Quivideruntoculi has been kind enough to respond to my reflections on Catholicism and change, and as what he has to say is, as ever, of wider interest, it seems fruitful to make some comments on what he has written.
The idea that the Second Vatican Council was in some way hijacked by Satan needs, if it is to be supported, more than a remark by Paul VI about the ‘smoke of Satan’, some critical remarks by senior figures years later, and speculation about what Pius XII might have done had he lived. It is, if one considers it, a most serious charge, and it needs serious underpinning; this I have yet to see. A hostility to some generic ‘liberalism’ by those who dislike what the sixties and seventies did to Western culture and society, is not sufficient ground on which to convict an Ecumenical Council of pronouncing in the voice of Satan.
Nothing in what I have written convicts, or even implies, that those who disagreed with John XXIII were dinosaurs or fuddie-duddies, and in thinking that the Church needed to come to terms with the modern world, John XXIII was no aligning himself with either liberalism or conservatism; he was seeking to take the mind of the church on the challenges facing it. The idea that had it not taken place, ordinary Catholics in the pew would have somehow been hermetically-sealed off from the changes taking place in Western society in the sixties and seventies is fanciful. The Anglican and Protestant churches had no Vatican II, and what quiavideruntoculi says about vocations in the Catholic Church was true there too. All churches in the West were hit by the cultural revolution of the sixties and seventies; it would not have mattered whether there had been a Vatican II or not, Catholics would have been as exposed to these changes as those Christians in churches which had no Vatican II.
In mu comments of religious liberty, there was no acceptance of relativism, just of a fact quiaviderunt oculi himself accepts, that circumstances alters cases. He accepts it would not be possible in our society to proceed with heretics as they did at the time of Aquinas. That is not relativism, it is realism. However much quiavideruntoculi might think he can think like a medieval man, he can’t, he has not had their education, neither does he live in their society; this is another form of the Protestant disease of restoriationism. It ignores the changes across time and seeks to substitute for the lived reality of the life of Church some imagined golden age.
I make no apology, and indeed underline it, for making a comparison between the Taliban and those Catholics who approved the burning of other people. This is a barbarous mind-set, and to imagine Our Lord approves of it is, I suspect, to run, oneself, the risk of hell-fire. I reiterate, those who think that burning people is what Christ wants do not know or understand Christ. Blessed John Paul II apologised for such barbarism. Those who seriously wish to restore it should say so. There are those in Pakistan and other places who approve of this sort of thing. They live in the mind-set of the Middle Ages; those who would burn people now live in that mind-set; if they have been educated in the West they have no excuse for such a view.
My piece explained that the Church has never approved of forced conversion, but that there was a time it thought that those who had been baptised could be forced to repent. This, as anyone with an elementary knowledge of people knows, is nonsense. If you are threatened with burning unless you repent, the conscientious man will burn, and encourage others to hate a church which does that in Christ’s name; the rogue will ‘convert’ gladly, and you end up with a church full of liars and cheats which is hated by those with real conscientious objections to the way it has behaved. Such behaviour in Mary;s reign made the Catholic Church a stench in the nostrils of most Englishmen for centuries; I am sad that anyone could imagine that a return to that practice would have any other result. If we refuse to learn from history, we are indeed, fools.
It is not enough to say that the OT shows God approving of violence. If the OT Jews had had God right in all aspects, then the Jews would have converted. They didn’t. Jesus was harshest on those Jews who preferred the letter of the Law to its Spirit. I see no reason to assume he is less hash on Christians who do the same.
To imagine that love consists of burning someone is to conceive of a God who is the psychopath of Dawkins’ fevered imagination. The Jews often saw God as a tribal God who would bring them victory over their foes; they were wrong, God did no such thing. We should not see Him as a tribal God, but as a Trinity so overflowing with love that all Creation resulted from it. We should not see Vatican II in terms of Satan, but of God, and of our attempts to understand more fully what it is He requires of His Church on its long journey through time. Did the Council get everything right? Does any Council? Should we blame it for the moral failings which hit the whole Western world? Hardly, unless we somehow imagine one of two things: that the rest of the Western world was influenced by Vatican II; or that Catholics are not affected by the societies in which they live.
