Cathedral Use by Non-Catholics

[HagiaSophia]

Information from LA on Cathedral usage by non-Catholics and conditions allowing it:

"…Since its dedication, an innumerable number of interfaith prayer services have been held in our Cathedral. Last month for example, representatives of the Armenian, Evangelical Christian, Baha’i, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, Evangelical Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, United Church of Christ, Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Faiths lead a large congregation of diverse people in an Interfaith Prayer Service commemorating the life of our Late Pope, John Paul II.

Earlier this week, as part of the seventh International Conference on Buddhist Christian Dialogue, representatives of various Buddhist traditions and Catholic, Southern Baptist, and Episcopal clergy gathered in the Cathedral to conduct a Buddhist Christian Prayer Service. An Interfaith Prayer Service is currently being planned to be held at the Cathedral prior to the upcoming inauguration of our new mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa.

"…The Guidelines further state: “The use of the Cathedral’s altars is reserved for the celebration of the Eucharist by Catholic priests and bishops according to the usages of Catholic Churches, that is, those in communion with the Bishop of Rome” [III.B]. And further: “The celebration of Eucharistic or other sacramental liturgies by other denominations is best reserved to the designated places of worship of those denominations or other appropriate locations” [ibid].

Last Sunday, we were honored to host the Pontifical Divine Liturgy of His Holiness, Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians, at our Cathedral. Why this exception to the above guidelines?.."

the-tidings.com/2005/0610/karekinside.htm

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

HagiaSophia:

Information from LA on Cathedral usage by non-Catholics and conditions allowing it:

"…Since its dedication, an innumerable number of interfaith prayer services have been held in our Cathedral. Last month for example, representatives of the Armenian, Evangelical Christian, Baha’i, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, Evangelical Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, United Church of Christ, Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Faiths lead a large congregation of diverse people in an Interfaith Prayer Service commemorating the life of our Late Pope, John Paul II.

Earlier this week, as part of the seventh International Conference on Buddhist Christian Dialogue, representatives of various Buddhist traditions and Catholic, Southern Baptist, and Episcopal clergy gathered in the Cathedral to conduct a Buddhist Christian Prayer Service.

Mission control to Apollo 14: in case you hadn’t noticed, Buddhists & Catholics do not share the same beliefs.​

An Interfaith Prayer Service is currently being planned to be held at the Cathedral prior to the upcoming inauguration of our new mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa.

"…The Guidelines further state: “The use of the Cathedral’s altars is reserved for the celebration of the Eucharist by Catholic priests and bishops according to the usages of Catholic Churches, that is, those in communion with the Bishop of Rome” [III.B]. And further: “The celebration of Eucharistic or other sacramental liturgies by other denominations is best reserved to the designated places of worship of those denominations or other appropriate locations” [ibid].

Last Sunday, we were honored to host the Pontifical Divine Liturgy of His Holiness, Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians, at our Cathedral. Why this exception to the above guidelines?.."

the-tidings.com/2005/0610/karekinside.htm

That reminds me of what is said in this:​

search with such words as:

worship
prayer
in common
resources

and other words and phrases that might be relevant.

At least the Patriarch is a Christian. I would like to know what the creed of the Armenian Church is: if it is not in accord with the Faith of the ccumenical councils, he has no more business offering at a Catholic altar than does the Dalai Lama.

To talk of being “together, praying”, rather than of “praying together” when there are members of non-Christian religions present (which was the defence for what happened at Assisi in 1986) is sheer sophistry. If the Church wants us to have a clear sense of our identities as Catholics, it can’t carry on practising indifferentism & syncretism.

Apart from anything else: what is the theological basis for having these omni-religious gatherings ? What possible unity - apart from a purely human one - is there between a Catholic bishop, an African animist, a Hindu swami, and a Buddhist ? They have nothing in common religiously, any more than if they were at a supermarket or a cinema: which may help to explain why Church buildings do not look much like churches.

The early martyrs preferred to die rather than participate in such a flagrant betrayal of the Catholic faith. If the present Pope puts an end to this anti-Christian nonsense, he will have performed a very necessary service to the Church.

