Anglican Plans to Apologize....

[TriuneUnity]

TU,
Did you fall for a fast one?

How unlike you?

WHat made this one so good, assuming it is false, is that we can see it happen.

LOL…no…I did it mainly to see whether it would be taken seriously and you’re absolutely right…it COULD happen. That’s what makes it so funny.

 

[Contarini]

LOL…no…I did it mainly to see whether it would be taken seriously and you’re absolutely right…it COULD happen. That’s what makes it so funny.

Well no, it couldn’t. It’s a ham-handed caricature by someone who hasn’t bothered to try to understand what makes Rowan Williams tick. I agree that it’s funny. But when you start suggesting that it has some relationship to reality, then we have a problem.

I wonder how you would react if I made a similar satire on Pope Benedict? “Pope Benedict announces that listening to Mozart daily is necessary for salvation!” That would be about as close to reality as this (just close enough to be funny, not close enough to be a real criticism of the Pope).

Edwin

 

[ralphinal]

Well no, it couldn’t. It’s a ham-handed caricature by someone who hasn’t bothered to try to understand what makes Rowan Williams tick. I agree that it’s funny. But when you start suggesting that it has some relationship to reality, then we have a problem.

I wonder how you would react if I made a similar satire on Pope Benedict? “Pope Benedict announces that listening to Mozart daily is necessary for salvation!” That would be about as close to reality as this (just close enough to be funny, not close enough to be a real criticism of the Pope).

Edwin

Wagner would work better

 

[TriuneUnity]

Well no, it couldn’t. It’s a ham-handed caricature by someone who hasn’t bothered to try to understand what makes Rowan Williams tick. I agree that it’s funny. But when you start suggesting that it has some relationship to reality, then we have a problem.

I wonder how you would react if I made a similar satire on Pope Benedict? “Pope Benedict announces that listening to Mozart daily is necessary for salvation!” That would be about as close to reality as this (just close enough to be funny, not close enough to be a real criticism of the Pope).

Edwin

How much more removed from reality is apologizing to Charles Darwin versus apologizing to an Old Testament villain? Of course it doesn’t have a relationship to reality but it’s close enough to convince several posters here that it was true

I could see requiring for Mozart for salvation as being much more logical than offering an apology to Darwin lol

 

[GKC]

I suppose it’s too much to hope that you might question whether you view the Archbishop fairly?

It was obvious to me that the thread was a satire. But then, I find the Archbishop’s actual words and actions to be generally reasonable and orthodox (as opposed to the frequent misrepresentations of him).

Edwin

No, I’ve given it some thought, and I don’t think I would question that.

GKC

 

[Contarini]

How much more removed from reality is apologizing to Charles Darwin versus apologizing to an Old Testament villain?

First of all, the Archbishop did not issue the apology. Secondly, no one was apologizing to Charles Darwin. The Anglican priest/official who issued the apology was retracting what he took to have been the Anglican rejection of evolution. I objected to it because the Church of England never as far as I know officially condemned evolution. Had the C of E done so, I think they would be right in officially retracting this condemnation. Since they didn’t, it seemed truly silly to apologize for the fact that some Anglican clergy opposed Darwin. But again, the Archbishop did not do this. I am fairly confident that he knows better.

Of course it doesn’t have a relationship to reality but it’s close enough to convince several posters here that it was true

And what I’m trying to suggest is that their credulity may derive from their prejudices. Just as some people think that Pope Benedict runs around making strict requirements for salvation, and so might believe something silly such as the Mozart proclamation.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Wagner would work better

I was being generous in my analogy. The Pope does in fact love Mozart. (And I was thinking in part of the snooty cardinal in the movie *The Third Miracle, *who was almost certainly a parody of Ratzinger.)

Edwin

 

[ralphinal]

I was being generous in my analogy. The Pope does in fact love Mozart. (And I was thinking in part of the snooty cardinal in the movie *The Third Miracle, *who was almost certainly a parody of Ratzinger.)

Edwin

Ok. I have not seen that movie. Is it good?