Servus Fidelis said:
I wholeheartedly agree, C. I would add to your last sentence that though we cannot expect to not be affected by societies in which we live we also can affect societies by how we live and respond to the challenges. How we worship and how we believe and how we pray are part and parcel to how we live that out. We must fix these things if we are to have any chance of stemming the tide of secularism.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
That, I think, is vital. If we imply that, given the right circumstances, we are going to have a Protestant barbecue again, what witness is that? If we give the impression we wish to live in the Middle Ages and afraid to face the challenges we are sent, we look like the Western Taleban. Christ’s Church has survived worse than this, and will endure, persevere and triumph.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
It will. We just might not live to see it unfortunately. But we can still hope and pray.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
We must – and we must never forget, that however hard men try, God’s Church survives them 🙂
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
Indeed so. 🙂
LikeLike
NEO said:
Well said, both of you.
We Americans are fond of comparing ourselves with Rome, occasionally involved Britain as our Greece, usually to our detriment. It’s a useful device, in the main, but it also calls attention to the fact that some of us (at least) do pay attention to history.
I wonder, if in some ways, the church’s problem (and I’m speaking of the wider church primarily, because C is right, we all have the problems that V II sought to address) is not quite similar to the early churches. An stark religion built on plain people, with rather more than a dose of asceticism involved attempting to survive and grow in a dominant hedonistic society which rules a goodly part of the world. I don’t know but it’s a possibility. And as I have often noted, every time that Christians war against Christians, other, specifically Muslims advance, and that is decisively bad for all varieties of Christians, as the Church of the East can attest.
We are here in the 21st century, this is our world, to save or throw away, we’d best think of something other than burning each other.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Well said Neo.
LikeLike
NEO said:
Thanks, C.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Most grateful for your perceptive comments. We are where we are, and we’re not going back to the time of the Apostles, Leo the Great, Gregory VII or Pio Nono. These are the times we have been given, and if we are men we shall live through them and help shape them; if we hide away, that helps no one.
LikeLike
NEO said:
Concur, and I’m grateful for your balanced post. far too often we, and I decidedly include myself, cast ourselves not only bridge but a hill too far, and we need to be brought back, hopefully gently, but brought back regardless.
Hiding has never solved a problem yet, other than, perhaps, waiting for a short storm to subside, so that things may be solved in an orderly manner.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Quite right, Neo.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
Quite right NEO. I prefer a good tongue lashing anyway. 🙂
LikeLike
NEO said:
Me too, Servus 🙂
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams said:
I fear that some want to take us back to the Cabrol Missel days of my First Communion in 1940. The world has moved on. The excesses of Vat 11 will, in time, be reined in.
The burning will come in the war/crusade against the Muslims. It will be WW111 and hopefully I’ll long gone.
LikeLike
NEO said:
Much as I hate to say it, that crusade came measurably nearer in the last week. It’s difficult to overstate the horror produced by the reports from Nigeria. Strong western governments, especially US and UK, could delay it, but this time we have varieties closely related to Chamberlain, many would say “at best”, which bodes very ill for us all.
LikeLike
St Bosco said:
My two most favorite subjects dead to my heart…Christ and him crucified and the CC taking off the smiley face mask.Leave it to upright good brother Chalcedon to bring up the subject of the CC burning protestants and admitting the CC did this.Half the cathols i talk to say it never happened, , a fourth say it was only one or two people burned, the other fourth wont comment on it. A leopard doesnt change its spots. The CC claims it changes not. The counter reformation went underground and is still in full operation thru the Jesuits. Anyone who says this is ridiculous doesnt know the catholic church.
“Christ’s Church has survived worse than this, and will endure, persevere and triumph.”