As things now stand, Rome cannot complain in words of indifferentism, if it goes on to practice indifferentism. For far too long, the Vatican has been sending mixed signals - with the expected results: confusion, bitterness, and suspicion among Catholics. If it doesn’t take its words about indifferenrtism seriously:

1. Why should anyone else do so?
2. Why should its other teachings be listened to ?

The result - it loses its moral authority.

This must stop. ##

 

[Irenicist]

Gottle of Geer:

At least the Patriarch is a Christian. I would like to know what the creed of the Armenian Church is: if it is not in accord with the Faith of the ccumenical councils, he has no more business offering at a Catholic altar than does the Dalai Lama.

Chill. :tsktsk:

The Armenian Apostolic Church is the friendliest to Rome of all the Oriental Orthodox. While its members do not subscribe to the Christological formulations of Chalcedon, Rome has determined that we share the same beliefs expressed differently. I would assume the Armenian Church recites the Creed in its original Nicene form. If we can’t share facilities with them, we can’t share them with anyone.
Gottle of Geer:

To talk of being “together, praying”, rather than of “praying together” when there are members of non-Christian religions present (which was the defence for what happened at Assisi in 1986) is sheer sophistry.

How so? “Praying together” implies sharing the same prayer. “Together, praying” implies sharing the same physical space. There is a play on words involved, but no more than that.
Gottle of Geer:

If the Church wants us to have a clear sense of our identities as Catholics, it can’t carry on practising indifferentism & syncretism.

Apart from anything else: what is the theological basis for having these omni-religious gatherings ? What possible unity - apart from a purely human one - is there between a Catholic bishop, an African animist, a Hindu swami, and a Buddhist ? They have nothing in common religiously, any more than if they were at a supermarket or a cinema: which may help to explain why Church buildings do not look much like churches.

I am of the view that it’s never inappropriate to pray, even if we have guests in our home, and it would be churlish for us to forbid others from praying also while under our roof. Pagan prayer might not be efficacious, but it isn’t necessarily sacrilege either. If the prayer is in a good cause, it qualifies as an expression of good will.
Gottle of Geer:

The early martyrs preferred to die rather than participate in such a flagrant betrayal of the Catholic faith. If the present Pope puts an end to this anti-Christian nonsense, he will have performed a very necessary service to the Church.

No Catholics are being made to mouthe pagan worship in the case described, and no pagans are praying at the altar. I don’t see what you are getting all torqued up about.
Gottle of Geer:

As things now stand, Rome cannot complain in words of indifferentism, if it goes on to practice indifferentism. For far too long, the Vatican has been sending mixed signals - with the expected results: confusion, bitterness, and suspicion among Catholics. If it doesn’t take its words about indifferenrtism seriously:

1. Why should anyone else do so?
2. Why should its other teachings be listened to ?

The result - it loses its moral authority.

This must stop. ##

I’m hardly “indifferent” with respect to the faith, but I don’t see what any of this has to do with indifferentism. The Catholic Chruch sees value in all faiths to the extent that they contain truth and represent a sincere attempt to reach out to God. Not all things of value are equal, however.

Look at this pragmatically. We have the truth and they don’t. Letting them pray alongside us exposes them to our truth.

Sharing churches with other, even with non Christians, is an act of charity. So long as due reverence is shown and proper safeguards are maintained with respect to the altar, I don’t see the problem. Do you really think Catholics are going to be led down the “eightfold path” simply from the exoticism of watching Buddhists pray in our churches? :whacky:

Irenicist

 

[David_Paul]

How many of those groups would allow Catholics to use their church, temple or synagogue?

 

[stanley123]

HagiaSophia:

"…Since its dedication, an innumerable number of interfaith prayer services have been held in our Cathedral. Last month for example, representatives of the Armenian, Evangelical Christian, Baha’i, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, Evangelical Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, United Church of Christ, …
Last Sunday, we were honored to host the Pontifical Divine Liturgy of His Holiness, Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians, at our Cathedral.

I was somewhat surprised to read that His Holiness, Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians celebrated a Pontifical Divine Liturgy at the LA Cathedral. From reading the Eastern Orthodox forum here, I might have been given the wrong impression that the EO would not want to celebrate an EO Divine Pontifical Liturgy in a RC cathedral.

