...or a little salt in the wound. I ask myself as I read this- why is it that Rome does not know what is going on with Bishop Milingo? According to this article in the National Catholic Reporter in an exclusive interview with Bishop Milingo, Milingo has written to the Holy Father and apprised him of his actions and beliefs.
I also found this blog that has a very complete post on Milingo with lots of useful links. Fr. Joe is here.
According to Zenit, the Legionaire's news site:
ZENIT - The World Seen From Rome
Date: 2006-07-13
Holy See Comments on Archbishop Milingo
VATICAN CITY, JULY 13, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo is again in the news, this time reportedly to campaign for a change in Church discipline on priestly celibacy.
The Vatican issued a statement today, saying: "The Holy See has not yet received precise news on the purpose of the trip to the United States of Monsignor Emmanuel Milingo, archbishop emeritus of Lusaka, Zambia.
"However, if the statements attributed to him about ecclesiastical celibacy are true, there would be no alternative but to deplore them, the discipline of the Church in this respect being well known," concluded the brief communiqué.
On his return to the Catholic Church at the request of Pope John Paul II in August 2001, Archbishop Milingo, native of Zambia, acknowledged that, having gone through a crisis, he sought recognition for his work in the "Moon" sect.
A few months earlier in that year, he had entered a supposed marriage -- not recognized by the Catholic Church -- with Maria Sung, in Korean Reverend Sung Myug Moon's "Federation of the Family for World Peace and Unification."
Today, the Italian newspaper Avvenire reported that, after a few weeks of not knowing Monsignor Milingo's whereabouts, he appeared on Wednesday in Washington.
According to the Italian Catholic newspaper, the prelate said at a press conference that he has gone back to Maria Sung, that he has met again with Moon himself and that he is contesting priestly celibacy.
About Me
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(321)
-
▼
July
(19)
- Breaking- Boston Archdiocesan Employee "Ordained"
- Authentic Religious
- Man and Wife: Demonstrating the Ideal
- Sentire Cum Ecclesia
- For Once and For All.
- St. Lawrence of Brindisi, a Man for His Time
- Saw This Coming....
- The Holy Father visits the St. Bernards
- Liturgical Abuses
- Milingo Update
- Crime and punishment
- Know They Neighbor instead of Love Thy Neighbor
- Followup to Flesh of My Flesh
- Flesh of My Flesh
- The USCCB batting 1000
- What's Wrong with Harry Potter?
- Boys Will Be Boys- Let Them
- The Black Legend
- Inspired Traditionalist
-
▼
July
(19)
46 comments:
"National Catholic Reporter"
This isn't exactly the most reputable news source! It is not a trustworthy source.
Reviews of this source list many weakness including:
Not-so-Catholic newsletters (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Subscribes to liberation theology (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Supports priesthood as a gay vocation (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Criticizes the institutional church (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Attacks the priesthood (Fidelity)
Example(s)
· Dissidents as regular columnists (Fidelity)
Example(s)
My dear Jackson,
Are any of the facts in the article really in dispute?
Yes, like many of the so-called facts you present on this blog, there are obvious inaccuracies in this report, but given that you seem comfortable accepting the NCR as an authentic news source, it hardly seems worth mentioning.
Might I suggest you become better educated about the Catholic church by including some reputable news sources in your daily reading.
M. Alexander;
I just read the AP post via Fr. Joe's blog, and can't really see why you'd be upset by Bishop Milingo's activities and/or views. To distill it down, Bishop Milingo simply advocates (either verbally or by his actions):
1. Catholics being "married" by a non-Catholic "reverend" without canonical permission
2. Bishops, priests, etc. disobeying the Church directive to remain celibate
3. Ignoring the fact that the indelible mark left by priestly ordination is an insuperable impediment to marriage
4. Engaging in "cohabitation" despite the fact that a sacramental marriage does not exist
between the parties
5. Rebellion against censure from the Vatican regarding any of the above.
6. Looking to the "Rev." Sun Yung Moon for guidance and counsel.
All he wants is to be loved. Is that so wrong?! At least he's not an ignorant, ill-read, ill-informed, bigotted, homophobic, close-minded, puritanical, finger-pointing "Traditionalist," is he? [I couldn't think of any other names you'd been called on this blog recently :D ROTFLOL!]
At least Archbishop Milingo has a defender in jackson. You go. When you can't defend the actions, but just can't stand agreeing with someone like M. Alexander (who, to my knowledge is not an archbishop that has been "married" by the RSYM, and after appearing to repent; repented of his repentence, and is currently touring the country to foment rebellion against current Church policy and/or doctrine, while establishing a "home" with his illicit "bride") attack the source.
Good liberal, (pat on the head) easy boy, good liberal...
"Good liberal, (pat on the head) easy boy, good liberal..."
