them because they hold themselves up as Holy. The media does love to see everyone, whether churches or people who put themselves forward as examples of goodness, fall.
It helps them to feel justified in their own sin. It's the way of the flesh. "Oh, look! They've fallen! Now they're just like me." Not knowing that they themselves are "poor, pitiable and blind", like it says in Revelation.
I don't like the Catholic doctrine, because I say it's unBiblical, but I like Catholic people. Well, the ones who don't get into doctrine with me but who can just be glad along with me to believe in Jesus. That's fine with me. My Grandmother was Catholic as were just about my entire family. They know where I stand, and I know where they stand. I still love them and (I think they still love me), but the days of arguing are in the past.
When we get to Heaven, doctrine isn't going to matter, is it? I have to be faithful to what I know. So does each one of us. Thankfully God judges the heart.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 3:50PM
Who Ya Kiddin' Propaganda Broad ?
The Liberal Mainstream Media targets The Catholic Church for the same reason they target We ,Tea Party Rebels , Sarah Palin , Rand Paul , Rush Limbaugh and anyone else who opposes their Liberal Agenda.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 3:56PM
READ, freakazoid. READ.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 4:07PM
The Liberal Mainstream Media Agendists have not gone after Muslims, Jews ,The Mainstream Protestants ,Buddhists,Druids Whatever ,the way they've serially attacked The Catholic Church .
The only group that gets The Liberal Media Agendists Workover , anywhere near what has been done to The Catholic Church are Evangelicals.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 4:19PM
Perhaps the Catholic church deserves it. If they protect child molesters, I say they do. The same goes for anyone who does the same. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. And if you don't want to be at the mercy of the Leftist media, don't ask for it.
I don't know what was wrong with what I said. It still holds true that they do it because they like to see others fall, and that it makes them feel justified. Please. Quit stalking me with your lies.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 4:30PM
Who Ya Kiddin' !
You Are No Friend of The Catholic Church .
You ain't stalkable Chubby Cheeks .
You just keep askin' for a keyboard punch in the mouth .
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 4:33PM
And you are no friend of the Lord's.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 4:50PM
That's Slander , Faux Christian Hypocrite Psychotic Lady.
Get Some Counseling Sweetie Pie.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 4:59PM
What's slander is your very disgusting existence. I hope you repent, but if you don't, may you rot in Hell.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 5:07PM
Why Thank You Lovely Church Lady .
And May God Bless You Too .
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 5:11PM
The Scripture that applies to you is, "I wish those who unsettle you would mutilate themselves." Gal. 5:12.
Vile creature.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 5:18PM
A Lovely Sentiment , My Dear .
And May The Lord Be With You To.
Evanston2| 6.30.10 @ 6:08PM
What's wrong with you, Tim? Do you hold your church to a higher standard or not? If so, then don't blame its enemies but talk about what needs to be changed. If you're happy with the status quo (and merely unhappy with criticism) then as Margie says "Perhaps the Catholic church deserves it." I'd leave out the "Perhaps."
jd| 6.29.10 @ 4:56PM
Good ole Margie, spewing anti-Catholic bigotry again and then stating she sees nothing wrong with with stating that Catholics act holy and want to see others fail. If there's one thing consistent about your posts, it is hypocrisy and calling anybody who questions you a LIAR! Oh how so evangelically holy of you. From now on anytime I see your name on posts regarding any theological issue I know to hit the scroll down button.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 5:00PM
Hey you little holier than thou liar. You just twisted my words. READ imbecile. READ!
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 5:11PM
What Church is it ,that you belong to there Margie Honey .
The First Smitin' Assault Swap Fanatics Church Of Newark ?
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 5:21PM
One that wouldn't allow a stalker in to its fellowship.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 5:58PM
Ohhhh , the sneeky stallkyness of it all.
How dare some vile creature comes to a public site and respond to Margie's Verbal Love Bouquets.