Anyway, I am generally in favor of improving relations with other religions. The way I see it, is that we have a choice here to either wage a bloody argumentative war with people of other faiths over the points where we differ, and where their religion falls into error, or we can accentuate those beliefs and values that we hold in common (while at the same time holding fast to our Catholic beliefs and not accepting errors in other religions).

 

[David_Paul]

stanley123:

Anyway, I am generally in favor of improving relations with other religions. The way I see it, is that we have a choice here to either wage a bloody argumentative war with people of other faiths over the points where we differ, and where their religion falls into error, or we can accentuate those beliefs and values that we hold in common (while at the same time holding fast to our Catholic beliefs and not accepting errors in other religions).

I’m speaking as an outsider here so I probably don’t’ see the positive.

But…seems to me all this interfaith dialogue consists of two things:

Asking Catholics to change their faith.

Asking Catholics to apologize for what the church has done. As if every group hasn’t erred and the world would be a perfect place were it not for what Rome has done over the last 2,000 years.

When Catholics do admit to errors those admissions are used as sledgehammers to pound Catholics into the dirt.

 

[HagiaSophia]

David_Paul:

How many of those groups would allow Catholics to use their church, temple or synagogue?

I suggest that one does not do a thing because the “favor will be immediately returned”. Witness the overtures to the RO Patriarch. OTOH sometimes it elicits an immediate gesture. For instance the Jewish community has given to the new cathedral a 2.5 million grant through the Skirball community for the Jerusalem fountain area. A beautiful thing. (Ref: Cathedral-- by Francis J. Weber)

Msgr. Weber also notes “From the start, the cathedral was planned and designed to serve as a unifying symbol for the city”. Elsewhere in his book he details that from its first inception it wa announced that others besides the Catholic populace would be using the cathedral and its other facilities.

 

[HagiaSophia]

(which was the defence for what happened at Assisi in 1986) is sheer sophistry. If the Church wants us to have a clear sense of our identities as Catholics, it can’t carry on practising indifferentism & syncretism.

There will NEVER be another Assisi. The fallout was so huge that the pope was totally taken aback. His view however was that he would always push the envelope and every instance wouldn’t be a winner. Assissi was definitively not a winner. Whew!
Gottle of Geer:

Apart from anything else: what is the theological basis for having these omni-religious gatherings ? What possible unity - apart from a purely human one - is there between a Catholic bishop, an African animist, a Hindu swami, and a Buddhist ?

That they all worship God, He is called by other names, appears in varied images, is explained in various ways, but a Deity… In this we have a commonality that humanity is more than a body born uselessly and dying in finality. This then imposes certain types of behaviors and attitudes towards each other upon us all.
Gottle of Geer:

The early martyrs preferred to die rather than participate in such a flagrant betrayal of the Catholic faith. If the present Pope puts an end to this anti-Christian nonsense, he will have performed a very necessary service to the Church.

I doubt if you will see the present holder of the Fisherman’s ring expressing himself in the same way as his predecessor. His style is totally different and he also has the opporunity now that relationships have been established among the “others” to balance the other side of the coin, his own congregants.
Gottle of Geer:

As things now stand, Rome cannot complain in words of indifferentism, if it goes on to practice indifferentism. For far too long, the Vatican has been sending mixed signals - with the expected results: confusion, bitterness, and suspicion among Catholics.This must stop.

I don’t think it is Rome who practices indifferentism as much as it is certain bishops and other clergy in various dioceses. Hopefully we can bring some of this under control and clean up the excesses and the folderol.

Having said all of the above, I dislike intensely the ugly “all purpose” bams being built as churches - and while I certainly am for inter-faith relationships, I prefer to keep the “holy of holies” for Catholics. Unfortunately no bishop consults with me.

 

[David_Paul]

HagiaSophia:

I suggest that one does not do a thing because the “favor will be immediately returned”.

I understand that. The faith requires the effort no matter what the response is.

Followed the Mel Gibson saga from about a year before the film was released and got so sick of the bashing from those the church does reach out to. Learned a lot about Catholicism in endless debates about the film. Vatican II was taken over and over again as an admission the church once taught what it never did. No matter how many times posters explained the truth, the critics would come right back with the same distortions.

Not criticizing and certainly not suggesting Catholics do anything but what they are doing. It is the right thing to do. I’m just not so charitable myself I guess.

