Traditionalists views on Rowan Williams' having given the homily at a Catholic Mass?

[Br_Mark]

Dear Howard,

Have you read any of the books by Archbishop Williams ? Your opinion of the archbishop does not seem to be shared by our Holy Father Benedict. How do you jive your opinion with the actions of not only the present pope but past popes in regards to the Archbishop of Canterbury. (see post 101)

As to relations between Traditional Anglicans and the Holy See, Pope Benedict has voiced the opinion that he would rather deal with Canterbury vs the various TAC groups.

I would also refer you to the agreed statements by the ARCC.

In Christ,

Br Mark, OSB

 

[Howard_Roark]

Benedictine - I’m not a world leader, I have the luxury of being rude (but honest) without offending entire continents. Google, BTW, is a marvelous thing, and indeed serves the purpose of truth in many ways…and is handy for finding the many insanities of Williams. the latest, as I’m sure you know, concerns the institution of Sharia law in GB. Wonderful. What a total fool. Feel free to peruse his body of public statements, especially his lack of leadership on the African/American split over homosexuality. Another of his greatest hits.

 

[JReducation]

Benedictine - I’m not a world leader, I have the luxury of being rude (but honest) without offending entire continents. Google, BTW, is a marvelous thing, and indeed serves the purpose of truth in many ways…and is handy for finding the many insanities of Williams. the latest, as I’m sure you know, concerns the institution of Sharia law in GB. Wonderful. What a total fool. Feel free to peruse his body of public statements, especially his lack of leadership on the African/American split over homosexuality. Another of his greatest hits.

Did you just disrespect a Benedictine monk? I can’t believe you would do such a thing. It is one thing to disagree and to ask questions when you do. It is another to be blatantly disrespectful to a man who is a consecrated religious.

We cannot defend the Church by violating charity and justice. Consecrated men and women deserve respect, regardless of whether one agrees with them or not. Our holy father Francis wrote in our rule something that applies to all Catholics. We are to treat everyone, especially bishops, priests and religious as if we were nothing and they were everything.

Regarding the Benedictines he taught the faithful that the Benedictine monk was singular in his vocation, because like Christ shone on the cross for humanity the Benedictine monk shines in the Church to show us the way to the City of God.

Please don’t ever disrespect a cleric or religious, especially Benedictine. No, I’m not Benedictine. I’m Franciscan. But Benedictines have a very special place in the life of the Church and we owe them much, especially gratitude and respect.

If you want to disagree, do so by asking your question or by making a statement that is well worded. Don’t brag about your freedom to be rude. As Francis said, no one has that freedom. There is not human law than can authorize man to be arrogant. We are all poor in the eyes of God.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Howard_Roark]

Duh, I mean “rude to Rowan Williams”. The Benedictine took me to task, saying that the Pope has a higher opinion of the Fake ArchBishop than I do. My response was that the Pope can’t afford to be rude - but I can - and so I doubt the Pope’s opinion and mine are much different.

Why did I have to explain all that? context, people, context. Diagram the sentences if you need to.

Also, in my experience, there are in this world MANY Benedictine monks worth disrespecting, however I haven’t seen any reason to do so in this case. I’ll also note that there are plenty of Franciscans worth disrespecting in this world, but I see no reason to think you’re one of them. Any religious that bothers to post on CA is probably considered an arch-conservative within their order anyway, and that’s the ones I like.

 

[JReducation]

Duh, I mean “rude to Rowan Williams”. The Benedictine took me to task, saying that the Pope has a higher opinion of the Fake ArchBishop than I do. My response was that the Pope can’t afford to be rude - but I can - and so I doubt the Pope’s opinion and mine are much different.

Why did I have to explain all that? context, people, context. Diagram the sentences if you need to.

Also, in my experience, there are in this world MANY Benedictine monks worth disrespecting, however I haven’t seen any reason to do so in this case. I’ll also note that there are plenty of Franciscans worth disrespecting in this world, but I see no reason to think you’re one of them. Any religious that bothers to post on CA is probably considered an arch-conservative within their order anyway, and that’s the ones I like.

Actually, I’m not considered an arch conservative among my Franciscan family. We try to avoid such divisive labels. We make it a practice to ask questions when we disagree, not question each other. That is forbidden by the holy rule. There was nothing more important to our holy father Francis than his brothers and sisters. Therefore the most important people to the Franciscan are the members of our Franciscan family. Therefore, we respectfully disagree and also blindly obey. But that’s another story for another day.

I will warn you that there is never anyone worth disrespecting, not even Pontius Pilate. Observe Jesus’ demeanor before Pilate. He is silent until he has a reason to speak. When he speaks, he speaks with respect. So it is in every case where he has to face those who would challenge him. He always responds with respect.

Our holy father Francis captured this from the Gospels and taught it to the Church, that includes you too. He did not teach just for his time, but for all time. He understood that Christ wanted us to treat every human being, regardless of who they are and what they say or think, as our superiors and our masters, because Christ treated every human being with courtessy and respect.

This is not Francis’ personal message. On the contrary, it is Christ’s example. Francis, as the perfect Christian, according to the Church, captured the example, lived and taught it to all Catholics.