Officer arrest this criminal .
jd| 6.29.10 @ 5:23PM
Margie's church is her Bible that she incessantly cites. No scripture reading will hide the hate she spews or venom in her heart. No wonder her Catholic family considers her an outcast.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 5:27PM
Little jd you are a pretty despicable liar. And like Tim* you don't even seem to mind that you are ruining your conscience.
The hatred and venom being spewed here is from the 2 of you. Keep on lying, jd. Only you will have to give an account of yourself to God.
Though you wish to discredit me here in the presence of AmSpec readers, you're really only hurting yourself.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 6:06PM
Ohhhh my ,my ,my Lordy , Lordy !
The Hatred ! The Venom ! The Liiiiiieeeeessss !
Wretched Creatures !
They have discredited the the Fairest Of The Fair . The Lovely And Shy Lady Margie .
Oh Lord , Forgive Us !
What Have We Done !
jd| 6.29.10 @ 6:38PM
The only person discrediting you on this site is you, Margie. What makes you think you can name call other bloggers, wish them damnation for disagreeing with you, accuse them of stalking you when we confront YOUR lies and yet accuse US of having no conscience. It's obvious you talk the talk but can't walk the walk. You have a right to make outlandish and misinformed comments about Catholicism but I have right to attack you for it.
Margie| 6.29.10 @ 7:10PM
jd,
You're still lying. Someone IS stalking me, and you have no conscience what so ever.
You're nothing but a complete and utter hypocrite.
You wear it well.
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 7:27PM
Top Secret Surveillance Report : For Top Clearance Classified Eyes Only :
Updated Report : Subject : Code Name Margie observed buying Beer and Cigarettes at Mustaffah's Packagee Goods on West Market Street Newark, New Jersey. Subject enters her Toyota Prius and drives West on Market Street to The Flyin' Pig Saloon & Tatoo Parlor..... Agent 001/5 follows . Subject enters the Saloon....... Waiting for next update from Agent 001/5 .
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:13PM
Margie is correct:
the media is motivated by Schadenfreude.
Alan Brooks| 6.29.10 @ 8:16PM
with a capital 'S'.
BTW who sang that 'Dirty Laundry' song; was it Joe Walsh?
John II| 6.29.10 @ 10:49PM
Yes, Marge is right--but the media ARE motivated by Schadenfreude.
The word "media" is the neuter nominative plural of the word "medium." Same with "data."
Why am I given the thankless task of grammarian on this thread? I wanna be rich and famous! Yet this is what fate has dealt me.
John II| 6.29.10 @ 10:56PM
Nobody can discredit you for my money, Marge. And I'm a Catholic. I think we have an understanding.
On the other hand, none of the Protestants in my extended family registers your kind of passion. Are you sure you're not an RC? You sure as hell sound like one. You know the saying: "Once a Catholic, always a . . ." Skip it.
Margie| 6.30.10 @ 11:59AM
Thank you, John II. Yes, the understanding is exactly like the one I spoke of in my post at 3:14 p.m., 3rd & 4th paragraphs.
However, I'm not a "Protestant". I'm a lowly Christian, saved by Grace. I do not belong to any denomination. Just me and Him and those who believe in Him and who were also saved by His Grace and Mercy. Anyhow, the Bible's definition of church is "Where 2 or 3 are gathered together in My Name, there I am in the midst of them." Mt. 18:20. I like to keep it REAL simple! :^)
I'm definately not an RC. Nobody is born an RC, it isn't a nationality, but I was born into a Catholic family. Well, Catholic in the sense of mostly in name only, really. I quit going when I was in my early teens and my Parents couldn't make me. I wasn't the goody 2 shoes type. I was a rebel through and through and didn't want to "play church", as I saw it. Do.. I lived rebelliously till I was about 20. I became about as ruined as a any sinner could become but mine was a deep descent for such a youngster.Then God saved me in such a marvelous manner. I saw His plan was to allow me to sink to the depths of despair and in sin in order to bring me up by sheer rescue by His Arm alone so that I would have no question in my mind ( or the minds of others), that it was Him doing it. I could go on at length to describe to you exactly what He saved me from or how deep but everyone knows what Sin is. It's rebellion in whatever form happens to suit you~the Sin of your particular choosing~but it's all rebellion, right? Well, anyway.. here I am almost 40 yrs. later posting on a Catholic blog trying to say what I really think.. all I know is that Jesus saves! He does it individually, and you know it's Him doing it without a doubt.