 

[HagiaSophia]

David_Paul:

Asking Catholics to change their faith.

No one in all my years of attending this Church has ever asked me to change my faith. Dominus Iesus answered that in a very definitive way.

David_Paul:

Asking Catholics to apologize for what the church has done. As if every group hasn’t erred and the world would be a perfect place were it not for what Rome has done over the last 2,000 years.

Acknowledging wrongs done, errors made must be done before a renewal and moving onward can really take place. I believe that was the spirit of JPII and while I can’t say I enjoyed it, liked it, I understood it. I know that he was disappointed that others did not follow suit but instead seemed to enjoy wallowing in our admissions. That however does not change in any way it’s “rightness of intent”.

David_Paul:

When Catholics do admit to errors those admissions are used as sledgehammers to pound Catholics into the dirt.

No question about it. However that is not the total story. The other side of the coin is that other faiths have found it now easier to talk with us, to explain their views, their problems, their perspectives. They are able to work with us more closely and much more trustingly than previously.

As the present pope puts it, we know that “we are called to be as one” – we are not quite sure how this will be accomplished, the Holy Spirit will develop things among us as the situation moves on, but we must act on that belief, that we are doing the will of God and thus proceed as best as our sights will take us.

 

[HagiaSophia]

David_Paul:

No matter how many times posters explained the truth, the critics would come right back with the same distortions.

That is the way of the world – as Malachy Martin once put it, the world seeks to make great men and then it seeks to destroy them. I think it is the same with institutions. There is no ancient and traditional regime today which is not under massive media attack, continual beating with stones, with nary a good word nor a balance in the view. It is the plight of all of us, born into one of the more secular ages in the history of man.

David_Paul:

Not criticizing and certainly not suggesting Catholics do anything but what they are doing. It is the right thing to do. I’m just not so charitable myself I guess.

There are days when I can truly say, me neither. But we are walking a new path through the forest, it has not been tried before in the history of Christianity on such a wide frame of reference. Thus like all new paths being made by the footsteps of each of us, we will run into stones, potholes, branches, thorns, and always Balaams ***, (it brays, it talks).

The good side is that as our footsteps pound the path into submission we make the way easier, the ground softer, the barriers removed as we move onward towards what JPII called the intersecting cosmology of Christ and man. Future generations will wonder what the fracas was all about methinks…humanity moves, albeit slowly. His duc in altum will stay with me always. I miss him and I bet Ratzinger does too.

 

[stanley123]

David_Paul:

How many of those groups would allow Catholics to use their church, temple or synagogue?

I know at least one case in this area where there was a fire in a Catholic Church, and the Lutherans allowed us to use their Church for Sunday Mass. This was for about six months or so while a new Church was being built.
Anyway, I don’t think it is a matter of Catholics having to wait and see what everyone else does. Personally, I am in favor of cooperation with other religious groups.

 

[David_Paul]

HagiaSophia:

No one in all my years of attending this Church has ever asked me to change my faith.

Didn’t make myself clear. I was referring to “The Passion” when the interfaith alliance attempted to shift the story to the Romans. Among other things.

No question about it. However that is not the total story. The other side of the coin is that other faiths have found it now easier to talk with us, to explain their views, their problems, their perspectives. They are able to work with us more closely and much more trustingly than previously.

But often the problem does not arise from anything the church did but the hostility of others. Take Pope Pius XII. Sure you know more than I about the praise he and the church received from all quarters after WWII. Franco was honored as well for saving at least 60,000 Jews. But in the early 1962s the attacks began and have only gotten worse every year. Yes, maybe some will stop the distortions because the church does not and will reply harshly.

Just my personal belief and I know it is against teachings but I would like to see a few more William Donohues. But ones who do not just play defense but make others defend what they did and do.

 

[Irenicist]

stanley123:

I was somewhat surprised to read that His Holiness, Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians celebrated a Pontifical Divine Liturgy at the LA Cathedral. From reading the Eastern Orthodox forum here, I might have been given the wrong impression that the EO would not want to celebrate an EO Divine Pontifical Liturgy in a RC cathedral.

He’s OO not EO.

Irenicist

 

[stanley123]

Irenicist:

He’s OO not EO.