We are bound to follow the example of Christ and treat others with respect. We are bound to see all people as worthy of our respect. Their humanity and its comorbid weaknesses take nothing away from the fact that they are still sons and daughters of the Divine Father, brothers of Jesus Christ and spouses of the Holy Spirit.

Humility is the road to sanctity. It is a rocky road, but a healthy one too.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Howard_Roark]

Pontius Pilate is a poor example…he really was the legitimate Roman authority in Jerusalem…not a pretender to authority and wolf in shepherd’s clothing like Williams.

You religious (in general, not you in particular) haven’t got a great track record of either 1.leading the laity in Catholic sanctity or 2.keeping order in your own houses in the last…oh…50 years or so.

I think we conseravtive laity will start listening to the religious (as a group) again when 1.They submit to Rome in all things and 2.Heterosexuality comes back into style in the orders.

For far too long, the religious brothers most of us have had contact with were overwhelmingly likely to be gay radicals. We’ve learned not to respect them.

Like I said, any religious on here is probably considered Arch-conservative, whether they use such “divisive terms” or not.

Divisive terms…sheesh…at some point it’s just delicacy, isn’t it?

 

[JReducation]

Pontius Pilate is a poor example…he really was the legitimate Roman authority in Jerusalem…not a pretender to authority and wolf in shepherd’s clothing like Williams.

You religious (in general, not you in particular) haven’t got a great track record of either 1.leading the laity in Catholic sanctity or 2.keeping order in your own houses in the last…oh…50 years or so.

I think we conseravtive laity will start listening to the religious (as a group) again when 1.They submit to Rome in all things and 2.Heterosexuality comes back into style in the orders.

For far too long, the religious brothers most of us have had contact with were overwhelmingly likely to be gay radicals. We’ve learned not to respect them.

Like I said, any religious on here is probably considered Arch-conservative, whether they use such “divisive terms” or not.

Divisive terms…sheesh…at some point it’s just delicacy, isn’t it?

Keep in mind that Christ’s example of respect is not restricted to those in legitimate authority. It is for all men and women, sinners and saints alike. Rememer the woman caught in adultery or the Samaritan woman at the well. Remember the sinners whom he healed and with whom he dined. His love did not limit itself to those who were virtuous, niether did his respect.

Respect comes from being sons and daughters of the Father, regardless of our sins or sinful tendencies.

As to religious men and women during the last 50 years, there have been many saintly ones too. But that’s another topic.

We must always see ourselves as the lowest and most sinful. That was one of the many admonitions of our holy father Francis. Personally, I find great consoaltion in it.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Howard_Roark]

Do you think “brood of vipers” is respectful? Rather makes my point, doesn’t it?

 

[JReducation]

Do you think “brood of vipers” is respectful? Rather makes my point, doesn’t it?

Actually not. If you look at the exegesis of the text, you’ll find that it has a very different meaning in that context than it does in our 21st century. It was common expression at the time to refer to sinful man. There is nothing new in saying that man is sinful.

It does not deny man’s dignity as a child of the Father. When looking at Christ you have to look at him as someone like Francis, Mother Teresa, Benedict, John Paul II or Vincent de Paul did.

They saw the total Christ and his relationship with humanity, not isolated events. The isolated events have many exegetical explanations and nuances. The personality of Christ does not.

The holiness of these people was in their reproduction of the personality of Christ in their lives.

You may want to read AUSPICATO CONCESSUM ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI

14. By his numerous virtues, then, and above all by his austerity of life, this irreproachable man endeavoured to reproduce in himself the image of Christ Jesus. But the finger of Providence was again visible in granting to him a likeness to the Divine Redeemer, even in externals.

This is the mark of true holiness to which all of us are called. This does not include disrespect of any kind toward anyone of any rank, faith or origin.

You may want to rad RITE EXPIATIS ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI

**He who called himself the “Herald of the Great King” was also rightly spoken of as “another Jesus Christ,” appearing to his contemporaries and to future generations almost as if he were the Risen Christ. **

Now that we have established the Church’s respect and devotion to this saint, to the point of saying that he was as if the Risen Christ, maybe we can learn from his teachings about Christ and Christ’s love and respect for human beings.

All human beings are to be considered superior to us in every way, including virtue. We are to consider ourselves as the greatest of sinners and never judge the alleged sin of another, but leave that to God. Ours is to recognize the presence of Christ in every human being and the Glory of God in his creation, especially man. For this reason, we may never violate the sacred presence of God in man by word, deed or thought.

To do so is contrary to the Gospel of Christ and to the actions of Christ.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Howard_Roark]

Actually not. If you look at the exegesis of the text, you’ll find that it has a very different meaning in that context than it does in our 21st century. It was common expression at the time to refer to sinful man. There is nothing new in saying that man is sinful.

Actually, no. Echidna really does mean serpent, and is particularly insulting because it implies a cunning user. Jesus really was calling the Pharisees evil and cunning as snakes, and even evoking the guile of the serpent in the Garden. Chrysostom, per the Catena, paraphrases it as “you are ill nourished of ill parentage and have an evil mind”. Rhabanus, also quoted in the Catena, says clearly it means “children of Satan”.