You ask about my passion? Well, that's why and where. It's because of Him. He saved a miserable wretch like me. I'm truly sorry for hurting anyone I may have hurt over the time I've been here.
God bless you guys.
John II| 6.29.10 @ 10:46PM
"Can't do the time, don't do the crime. " Whoa! I remember THAT one, Marge. Baretta! 1975-78. The theme song was sung by Sammy Davis, Jr.
Now, here's the trouble, as I see it. I loved Baretta and I loved watching that show, but even then the theme of lone-cop-against-the-establishment was wearing thin. I mean, I was already getting old enough (mid-thirties) to start feeling some sympathy for the by-the-book cops whom Baretta worked under. He was a pretty effective cop, but he was also a colossal pain in the . . . well, then there was Blake's troubled personal life, which emerged later.
I liked him best in the Our Gang series and, in a brief two-year stint on TV, as Little Beaver, the Indian boy-companion of Red Ryder. Then there was sure-enough fame and fortune for his role in the Truman Capote vehicle In Cold Blood, which creeped me out, and then Baretta and then big trouble in his troubled personal life, in which he barely escaped a real-life murder rap.
Why am I ranting about all this? Because Baretta, to this day, is one of my emblems for the superficial appeal of the faux-"outsider."
The REAL outsider, it turns out, tends to be the ordinary straight dude attentive to his family and temperamentally incapable of taking himself seriously. The last shall be first--because they just don't give a sweet damn about being first.
And now back to Groucho.
justplainbill| 6.29.10 @ 2:45PM
"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
"Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
"Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth." I Timothy 4:1-3
Tim*| 6.29.10 @ 2:59PM
" One issue closely related to ministerial priesthood is the celibacy imposed by the Catholic Church to those who want to become priests and bishops. Does the Bible say that bishop is a husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:2) and that forbidding marriage is the doctrine of the demons (1 Timothy 4:1-3)? First celibacy of the priests and bishops is neither doctrine nor dogma but a discipline imposed by the Western (or Latin) Catholic Church. In the Eastern Catholic Church married men can be ordained as priests (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 1580). The Church also welcomes as married priests, former (married) clergies of Anglican or Episcopal or Lutheran church who converted to Catholicism. The Church does not and never forbids marriage – married Catholics far outnumber non-married ones, be they bishops, priests, monks, nuns or laity. The candidates for priesthood are fully aware of celibacy discipline before and during their seminary times – they have ample time to consider whether this vocation is for them or not. Thus it is celibacy based on voluntary, not a forced one, as stated in1 Timothy 4:3. Mandatory Celibacy for all members is practised by sects like Cathar in Europe (12th – 13th century) and Shaker in USA. What happens if a priest decided to get married after being ordained? The Catholic Church would not stop him either for doing so – he can undergo laicization process to leave priesthood. "
Jorge| 6.29.10 @ 3:50PM
The Catholic Church should sell all its worldly belongings, give it to the poor and follow Jesus.
DaveS| 6.29.10 @ 11:44PM
A little envy here, Jorge?
Patrick| 6.30.10 @ 12:29AM
Gospel of John, chapter 12, verses 1-8
1 Jesus therefore, six days before the pasch, came to Bethania, where Lazarus had been dead, whom Jesus raised to life. 2 And they made him a supper there: and Martha served. But Lazarus was one of them that were at table with him. 3 Mary therefore took a pound of ointment of right spikenard, of great price, and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. 4 Then one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, he that was about to betray him, said: 5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence and given to the poor? 6 Now he said this not because he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief and, having the purse, carried the things that were put therein. 7 Jesus therefore said: Let her alone, that she may keep it against the day of my burial. 8 For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always.
