No Compromise On Vatican Ii: Fellay

[Skinzo]

At this point I have some problem with your posts as you just don't seem to read what I'm saying very carefully or totally ignore points I do make, or you put words in my mouth which I have not said.
I've already addressed the supposed "doctrinal" question so I'm not going to repeat what I've said on that. No one has elevated this to the level of doctrine. But there are limits on what any bishop can say on lots of topics and the Vatican could not ignore a bishop who is making statements about an historical event which are thoroughly contrary to what the Holy See has said on the same topic. The Catholic church makes policy statements on serious public issues, and the pope as a matter of internal discipline certainly expects Catholics to support those. As to the issue of holocausts/genocides in Africa, this pope and his predecessor have tried to focus attention on those as well. There are numerous statements of the Vatican on those matters. It is unfortunate that the western world continues to ignore Africa's plight. And of course, there is the holocaust of abortion, very much ignored in world media.
Bishop Williamson has at times denied the Holocaust, at other times he has tried to minimize it, saying that maybe 2-300,000 died in the camps. He isn't consistent. He has also expressed his belief in the "protocols of the elders of Zion" which has long been shown to be a fake by serious historians. If indeed you plan to teach why would you post an opinion here on Bishop Williamson when you have not even researched what he did say?? I've no idea what you mean by 11,000 to 19,000. ?? Qualitative and quantitative issues can matter in public perception, but perhaps not in judging one holocaust against another in moral terms. The point is I think that in some people's minds the Holocaust becomes less of an issue if the numbers are drastically reduced.

If I have to choose between supporting one obviously very screwy antisemitic bishop or supporting Benedict XVI, it's an easy choice. Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II, all fought against the Holocaust. Benedict himself and his family suffered under the Nazis. Theirs is the moral high ground. That's the place to be.

S.

Edited August 7, 2009 by Skinzo

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1942634' date='Aug 7 2009, 07:09 AM']At this point I have some problem with your posts as you just don't seem to read what I'm saying very carefully or totally ignore points I do make, or you put words in my mouth which I have not said.[/quote]

I did what I could with what you gave me, call it doctrine or not I believe you give it far too much import than it deserves. That's all I'm going to say more on this. There's really nothing more useful that can come from this. peace

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1942259' date='Aug 6 2009, 03:44 PM']You doubt it. But does Orthodoxy take a formal position on the matter?? Just where does the Orthodox church spell out what are acceptable qualities in a candidate for ordination??


S.[/quote]
Unlike the Catholic Church, which likes to issue documents on almost any issue at the drop of a hat, the Orthodox Church does not have a bureaucratic mindset.

The ancient canons and economia govern the practices of the Orthodox Church.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1942149' date='Aug 6 2009, 01:56 PM']I am merely stating that the Orthodox Church would happily ordain such a person as I know of no reason they would exclude him.

S.[/quote]
I doubt that an Eastern Orthodox bishop would ask about the ordinands views on the holocaust, or whether he believed that Brutus killed Caesar, or what he thought about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, or about his views any number of other historical events for that matter. That said, I am sure that an Eastern Orthodox bishop would be far more concerned about the man's theological views, i.e., does he believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the second person of the Holy Trinity, and that He is the sole savior of mankind.

I think Catholic bishops should be more concerned about ensuring that men receiving sacred ordination to the diaconate and presbyterate have a good grasp on Catholic dogma and a living faith in Christ, rather than worry about the ordinand's views on matters pertaining to secular history.

Edited August 8, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Skinzo]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1943761' date='Aug 8 2009, 07:30 PM']I doubt that an Eastern Orthodox bishop would ask about the ordinands views on the holocaust, or whether he believed that Brutus killed Caesar, or what he thought about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, or about his views any number of other historical events for that matter. That said, I am sure that an Eastern Orthodox bishop would be far more concerned about the man's theological views, i.e., does he believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the second person of the Holy Trinity, and that He is the sole savior of mankind.

I think Catholic bishops should be more concerned about ensuring that men receiving sacred ordination to the diaconate and presbyterate have a good grasp on Catholic dogma and a living faith in Christ, rather than worry about the ordinand's views on matters pertaining to secular history.[/quote]
I guess I'm not going to get an answer to my question as to whether a card carrying Nazi would still be eligible for ordination in the Orthodox church. It's probably wise of you to dodge the question. But I suspect you indeed know the answer. Let's take a brief look at the real problem here.
I think the real issue is Orthodoxy's lack of a universal pastor who might have the authority to reform the place, for one. I guess it's safe to say that it's OK to be offensive to the Jewish people in the Orthodox church. I'm glad the Catholic church is no longer a haven for antisemites. Of course with the antisemitic quality of the Orthodox liturgy it's not surprising it should attract hateful people. After all these are the kinds of phrases that are still a part of the Orthodox liturgy every Easter: [b]"the Jewish tribe which condemned you to crucifixion, repay them, Oh Lord," which is repeated half a dozen times, and "Christ has risen but the Jewish seed has perished," as well as references to Jews as "God-killers."[/b]
The only bright spot it seems is that two years ago a small group of Orthodox priests banded together to ask that orthodoxy finally cleanse its liturgy of such dreadful stuff. Some were threatened with censure for even raising the subject. (!)
Yes, you are quite right orthodoxy is still governed by ancient practices. Perhaps Bishop Williamson will find a home there after all.
Indeed you are also right, Orthodoxy really doesn't issue official documents on any subjects because the patriarch of Constantinople can't. He can't really exercise authority. Orthodoxy has never issued anything like "Nostra Aetate" and probably never will. After all, only a Church with a real claim to being a mother Church would concern itself with such things.