What does triumph mean? Does it mean the CC will be the only religion on earth eventually? Triumph over who? And the CC has survived worse than this? The people of the earth had to survive under the cruel iron fist of the catholic church. Talk about forced conversion? South america is mostly catholic because the Jesuits killed the parents and raised the children catholic. If the parents refused to convert, they were killed. Lots wouldnt convert. When Luther exposed the wickeness of the CC and people started leaving it, the Pope tried to exterminate these protestants. Wow, what a history of nothing but murder and misery left in the wake of the CC. The final blow is to the faithful who die at the feet of the CCs graven images. There will be no trumpets blowing for them. No my friends, this system will not triumph.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Jesus founded a church, Bosco. The triumph of His Church, is His triumph.
LikeLike
St Bosco said:
Jesus didnt found an organization. His church is his own body. His own body is already triumphant. The saveds bodies are Christs body, physically. I know what youre getting at. Christ founded the catholic church. But thats just a slogan, a claim. You can say that over and over again. Doesnt make it true. Hey, why dont you ask Jesus to show himself to you? Then you will be part of his body. Its not hard. His yoke is easy.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Bosco, I have already quoted you Matthew, where Jesus says he founds a Church. If you disagree with Him, let Him know next time you talk. Until then, I’m with Jesus.
LikeLike
bozoboy87 said:
What i dont get is what makes you think its the catholic church? Keep in mind Jesus was against costumes and titles and graven images.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
The Catholic Church is the Church of St Peter, upon whose faith Jesus said He founded His Church. You seem to need to pretend His words don’t mean what they say – a bad sign. Believe what Jesus says, Bosco, not what you think He ought to have said.
LikeLike
bozoboy87 said:
Good brother, you still havent convinced me that this church is the CC. Peter never mentioned this organization in his writings. I dont see it in scripture. Jesus mentioned 7 churches, non of which were in rome. All i see is a claim made that its the CC. Jehovas make that claim. Mormons make that claim. Orthodox make that claim. Anglicans make that claim. None are supported by the bible. Peter died old and feeble. Still nothing but claims as to the CC being Peters outfit. Im aware that that is what the CC is founded on and rests on, is claims. great swelling words against the Most High. ” I will sit as God” Pontifex Maximus
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Peter was crucified in Rome about AD 64. As early as AD90, Clement of Rome was writing to the Church at Corinth to correct its errors. That is not so for any of the other groups you mention.
LikeLike
bozoboy87 said:
Sorry, i dont take Clemment or any other of them as gospel. You can feel free to believe every word from them. In Rome, christianity got one fed to the lions at that time. And why does Jesus have to operate through some religion? Other cathols i talk to all ask me which religion is correct if it isnt the CC. Thats all they can think of, is a religion. they cant see salvation as following the Lamb. its foreign to them. Amazing. Even though the scriptures are closed to the unsaved, they can still see Jesus never pushed a organization that required membership. He just said” follow me’. He also siad, ” by their fruits ye shall know them” Look at all the big religions claiming to be gods own. Nothing but vice, vice and more vice. Look at the CC and one can add murder and torture to vice. Thats insulting to my Lord by saying this religion is Christs religion.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Jesus founded a church. You seem to disagree with Him, yet the Bible is clear on this. The historical record connecting it to Peter us equally clear.
LikeLike
bozoboy87 said:
If you say so good brother. Im on my way to a chess tournament. I cant frazzle my mind with religions rite now. Wish me luck.
LikeLike
St Bosco said:
deAR To my heart…..correction
LikeLike
Pingback: Change and Continuity II | All Along the Watchtower
NEO said:
We’ve talked quite a lot in the last few days about attitudes and such in history and why we should or should not perhaps lend them too much credence. I’m a history buff as anyone who reads my blog knows, and I’ve been around enough professional historians over the years to pick up some of their attitudes. One of those is to understand that I cannot fully understand our ancestors. This is true even for the World War II generation whom I knew well, so it becomes really problematical to make a judgement on things that happened 100s of years ago, either good or bad. I just can’t get completely into their mindset, no matter how much I try.