The thief and traitor often uses the poor as cover for his own sin.
jrje| 6.29.10 @ 5:11PM
Organized Christian religion has self-destructed. And the very short sighted leaders are leading it there. As to the Catholics, the current pope should have cleaned house when he was installed. Now he is just one of the also popes.
Patrick| 6.30.10 @ 12:31AM
The papacy does not grant magical powers, nor dispense magical wands that, by simply waving them about, make evil go away.
This is real life, not Harry Potter.
DaveS| 6.29.10 @ 11:42PM
JPII was a mystic. Benedict a constructionist. Day to day, the Church needs the latter more than the former. Benedict was broadsided, but it's not like he was surprised. Great article by Bethell. The Holy Spirit chooses well for the time of need and for the future. Thus, JPII and now Benedict. There's a lot of sentimetality for JPII, but Benedict, if he lives another five years, will earn his and place the Church on improved footing. The Church will always be hated - as foretold by Christ Himself.
AMENBRO| 6.30.10 @ 3:01AM
You are a child MOLESTING POS or you aren't.
You covered it up or you didn't.
Organized religion PARTICULARLY of the Catholic variety is an ABORHORENT manifestation of Mankind not GOD.
Face it your relation with GOD is a heck of alot more personal than anyone that survives on your largesse and coins in the offering plate's ringing implies.
EXACTLY WHAT MARTIN LUTHER TAUGHT US HOW LONG AGO.
Catholicism is a disease,,,face it. Why else just like UNIONS are they so in bed with criminals worldwide????
Pope John from POLAND is the only POPE in History that wasn't. KICKED THE Communist's ASSES all over the globe YAWL.
KyMouse| 6.30.10 @ 8:04AM
What Mr. Bethell calls the barque of St. Peter has been foundering for centuries.
Catholics say that it’s the sin of presumption to believe that Jesus paid for all of one’s sins. But Christians believe that Jesus told the truth when he said, “He who believes in Me has everlasting life” (John 6:47). Those who trust in Jesus are acceptable to God forever (2 Corinthians 5:21, Hebrews 10:14—“For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified”).
In 1545, the Catholic Church decreed that tradition is equal in authority with the Bible. Christians respect tradition when it doesn’t conflict with the Bible, which carries the very authority of God Himself (Galatians 1:12—“…it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ”). Everything we should believe as Christians is found in the Bible, and no other source is binding or authoritative. Jesus said, “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35), not “Tradition cannot be broken.”
Giving undue authority to tradition has led the Catholic Church to decree that Mary was sinless (in 1547), is the Co-Redeemer of Mankind (1922) and was bodily taken up into heaven (1950). She has been given titles such as Queen of Heaven and Earth. She has allegedly promised that Catholics who wear her scapular medal will be delivered from purgatory on the first Saturday after their death. If such things were true, the writers of the New Testament would have proclaimed them. However, after Mary’s role as the earthly mother of Jesus ended, they don’t mention her. Even Jesus never exalted Mary as Catholics do (e.g. John 2:1-4).
Catholics are taught to give some degree of devotion to Mary and Catholic saints. Christians know that only the Father, Son and Holy Spirit should receive worship, which includes prayer and veneration, “hyperdulia” as well as “latria.” Catholics believe that Mary and their saints act as mediators, but Christians know that “there is one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ” (I Timothy 2:5).
All of us, whether Catholic or not, need to know that we aren’t forgiven through church membership or baptism, but by putting our faith (obedient trust) in Jesus (John 3:14-18). We are saved by God’s grace only through our faith in Jesus (Romans 5:1; Ephesians 2:8-9), not through any of our works. Good deeds are the result of our salvation, not the other way around.
Trust Jesus alone for your salvation—not the pope, not your parish priest, not Mary, not Catholic saints, not penance or indulgences, not the rosary. “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31).