For those wishing to read more of the few orthodox priests who are battling antisemitism within the orthodox church, here's a link:
[url="http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1176152838943&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull"]http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...rticle/ShowFull[/url]


S.

[Skinzo]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1942961' date='Aug 7 2009, 06:38 PM']I did what I could with what you gave me, call it doctrine or not I believe you give it far too much import than it deserves. That's all I'm going to say more on this. There's really nothing more useful that can come from this. peace[/quote]

Perhaps the real issue here is that it all depends as the old saying goes on "whose ox is being gored". If you peruse his statements you'll find that Bishop Williamson has also offended Africans as well as women to mention only two other groups. He once said that Africa was better off when it was "run by white men". There is simply no way the Catholic church could tolerate those kinds of remarks from a bishop or a priest. Bishops are public figures and they need to be beyond reproach in what they say.
Only churches which still tolerate antisemitism or racism could sit still for stuff like that. Imagine if the archibishop of Detroit denied the history of slavery in the USA, or denied that racial discrimination had ever been a problem in the U.S.? I think there would be quite an outcry and justly so.

S.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1943799' date='Aug 8 2009, 06:41 PM']I think the real issue is Orthodoxy's lack of a universal pastor who might have the authority to reform the place, for one. I guess it's safe to say that it's OK to be offensive to the Jewish people in the Orthodox church. I'm glad the Catholic church is no longer a haven for antisemites. Of course with the antisemitic quality of the Orthodox liturgy it's not surprising it should attract hateful people. After all these are the kinds of phrases that are still a part of the Orthodox liturgy every Easter: [b]"the Jewish tribe which condemned you to crucifixion, repay them, Oh Lord," which is repeated half a dozen times, and "Christ has risen but the Jewish seed has perished," as well as references to Jews as "God-killers."[/b][/quote]

Many of our Eastern Catholic brethren use a liturgy almost exactly the same as the one used by the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1943805' date='Aug 8 2009, 06:54 PM']Perhaps the real issue here is that it all depends as the old saying goes on "whose ox is being gored". If you peruse his statements you'll find that Bishop Williamson has also offended Africans as well as women to mention only two other groups. He once said that Africa was better off when it was "run by white men". There is simply no way the Catholic church could tolerate those kinds of remarks from a bishop or a priest. Bishops are public figures and they need to be beyond reproach in what they say.
Only churches which still tolerate antisemitism or racism could sit still for stuff like that. Imagine if the archibishop of Detroit denied the history of slavery in the USA, or denied that racial discrimination had ever been a problem in the U.S.? I think there would be quite an outcry and justly so.

S.[/quote]


I'm sure there would be outcry no doubt and such a person should be corrected, but I stand by my position that no matter how ludicrous the position, a solely historical matter does not equate with the importance that you give it.

Yes, IF such a position were to be born out of anti-semitism or racism or sexism or whatever-else-ism you want to put onto it then yes there would be problems of doctrinal matters and something more should be done. But unlike yourself I do not immediately assume that a historical belief of this sort is automatically and inherently linked to such things.

[jeffpugh]

OFF FREAKING TOPIC, GUYS! Srsly. Can we get back on track?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1943886' date='Aug 8 2009, 08:44 PM']OFF FREAKING TOPIC, GUYS! Srsly. Can we get back on track?[/quote]

Trying to get others back on topic usually just kills the thread.

