The Pope rehabilitates a Holocaust denier bishop and is surprised that it throws off Catholic Jewish relations?
It does seem that this Pope is undoing much of what Vatican 2 accomplished in warming Catholic Jewish relations. In context, earlier in his papacy he reintroduced a version of the Good Friday Prayer that many Jews find insulting, that had been replaced by Vatican 2.
It is a shame that he has chosen a path so different than Pope John Paul II’s.
Well, in His Holy Defense, it’s probably not a specifically antisemitic move - that knucklehead seemed astonished that innocently saying (sorry, quoting, “I’m not the one saying it, no really !”) that Islam as a whole was evil, inhuman and inherently preached by the sword could be perceived as a negative comment by the Muslim community.
His Hatness isn’t big on fraternity and understanding between peoples, that’s all. Which probably means God ain’t either these days, since Benny’s canonically the mouth of Saur… I mean Yahweh.
ETA : heh, that was mentionned in your cite. Nevermind then.
It should be noted that the guys he rehabilitated (and what he did was dis-excommunicate them, i.e., only acknowledge that they are no longer beyond the pale – somewhat different to giving them a good conduct medal) were excommunicated in the first place not for their (it now emerges) goofy views on what the Nazis did, but for schismatic behavior (following a dissident bishop who was in open revolt against the Vatican). So it’s an internal governance matter.
Unfortunately I have long noted that every non-Catholic, and most Catholics, have no bloody idea what excommunication is.
Which makes this entire thread, as well as the controversy itself, a lot of ignorance rolled into one little package.
Except that the whole point of this thread is what message the pope is sending. If everyone in the world fails to understand what excommunication is, the pope should be aware of that, and should factor it into his decisions.
Including his decisions about internal disciplinary proceedings? That hardly is a necessary truism.
Would it have been possible for the Pope to revoke their excommunication with a minimum of publicity? (This is not a rhetorical question)
If that is possible, that would probably have been the way to go.
Can the Pope do anything with a minimum of publicity, though?
I think he could have done it and tried to keep it quiet, but they (the former dissidents) would have wanted to publicize it. And the point (AFAICT) of lifting the excommunication was to reconcile internecine disputes over LeFebvre and his ultra-conservative constituency; it would hardly achieve the goal of bringing the sort of sedavacantists back from the fringe if they didn’t know their ‘martyrs’ had been found not to have been in super-grave error or insubordination worthy of excommunication.
So what you’re saying is that you know next to nothing about the current pope?
I agree.
The Catholic Church is in the business of saving souls as they see it. Relationships with Jews are irrelevant if they conflict with the core mission.
I myself don’t have any problem with this version:
A bit annoying to have Catholics attempting to horn in, but that is what postheletizing religions do, more or less - seek to convert everyone to what they believe to be the Truth with a capital “T” (Judaism itself of course not falling into this category - it is not a prostheletizing religion).
The original version was clearly insulting:
“Faithless Jews” is pretty clearly insulting and intended to be, as is the assertion that their hearts are “veiled”.
His poopiness doesn’t and doesn’t HAVE to care about the jews. He doesn’t care about much except Holy Mother Church and her mission in the world, which is his job technically, but his lack of human understanding means, at least to me that he’s no different, that the Taliban or any other fundamental group leader/tyrant. It’s another poor choice in a long history of poor choices by the Holy See, choosing this man.
And it used to be “the perfidious Jews”.
Lack of human understanding? :rolleyes:
Please prove that he doesn’t understand the issue. I am having trouble seeing it myself behind all the projection upon Pope Benedict’s state of mind.
I see no indication that he was surprised about anything, other than a misleading thread title of course.
That’s right! Just ask Pious XII.
:rolleyes:
In his decisions on whether or not someone should remain excommunicated? He can’t do that…the Pope technically doesn’t excommunicate someone…they excommunicate themselves by separating themselves from the Church and it’s teachings. These guys did that by not accepting the authority of Rome. If they change their minds and decide to fall back in line with Rome, then they are no longer outside the Church, and the Pope is merely acknowledging that. Excommunication isn’t a punishment for doing something really really bad, it’s just a state of being that a person chooses to be in, usually indicated by the person literally renouncing some doctrine the Church holds (not disobeying the doctrine, but coming right out and opposing it deliberately).
Pius XII.
Implying the pope had no choice in the matter? I find that a bit hard to believe.
If nothing else, he could have issued a statement (and maybe he did but it wasn’t widely reported) saying “these guys are utter douchebags and their views are loathsome and hateful and wrong and we hate them, BUT we have no choice but to do what is basically a minor procedural action, please don’t read anything into it”.
It is not a minor matter. It is a religious principle that you can be a douchebag, and it’s between you and God. Excommunication has nothing to do with that. Second, the Church does not go around calling poeple douchebags. At least not in public.