I was looking around in my files tonight for something and I ran across this video which explains my point better than I can, and so although it has run on my blog a while back and most likely will again, I think it appropriate to share it here as well. In my opinion Dr. Lipscomb does as good a job of explaining it as I’ve heard.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
She does make a good point NEO. We do seem to want to project our modern view of the world on the past and and imagine the future according to who we are today as well. It is ingenuous to do such and we have no earthly idea what it was like to have the mind of our ancestors who are as foreign to us now as it would be to understand an alien from another planet. Thanks for the short lecture, it was quite to the point.
LikeLike
NEO said:
You’re very welcome. Jess and C. introduced me to her work and she is quickly becoming one of my favorite historians, not least because I’ve always found the Tudors rather fascinating which is her specialty. She pretty much always makes her point clearly and well, and even understandably.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
She certainly did that in very short order.
LikeLike
NEO said:
Indeed so.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
The catholic so called Church is not gods church..
it is the Whore of babylon. Rev 17.
The catholic so called church is the evilest,vilest, organization to have ever existed on this planet.
it has been officiated over, by the worst genocidal , pervert , maniacal so called popes, the world has ever known.
There are only a couple of things keeping roman catholicism going,
one is money, and lots of it, and the other is satan himself.!!
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Spook – that was the Roman Empire; do some work and stop reading Chick tracts; they are bad for you.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
and you can put your roman catholic ‘ Beano Comic ‘ down.. lol
get a history book that doesnt have the nihil obstat in it for once…!!
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
I have never read a history book with one – do try to read some real history and stop the comics.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
I think that you are the one reading comics..
…….”…yawns……”
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
I put to you some time ago some serious history books, none of which you had heard of – so perhaps you should stay mentally asleep.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
yes, those books were probably as obscure as you are.
You are obviously some sort of pseudo intellectual snob.
Wise in your own sight, thou whited wall !!
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
No, just better informed than you.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
see…I knew you were a snob…
better informed….
I am not so sure..
i do know that your no fool,….but then neither am I, although you think I am..
perhaps you look down on others too much…
knowledge puffeth up etc…
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Do you find that chip on your shoulder a burden?
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
I sometimes do.
hows your particular chip… ??
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
I don’t have one
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
sez you..
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Quite
LikeLike
Rob said:
Spook personal attacks rarely achieve anything neither does rudeness – why not stick to challenging the issues – I’m sure you enough material to do so.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
I shall try to be more tactful in future..:D
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
lin ger:
I am being absolutely serious.
That the practices, of catholics convince me that it is actually VOODOO, or some form of Shamanism that they are practising,and their undeniable ignorance of Scripture, and mis-application of it,the talisman of the Rosary etc.
Can I really be blamed for thinking this of catholicism…??
I dont think so.
http://wp.me/p3NlHB-Md
LikeLike
Rob said:
I am interested Spook – what do you actually know about Voodoo religion and whether you have any first-hand experience of it?
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
Thankfully, I have no experience of Voodoo..lol
but there are obvious similarities i think.
Voodoo is actually a mixture of afro-carribean religion and catholic religion/practices.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
So, the abuse of something warrants calling the original by the name of the abuse? Try thinking Spook.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
Try the same yourself..
You are never anything but abusive and snotty.
I think there is a reasonable comparison / equivalency between Voodoo and catholicism, ….
Voodo is a compound of afro-carribean and roman catholic dogma..
Try a dictionary please..
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
No one denied that, what I deny is that an abuse of something means that the original is tainted. If I am ‘snotty’ it is because you seem to be very stupid.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
You say original,, but christianity has been corrupted by satan, and thereby we have catholicism,,, the practitioners of afro-carribean religions / shamanism, had obviously seen the similarities between their pagan /demonic beliefs, and the practices,dogmas of rome…
I may seem stupid, but actually, I think I am a long way from being stupid…
If your so intelligent…then how come your roman catholic ??
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant.
Christianity has not been corrupted – individuals have been led astray. As you have no experience of Voodoo yourself, you pontificate on it from a position of ignorance – hence my comment.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
I could never be accused of pontificating, like you..thank you.
i do not speak as the pope does.
yes indeed, you have been led astray,..
I do not need to have been an adherent of Voodooism, to have some opinion of it, or to make a comparison..