[img]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c292/Imfeeningfor1/Grim_Reaper_300.gif[/img]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1943807' date='Aug 8 2009, 06:01 PM']Many of our Eastern Catholic brethren use a liturgy almost exactly the same as the one used by the Eastern Orthodox Churches.[/quote]
Yes. In fact, the Vatican has indicated that there should be no differences between Eastern Catholic liturgical books and Orthodox ones, even going so far as to say that Eastern Catholics should use Orthodox produced books.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1944032' date='Aug 9 2009, 01:58 AM']Yes. In fact, the Vatican has indicated that there should be no differences between Eastern Catholic liturgical books and Orthodox ones, even going so far as to say that Eastern Catholics should use Orthodox produced books.[/quote]

I don't think that any statement from the Vatican has gone that far. If so, I would definitely like to see it.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1944033' date='Aug 9 2009, 01:00 AM']I don't think that any statement from the Vatican has gone that far. If so, I would definitely like to see it.[/quote]
"In fact, some Eastern Catholic Churches lack their own editions of liturgical books, or at least some, and must use editions, which objectively speaking are sometimes very well done, used by the corresponding Orthodox Churches. Such use occurs with the tacit approval of the Apostolic See or the local Authority. This necessity, each case being examined with prudence, may prove itself a valuable custom, as a manifestation of the partial but deep and extensive communion existing till today between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches which come from a common trunk, and may serve as a dynamic seed for the recovery of full communion. On the other hand, quite a number of editions of liturgical books published in Rome are sometimes appreciated and used by Orthodox brethren. Nonetheless, any unnecessary differentiation between the liturgical books of the Eastern Catholic Churches and those of the Orthodox should be avoided. Rather, common editions, in the measure in which it is possible, are encouraged."

[Apotheoun]

It is with great sadness that I note, for the sake of clarity, that recent editions of liturgical books issued by some Eastern Catholic Churches are in many cases falling victim to the same spirit that radically altered the Latin Church's liturgy after Vatican II. These newer texts, which often utilize inclusive language, while simultaneously morphing the prayers of the Church in order to conform to the politically correct sensibilities that dominate certain Western societies, will have lasting detrimental effects when it comes to the future reconciliation between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church.

The Orthodox Churches, unlike the Latin Church, are not interested in "updating" their ancient liturgy, which they hold -- as a matter of faith -- is the primary patrimony of the God-inspired Fathers.

Edited August 9, 2009 by Apotheoun

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1943936' date='Aug 8 2009, 11:42 PM']Trying to get others back on topic usually just kills the thread.

[img]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c292/Imfeeningfor1/Grim_Reaper_300.gif[/img][/quote]
Lawl. I like the Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1944042' date='Aug 9 2009, 02:45 AM']"In fact, some Eastern Catholic Churches lack their own editions of liturgical books, or at least some, and must use editions, which objectively speaking are sometimes very well done, used by the corresponding Orthodox Churches. Such use occurs with the tacit approval of the Apostolic See or the local Authority. This necessity, each case being examined with prudence, may prove itself a valuable custom, as a manifestation of the partial but deep and extensive communion existing till today between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches which come from a common trunk, and may serve as a dynamic seed for the recovery of full communion. On the other hand, quite a number of editions of liturgical books published in Rome are sometimes appreciated and used by Orthodox brethren. Nonetheless, any unnecessary differentiation between the liturgical books of the Eastern Catholic Churches and those of the Orthodox should be avoided. Rather, common editions, in the measure in which it is possible, are encouraged."[/quote]

It does seem that [b]when there are no Catholic editions of the liturgical books[/b] for a rite that Eastern Catholics may use the books published by the Eastern Orthodox.

I would assume, though, that the prayer for the Supreme Pontiff would be added.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1944044' date='Aug 9 2009, 02:50 AM']The Orthodox Churches, unlike the Latin Church, are not interested in "updating" their ancient liturgy[/quote]

Many of us Latins aren't very interested in "updating" our own ancient liturgy either.

Edited August 9, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1944093' date='Aug 9 2009, 08:46 AM']It does seem that [b]when there are no Catholic editions of the liturgical books[/b] for a rite that Eastern Catholics may use the books published by the Eastern Orthodox.

I would assume, though, that the prayer for the Supreme Pontiff would be added.[/quote]
Yes, that is done; although the pope should only be commemorated during the liturgies of the Patriarchal Church, and not in common parishes. The former practice is an ancient patristic tradition, while the latter practice is a Latinization.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1944182' date='Aug 9 2009, 12:30 PM']Yes, that is done; although the pope should only be commemorated during the liturgies of the Patriarchal Church, and not in common parishes. The former practice is an ancient patristic tradition, while the latter practice is a Latinization.[/quote]

[Skinzo]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1943871' date='Aug 8 2009, 10:13 PM']I'm sure there would be outcry no doubt and such a person should be corrected, but I stand by my position that no matter how ludicrous the position, a solely historical matter does not equate with the importance that you give it.

Yes, IF such a position were to be born out of anti-semitism or racism or sexism or whatever-else-ism you want to put onto it then yes there would be problems of doctrinal matters and something more should be done. But unlike yourself I do not immediately assume that a historical belief of this sort is automatically and inherently linked to such things.[/quote]
Hmmm, I thought you said you would not be back? I think you will have to research Holocaust denial more before you can understand it, as I've said before. Those who deny the Holocaust have always been anti-semitic. Try finding one that isn't. There's a reason why it is a crime in 14 European countries now.

S.

Edited August 12, 2009 by Skinzo