Irenicist

Correct. But – I notice that in the Catholic Answers Forums, there is a subforum called Eastern Orthodox. Would a comment about OO be acceptable in an EO forum or not?

The cathedral use involved Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, etc., and other non-Eastern Orthodox, so it was placed here.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Irenicist:

Chill. :tsktsk:

The Armenian Apostolic Church is the friendliest to Rome of all the Oriental Orthodox. While its members do not subscribe to the Christological formulations of Chalcedon,

Then they are objectively heretical​

Rome has determined that we share the same beliefs expressed differently. I would assume the Armenian Church recites the Creed in its original Nicene form. If we can’t share facilities with them, we can’t share them with anyone.

Nicea I is one Council only - agreeing to Nicea is not the slightest evidence or agreeing to Chalcedon or to Nicea II. And this sort of minimalism would have been anathema to every Pope and bishop of the last 1680 years. If we can’t share them - fine.​

Agreeing to Nicea I is no proof of orthodoxy on matters defined since. This has always been implicit the Church’s behaviour until now - so why the volte-face ? ##

How so? “Praying together” implies sharing the same prayer. “Together, praying” implies sharing the same physical space. There is a play on words involved, but no more than that.

Because it hides the fact that people of the most contradictory beliefs were gathered together as though they were one in faith. As for that putting a Buddha on a tabernacle - no power on earth can possibly justify that. It’s unforgiveable - and would have been called so, in a less mealy-mouthed age; say, 50 years ago. It is a downright abomination. If this is not evil - nothing is evil. Abortion ought to happen, when such things can be tolerated by those who should be the first to reject them; abortion is merely the social counterpart of such evils in the Church. It’s nothing, compared to the abortion of faith.​

I am of the view that it’s never inappropriate to pray, even if we have guests in our home, and it would be churlish for us to forbid others from praying also while under our roof. Pagan prayer might not be efficacious, but it isn’t necessarily sacrilege either. If the prayer is in a good cause, it qualifies as an expression of good will.

God alone knows whether it is efficacious or not - I don’t believe for one moment that God can be put on a leash; but neither can I see any excuse for such shameless syncretism. It would have been unhesitatingly condemned before 1965, and probably later. That kind of carry-on is far too high a price to pay for peace and good will; because it guts the very Gospel it is meant to serve; it is self-defeating.​

No Catholics are being made to mouthe pagan worship in the case described, and no pagans are praying at the altar. I don’t see what you are getting all torqued up about.

For a start, this practice seems to have got ahead of the theology needed to show that it is good & right to do. If St. Ambrose had no time for the “one god by many roads” theology of the pagan senator Symmachus - why would he have any more time for it when a Bishop of Rome is present at a display of it ? What was wrong in 386, is as wrong after 1978. “Between Christ and Belial there is no fellowship” - or is St. Paul also to be ignored ?​

I’m hardly “indifferent” with respect to the faith, but I don’t see what any of this has to do with indifferentism. The Catholic Chruch sees value in all faiths to the extent that they contain truth and represent a sincere attempt to reach out to God. Not all things of value are equal, however.

Look at this pragmatically. We have the truth and they don’t. Letting them pray alongside us exposes them to our truth.

Sharing churches with other, even with non Christians, is an act of charity. So long as due reverence is shown and proper safeguards are maintained with respect to the altar, I don’t see the problem. Do you really think Catholics are going to be led down the “eightfold path” simply from the exoticism of watching Buddhists pray in our churches? :whacky:

Irenicist

St.Ambrose & St.Paul are not pragmatic ? Warnings against heresy and apostasy are as pragmatic as one can possibly get. As are rejections of “defending the ill-done” - because “defending the ill-done” is a way of sinning.​

Such events are occasions, however remote, of the temptation to fall away - and it is a sin to put onself in the way of an occasion of sin, if and when one is morally free not to.

What is being shown is indifferentism, and it looks uncommonly like scandal as well - I stand by every word of that last post

The Church *cannot *get all het up about such things for most of her life so far, then calmly turn around & give it the OK without even explaining why. Not if she believes her own teaching, and wants it to be spead by beings capable of justifying it. There is a place for fraternising with Buddhists, and so on; this website is one of them - but a Catholic shrine is not one of them. If the Vatican actually believes its own teaching, it cannot decently allow these get-togethers to continue.