I went with Wagner because every closet Nazi loves him (JOKING)

 

[Contarini]

Ok. I have not seen that movie. Is it good?

Compared to *Stigmata, *it’s excellent.

It would annoy most Catholics on this board, I think. I had mixed feelings about it. I thought it fell into a lot of liberal cliches (such as the caricature of Ratzinger), but it at least tried to be a thoughtful exploration of the question of what makes someone a saint. I saw it nearly ten years ago and don’t remember the details too well. There was a “priest falling in love” aspect to the plot, but if I remember rightly he wound up staying faithful to his vows (or at least returning to them–I actually don’t remember for sure if he ever broke them, but I think he may have). I didn’t think it was great. But for a Hollywood portrayal of Catholicism, not too bad.

I went with Wagner because every closet Nazi loves him (JOKING)

Right. I figured that. That would reflect far less understanding of the Pope than my version, and not just because of the “Nazi” slur. I just can’t imagine Ratzinger getting much out of Wagner. Too big and loud and crass (Wagner, not Ratzinger–and I say that as someone who finds Wagner very interesting, though I wouldn’t say I love him).

Edwin

 

[ralphinal]

Compared to *Stigmata, *it’s excellent.

It would annoy most Catholics on this board, I think. I had mixed feelings about it. I thought it fell into a lot of liberal cliches (such as the caricature of Ratzinger), but it at least tried to be a thoughtful exploration of the question of what makes someone a saint. I saw it nearly ten years ago and don’t remember the details too well. There was a “priest falling in love” aspect to the plot, but if I remember rightly he wound up staying faithful to his vows (or at least returning to them–I actually don’t remember for sure if he ever broke them, but I think he may have). I didn’t think it was great. But for a Hollywood portrayal of Catholicism, not too bad.

I went with Wagner because every closet Nazi loves him (JOKING)

What a pick to compare it to. Stigmata. LOL

One of my favorite ones is The Mission. Excellent film and does a good job with the area/era.

 

[Contarini]

What a pick to compare it to. Stigmata. LOL

Well, it came out about the same time, and I think I read at least one review that made the comparison.

One of my favorite ones is The Mission. Excellent film and does a good job with the area/era.

Compared to *The Mission, The Third Miracle *is trash!

I need to see *The Mission *again. It’s been a long while.

Barbara Nicolosi came and spoke at my college last year, and she told the students that if they had watched *300 *they should go see *The Mission *as penance. (What evangelical Protestant students thought of being assigned penance I’m not sure!) That struck me close to home, since I had just seen 300.

Edwin

 

[ralphinal]

Well, it came out about the same time, and I think I read at least one review that made the comparison.

Compared to *The Mission, The Third Miracle *is trash!

I need to see *The Mission *again. It’s been a long while.

Barbara Nicolosi came and spoke at my college last year, and she told the students that if they had watched *300 *they should go see *The Mission *as penance. (What evangelical Protestant students thought of being assigned penance I’m not sure!) That struck me close to home, since I had just seen 300.Edwin

300 is ok as a slash em up, but it is about as historical as the Trail of Blood. I own The Mission. It is wonderful. You should invest in a copy of it. THe behind the scenes on it are wonderful.

 

[rr1213]

Wagner would work better

If you really want to go with the divine, make it Schubert.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m on the Bosphoros (actually the Orontes, Antioch), but better to swim the Tiber than drown in the Thames.

I think theologically speaking the Thames has enough toxic waste to make a person glow! lol

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Yes to the last. But also, maybe, consider the apologies issued for this and that by JPII. Maybe +Rowan spread a wide net, to find something to emulate him, along those lines. And seized on the schizoid nature of the OT/NT God, as he saw it. Sort of a one-upsmanship, apologising not for the Church, but for God, as he reads it.

Or, one can fall back on the assumption that Rowan is a steampowered yoyo. It is a catch-all explanation.

GKC

Rowan IS a lunatic. Crazy, out of control wild eyebrow hair aside, he’s kookoo! This is the same guy that’s ok with Sharia Law from Islam in England running the show? Looney!