So, try again.

 

[Br_Mark]

Dear Howard,

You still have not addressed the question that I put before you.

As student in school we learned that when we are asked a question or turn in our homework; which we were not prepared to either turn in or answer; that the best way to get out of harms way, was to distract. Get the teacher off on another tangent and perhaps if we are lucky the teacher will go off in the other direction and in turn we would be off the hook.

You stated that you doubt that your opinion and the pope’s are different. By your statements and the actions taken by the present pope and the last four or five popes I would have to say you are completely off base. Or perhaps as you say the pope has to be polite, but if that is the case then is not the pope “speaking” falsely when he refers to the archbishop of canterbury as his brother bishop.

This reminds me of the fact that for many years the United States goverment did not reconise the Peoples Republic of China as China, but reconised a small island off the coast (Formosa) as China. Regardless of your perception the Archbishop of Canterbury is who he is and it appears that the pope believes he is as well (a bishop).

So we get to pick and choose who we believe deserve respect, and I would assume that would mean that in the end that we respect those who agree with whatever position that we as individuals take.

One last thing to meditate on, what did Jesus said concerning the greatest commandment(Oct 26 /// Matt 22) .

Pray that we may be one,

Br Mark, OSB

 

[Howard_Roark]

What a bunch of malarky. (Pause to note that THIS is the sort of thing we expect from modern Catholic religious).

Of course he’s not a legitimate Bishop. There is a legitimate Roman Catholic Bishop over his See, and it ain’t Rowan Williams.

I don’t personally approve of Popes calling fake Bishops by the title, but that was my point earlier - I can be frank, terse,and even rude without offending millions of people. The Pope can’t. I feel bad for him, because as soon as he stretches the definition of a word, the traditionalists jump all over him. Me, I wish the Pope wouldn’t misidentify Rowan Williams as a Bishop, but I get it. He’s a “Bishop” in the sense that the Anglicans call him that according to their understanding of the term, yadda yadda.

From a strictly Catholic point of view, he’s apparently a layman (although you could check the pedigree of his priestly ordination, I know there’s some hanky-panky on that score, with some Anglicans requesting re-ordination by Catholics and whatnot) and a crazy one to boot. For certain, he has no legitimate authority of any kind.

You guys crack me up.

 

[pnewton]

Please don’t ever disrespect a cleric or religious, especially Benedictine. No, I’m not Benedictine. I’m Franciscan. But Benedictines have a very special place in the life of the Church and we owe them much, especially gratitude and respect.

Fraternally,

JR

Thank you for bringing this up in a charitable fashion. I do not know if I would have ever used the word “rude” for Jesus, but I would bet he didn’t relish rudeness. A little courtesy never hurt any one and out right rejection of civil speech does nothing but perpetuate stereotypes of traditionalism

Unfairly, I might add.

 

[Howard_Roark]

…do you really want to do all of this in on behalf of the Rowan Williams fan club?

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Dear Howard,

Have you read any of the books by Archbishop Williams ? Your opinion of the archbishop does not seem to be shared by our Holy Father Benedict. How do you jive your opinion with the actions of not only the present pope but past popes in regards to the Archbishop of Canterbury. (see post 101)

Am I greatly mistaken or does not Mr. Williams preach the heresy that homosexual behavior is not sinful?

I think our Supreme Pontiff has the same concern and compassion for Williams as he does for any wayward sinner. I also think the man (Williams) needs our prayers; think of the vast numbers he is leading astray with his support for the Culture of Death. Think of Christ’s warning about the millstone.

As for his status of ‘Archbishop’, yes, he is welcome to that title, if one recognizes that it has as much actual theological weight as it would if I declared myself an Archbishop. The Anglican bishops did not maintain Apostolic Succession - they bear no relation to the bishops consecrated by Christ, unlike true bishops, the bishops of the Holy Catholic Church. These are simple facts.

 

[pnewton]

…do you really want to do all of this in on behalf of the Rowan Williams fan club?

One does not have to be a fan to show human decency, only human.

You stated, and rightly, that you are no world leader that could offend millions. The reverse to that is that, as a person on the sidelines, you lack the information as to why Williams was allowed to speak, in addition to lacking the authority and responsibility for such decisions. If you were in that situation, you likely would have a different perspective.

 

[maurin]

Am I greatly mistaken or does not Mr. Williams preach the heresy that homosexual behavior is not sinful?

If the Catholic church is not today the dominant social dynamic force, it is because Catholic scholars have failed to blow the dynamite of the Church. Catholic scholars have taken the dynamite of the Church, have wrapped it up in nice phraseology, placed it in an hermetic container and sat on the lid. It is about time to blow the lid off so that the Church may once again become the dominant social dynamic force. To blow the dynamite of a message is the only way to make the message dynamic. --Peter Maurin.

Peter Maurin wrote this in the late 30’s or early 40’s. How much more true it is today. Welcome to the new world order!

 

[Brian777]

Mr. Williams is a heretic, and should never have preached. He should definitely been allowed to be there of course, but not to preach. Cardinal Kaspar is really to blame though…