OTOH - Antony de Mello’s books are condemned
OTO - the Pope went to Assisi; and similar gatherings have happened elsewhere in the CC.

So which is it to be - getting pally with all manner of other religions, and saying how wonderful they are ? (I wonder what spiritual riches the religion of the Aztecs would have been praised for; if a religion is infernal, that should be said unambiguously.)

Or condemning their deficiencies ? ##

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

HagiaSophia:

There will NEVER be another Assisi. The fallout was so huge that the pope was totally taken aback. His view however was that he would always push the envelope and every instance wouldn’t be a winner. Assissi was definitively not a winner. Whew!

That they all worship God, He is called by other names, appears in varied images, is explained in various ways, but a Deity… In this we have a commonality that humanity is more than a body born uselessly and dying in finality. This then imposes certain types of behaviors and attitudes towards each other upon us all.

That would do for natural theology - but not for the conduct of members of an avowedly supernatural religion. There were several continuations to Assisi - it is altogether likely it will happen again, I fear ​

I doubt if you will see the present holder of the Fisherman’s ring expressing himself in the same way as his predecessor. His style is totally different and he also has the opporunity now that relationships have been established among the “others” to balance the other side of the coin, his own congregants.

I hope he is given time to undo the worst blunders of his predecessors. It took more than one Pope to clear up after the Medici and their kind had dragged the Church into the sewer - it will probably take several Popes to undo the worst nonsense of the last 40 years, without ripping up the healthier stuff as well.​

I don’t think it is Rome who practices indifferentism as much as it is certain bishops and other clergy in various dioceses. Hopefully we can bring some of this under control and clean up the excesses and the folderol.

IMHO, it is precisely Rome which practices - or practiced - the worst of it; just as it is Rome which has knighted a pro-abortion politician, and which allowed the Church of Silence to be ignored in the interests of Church politics. It’s made a fine mess of things at times, and I don’t see why one should be shy of saying so; provided only one is sure of the facts. Rome has a position in the Church not held by any other see - and that is exactly why its blunders need to be noticed. If it were some tiny little see in Southern Italy, its errors of judgement would be far less serious and much less noteworthy. Its pre-eminent position, and the centralisation of so much authority in Rome, means that its acts have a weight they would not otherwise possess.​

Had it not been for the horrible example set by the late Pope, I wonder just how much would have occurred elswhere. I very much hope you’re right, but this is not going to be cured overnight ##

Having said all of the above, I dislike intensely the ugly “all purpose” bams being built as churches - and while I certainly am for inter-faith relationships, I prefer to keep the “holy of holies” for Catholics. Unfortunately no bishop consults with me.

I doubt they need to ​

 

[Anima_Christi]

The Los Angeles Cathedral, also known as Taj Mahoney, is a hideous monstrosity. It is extremely unsightly, does not look like a Catholic building, and is not a fitting place for the worship of the Blessed Trinity.
Since the LA Cardinal, Mahoney, is known to be . . . shall we say . . . progressive, it is not suprising that all forms of heresy, and heathen worship are encouraged. It is designed as a conference center and was a very expensive attempt to de-Catholicize Catholicism.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Anima Christi:

The Los Angeles Cathedral, also known as Taj Mahoney, is a hideous monstrosity. It is extremely unsightly, does not look like a Catholic building, and is not a fitting place for the worship of the Blessed Trinity.
Since the LA Cardinal, Mahoney, is known to be . . . shall we say . . . progressive, it is not suprising that all forms of heresy, and heathen worship are encouraged. It is designed as a conference center and was a very expensive attempt to de-Catholicize Catholicism.

The church of God the Merciful Father in Tor Tre Teste, in Rome, does not even resemble a church. The architect is a Jew - not even a Christian. Even to have a Christian architect was too much for the people who approve this monstrosity to manage.​

At least the Taj Mahoney looks like a church. I sometimes think that Rome was chosen as the centre of Catholic unity so that Catholics would never lack scandals by which to be appalled - bad popes, rotten choices of bishops, hideous churches. To abbreviate Tacitus: “Everything that is foul in the world flows into Rome and festers there”. He had a point. ##