Indeed, you are the one who is Intensely ignorant, and blinkered.
I think you need to get off of your pseudo intellectual ‘ high horse ‘…and take a breather…and get a Biblical reality check..
Assuming you have access to a Bible.?
Christianity has been corrupted in the sense that, it has been twisted out of shape, by Constantine / others et al, Ad nauseam, and is through ignorance, seen as being christian, when it is not…
It is the handiwork of Satan is the catholic so called church..The Whore of babylon. Rev17
To be deep in History is actually to be Christian, and not catholic as you ignorantly suppose.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Spook – you write from a position which combines a profound ignorance of facts with a profound ignorance of the depth of your lack of knowledge; that is not abuse, it is a fact.
How odd you should think I have no Bible, that is another sign of ignorance. I began as an Anglican and have been Orthodox in my time, and I have run catechetical classes and I lecture of Scripture. I am also a professional historian, and know from the sources that your comments about Constantine and his influence on the Church are just part of your ignorance.
The idea that the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon is yet another sign of ignorance, as well as abusive. If you do not wish to be told how ignorant you are, you have two choice; stop showing it; and start educating yourself.
You will do neither, of course, but that is your choice.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
sez you !!
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Thank you for further proof, but I can assure you, no more was needed.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
“…..yawns……”………..
On a lighter note…
Sincere regards to jessica hof.. please..
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Always happy to pass on kind wishes.
She is very busy at work, but also, as you can see here, answering a Muslim apologist.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
Well….I dont envy her….
Thank you chalcedon451….
appreciated !!
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Thank you, Spook, C told me you had been kind – much appreciated 🙂 xx Hope you are well?
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
yes jessica thank you…
I would love to meet you Jessica…
I think it would be fun hee heee lol
we could argue all day then 😀
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
All the day long 🙂 x
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
well..not all day..
hee heee..
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
P’raps not 🙂 x
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
😀
gotta go..mekkin a sausage butty..
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
? 🙂 enjoy, anyway x
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
sausages…..fried scallops, and big dollop of Mustard….
LikeLike
JessicaHof said:
Sounds as though you’re eating well 🙂
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
not that well etc..
sausages were 60pence in tesco..
and the potataoes were even cheaper.
I buy loaves of bread at 50 pence etc..
LikeLike
Rob said:
Spook – you would never believe the price of food in Barbados as might also disbelieve my encounter with Voodoo!
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
may i ask what your encounter with voodoo was..
was you a member..etc..
Not being funny in asking that.
genuine enquiry ??
😀
Also…just wondering to myself just then,,if Atheism is a religion ??
gonna do some sort of posting on it…to annoy the Atheist’s..
😀
LikeLike
Rob said:
No I was never into Voodoo.
A Christian lady here had previously been married to a Voodoo practitioner and his spirit constantly appeared to her and her current husband tormenting them. They stayed with us for a weekend for us to address the problem.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
did you excorcise the demon etc…
ive been meaning to learn about demon posession etc….
LikeLike
Rob said:
No I just told it to leave.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
ok..
just done quite an amusing ( in my view ) posting on atheism…
hope you check it out.??
😀
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
yes jessica thank you…
I would love to meet you Jessica…
I think it would be fun hee heee lol
we could argue all day then 😀
http://wp.me/p3NlHB-NO
LikeLike
Rob said:
How can you suggest there are similarities if you know nothing about Voodoo, unfortunately in the Caribbean here I do have a little experience of it.
What I am trying to encourage is for you not to challenge any belief system without providing some evidence for your challenge. If you do it becomes just an accusation and is rejected by all as prejudice.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Rob – I leave him to you. I have taught too many years not to recognise wilful and invincible ignorance when I see it.
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
well I look at some of the Voodoo stuff etc…
it is defined in the dictionary,,as i decribed earlier..
i.e.. a compound of afro-carribean and roman catholic dogmas/practices…..
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
😀
LikeLike
spookchristian said:
btw..on a lighter note..
How is jessicaHof..OK I hope.??
genuine enquiry..in case you wondered?
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Jessica is fine thank you
LikeLike