John II| 6.30.10 @ 9:49AM
"If such things were true, the writers of the New Testament would have proclaimed them."
Er . . . does that asseveration apply to the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura? If so, could you cite the passage?
Ryan| 6.30.10 @ 10:07AM
The Bereans were a good example - they compared everything new they were being taught with what was written down in the OT.
It DOES make appearances that at least the standard was the Old Testament in New Testament times.
Doctor Right| 6.30.10 @ 10:14AM
This is a straw-man argument that the Catholic-apologists on this board ALWAYS throw-out to try and prove some vague point only known to them.
They try and trip you up by confusing the CONCEPT that scripture is ALL that Christians need for guidance with the actual DOCTRINE of "Sola Scriptura" which first appeared as a doctrine during the Reformation.
In other words, these "clever" boys want you to say that "Sola Scriptura" itself is in the New Testament, when, of course, it's not there AS A WRITTEN DOCTRINE. They also like to play the game of saying that "scripture" itself (the Bible, as a bound volume) didn't really exist then, either, so of course, neither could the CONCEPT of "sola scriptura".
This is demonstrably false, and transparently disingenuous.
99% of the gobbledy-gook that Catholics believe and hold dear, and they know it...So they try and deflect the issue with nonsensical questions like JOHN II's...
OF COURSE the N.T. doesn't mention the phrase "sola scriptura". It didn't need to; Paul and the apostles were constantly warning of the dangers of straying from Christ's words AS GIVEN directly to the Apostles, and faithfully recorded in their letters and epistles.
Additionally, Proverbs 30:6 makes it CRYSTAL clear:
"Proverbs 30:6 (New International Version)
"6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar."
NICE TRY, John II...
John II| 6.30.10 @ 3:55PM
But Doc--you didn't answer my question, really.
Fascinating use of the term "straw-man argument." I sometimes think that when people misuse that term, they're actually in the process of creating a sure-enough straw-man argument.
In any event, I didn't make an argument; I asked a question. And you practically chewed my head off. As Napoleon Dynamite would say, "Gosh!"
Margie| 6.30.10 @ 1:34PM
KY Mouse,
Those words are just as wonderful as Jesus Himself.
John II| 6.30.10 @ 3:59PM
Hi Marge. Thanks for your prior apologia--charming, as always. But be careful! It sure sounds as if you're on your way back to Holy Mother Church.
Anyhow, Kymouse's words are fascinating, to be sure--but not as wonderful as Jesus! I mean, for crying out loud.
Margie| 6.30.10 @ 4:47PM
Rest assured, John II. I won't ever be on my way back there, since actually I never really was there to begin with. The only Saviour I will ever need is Jesus Himself.
As to KY's words~ Here is why they are as wonderful as Him~ wonderful in that they are truthful and represent Jesus, who is the Truth.
"Jesus said to him, "I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father, but by Me." Jn. 14:6.
John II| 6.30.10 @ 7:30PM
Well, I can't argue with that. Anyhow, I'm glad there're no hard feelings. We all need to put aside our differences, pool our resources, gather our wits, and, to paraphrase our preposterous leader, kick some liberal socialist ass.
And I do mean ass. I am reassured that you and I share the same enemies.
Margie| 6.30.10 @ 9:36PM
Awesome, John II. We do, indeed. (Share the same enemies.)
And your words brought this to mind: Mt. 10:40. "He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me."
God bless.
RCV| 6.30.10 @ 6:09PM
As a non-Catholic, I must say that I find it ironic that so many Protestants criticize the Roman church for exalting doctrines over Jesus's words, and then go ahead and treat the Epistles -- letters from human beings after Christ's death -- as if they were holy. Seems blasphemous to me. Paul was a man, a human, not perfect, not God, and subject to error. The only reason the Epistles are in what we now call "Scripture" is that some Roman Catholic Church council decreed that they should be. Should we read Paul's commentary's and consider them on their merits? Certainly. But to put them on an equal plane with God or with Jesus's own teachings is no different than doing the same with Mary.
RCV| 6.30.10 @ 6:12PM
Sorry - "Paul's commentaries".
Margie| 6.30.10 @ 9:43PM
Hi RCV,
I'd like to tell you why I put them on the same plane, as it were. It is because of this:
"And we have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the Day dawns and the Morning Star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."
RCV| 7.1.10 @ 1:23AM
Sorry, Margie, but that doesn't cut it for me. References to the prophets of the OT don't include Paul, who was no Prophet, but a wise latter-day apostle of the Lord. A great and wise thinker he was, yes, I will grant you. But I will never put him, or his teachings on a par with Jesus. Never.
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 9:13AM
RCV,
Well you're right in bringing to mind one thing. Paul certainly wasn't Jesus, and he sure never claimed to be. But he was filled with the Holy Spirit .."Men moved by the Holy Spirit.." and was one of His Apostles. Those of us who have the Holy Spirit recognize those who do.
Even the demon said to the man who was trying to cast him out, "Paul I know, Jesus I know, but who are you?" Acts 19:15.
But each person will choose which master he will serve.
Ryan| 7.1.10 @ 8:20AM
Your statement "that some Roman Catholic Church council decreed that they should be" is a bit of an oversimplification. The Biblical Canon - the traditional Old and New Testaments - weren't exactly pulled out of a hat. There was a pretty extensive process that went into determining what is and isn't scripture, and it's held up pretty well .
Using Jesus' words and the Gospels as the standard isn't necessarily bad theology; but Paul never states anything that contradicts Christ and probably expounds the best on the meanings.
I know that there is an anti-Pauline minority out there (and I'm not necessarily including you in it), but from what I have seen, they don't do well with context and meaning and don't understand how the Canon was arrived at.
RCV| 7.1.10 @ 11:34AM
You're right, Ryan, of course. My flippant reference was indeed an oversimplification, and I've certainly done enough reading on the development of the Canon to be fully aware of its history. It doesn't change my ultimate conclusion on the relative authority of the teachings I spoke about. Nor would I ever consider myself an Anti-Pauline. I have the greatest respect for Paul and his profound understanding of the revolutionary nature of Jesus's coming and its relationship to the old order.
Ryan| 7.1.10 @ 12:21PM
I think what the problem is with what you stated is that you seem to present the possibility that Paul may have gotten something wrong because of his fallen nature.
Such a question may be worth asking, but I think the proof - that Paul doesn't contradict Christ and even gets a nod from Peter that at least something of what he wrote could be defined as "scripture" - should bear out the right answer to what you are proposing.
JP| 7.1.10 @ 4:28AM
KY Mouse,
Excellent points; too bad Catholics do not believe or practice any of them. I would strongly reccomend that you buy a copy of the Catholic Cathechism. In it you will find one of the most heavily footnoted books in existence. Almost all of the footnotes are biblical references.
As far as Doctrines concerning Mary, Purgatory, praying for the Dead, etc... these practices were in existence from the earliest times of the Church and it took some 2 millenia to actually make them doctrine (Catholics do debate and some of these debates have lasted 1800 years or longer). Just because a Dogma was instituted in say 1950 or 1870 doesn't in the least bit mean they were or are only 60 or 130 years old. Protestant sects have been breaking off from eachother for 500 years now (there are some 36,000 of them -all declaring they have the truth). Only the Catholic Church has a 2000 year continuity of beliefs and faith that is unbroken.
And if you do obtain a copy of the Cathechism, I urge you to find a crediable theologian, apologist, or priest and debate with one of them. In the US the RCC averages about 115,000 converts a year (mainly Protestants like you, and quite a few are Protestant ministers and theologians).
Ryan| 7.1.10 @ 8:24AM
I think a lot of the problem - and this coming from someone familiar with many nominal Catholics - is that there are many Catholics who don't understand this stuff, and there's a lot of APPEARANCES that we Protestants take too much at face value and don't understand the roots of.
That being said, it doesn't necessarily make the old traditions Biblical or not.