Madeline, if you are referring to me, you are so far off. I'm an in no way a liberal. I am a traditional Catholic (a REAL Catholic, not the nutty SSPX kind) and regularily attend an indult mass. Guess your inferior female brain can't really comprehend anything beyond the liberal vs conservative stereotype.
"just can't stand agreeing with someone like M. Alexander "
Actually I could stand agreeing with her -- if she ever managed to post anything that actually had any real basis instead of getting her information from the National Enquirer equivalent of Catholic news. Would it kill her (or you) to actually read reputable sources...oh, actually it might because you won't be able to back up your crazy conspiracy in the church hierarchy theories.
Dear Madeline,
You've been so hard on Jackson when all he wants is to be understood.
Don't you realize that the facts are all under dispute. Nothing for certain can be deduced. In other words he took the blue pill. (a la the Matrix)
He takes umbrage at my referring to an exclusive interview and completely ignores the article from Zenit which I think would be right up his dead end alley.
m. alexandar,
Why don't you take some advice from your own recent post. Women are meant to be men's helpers, so why don't you get back in the kitchen and leave the blogging to the men who actual know something about these issues.
If you are not equal to men (as you conceded earlier) what makes you think men want to listen to your inferior opinion??
JACKSON WROTE: "If you are not equal to men (as you conceded earlier) what makes you think men want to listen to your inferior opinion??"
The fact that you are logging into this blog must mean you are a woman, and want to 'listen' to Mary's opinions. Otherwise, you wouldn't be here, would you? You write like a teenage girl at that. It is good for comic relief on this serious blog.
"NCR isn't exactly the most reputable news" source"! So, in your opinion what IS THE MOST REPUTABLE NEWS SOURCE? Do tell.
"The fact that you are logging into this blog must mean you are a woman, and want to 'listen' to Mary's opinions. "
Nice misuse of logic there, TradCatholic.
I am a male (won't send photos proving it, you'll have to take my word).
A buddy at work told me about this blog. He said it's hilarious to see how misguided it is. I agree. It's one of the shoddiest blog in terms of accuracy about the church. It's funny to see the girls play at pretending to be bishops/priests.
Snicket;
Why the vitriol when I was being sooo complimentary, and commending you on an excellent use of diversion?
You've even further impressed me by your initiative in attacking the messenger, rather than just the vehicle. My, we are innovative, aren't we?
Please, please don't bother addressing the topic of the post. I assure you that your assumptions regarding my reading habits, intellectual inferiority, and pursuit of conspiracy theories is certainly enough to convince me that you are always right about absolutely everything.
I'm glad you find it amusing that devout Catholics are outraged over the silence of the Church Hierarchy in the face of the blatant heresy and the disobedience of Archbishop Milingo. At least somebody besides the devil is laughing.
I repeat,again, what Jackson I addressed re: Jackson's comment about news sources:
"NCR isn't exactly the most reputable news" source"! So, in your opinion what IS THE MOST REPUTABLE NEWS SOURCE? Do tell.
Now, again, enlighten us and tell us what IS the most reputable source for news in your not so humble opinion?? Go ahead, give it a whirl!
Of course, HE hasn't revealed this info for all of us to be enlightened as he seems to be. Do tell, Jackson!
To poo-poo the dangers apparent in the Church liturgy today is to hide one's head in the sand. The situation is very serious, approaching dire consequences re: the salvation of souls. The bishops have not led as is their command; they have led astray even the faithful; they have blinded the eyes of the just to Christ and denied themselves the fruits of their labours. They have sunk into the pit of vice and all uncleanliness, smitten by the devil himself, dragging down even the just.
This blog exposes these errors for what they are. Sometimes news sources who are against the real truth most of the time, as the NCR, love to expose sins of the bishops just to make the Church look foolish. Sometimes we learn more from out enemies than from our friends.
When is comes to a source for the Faith issues, certainly no responsible Catholic would concern themselves with the NCR.
Why not address the issues,jack,and quit fogging the comment section with red herrings and distractions just to make yourself look intelligent. It's not working that way. There IS "a clown at every Mass you attend," if you do attend Mass! I liked Madeline's line....sometimes the women are "spot on".
"To poo-poo the dangers apparent in the Church liturgy today is to hide one's head in the sand. "
Go ahead girl...keep ranting. This is just too funny. Seriously. You yip and yip like a little toy dog but don't do anything to help solve the problem.
What good do you think your complaining is doing? Do you think the Holy Father reads this blog and is going to base his decisions on your little outbursts?
Seriously, though, other than your little rants what have you done specifically that will improve things in YOUR church?
It's easy to point out flaws, then run away like a chicken. It's another thing to stay and help work on a solution. I have read a lot of complaining by you and others on this blog, but have not read one single solution (oh, other than don't read Harry Potter).
As for the reputatble news sources, I don't think you'd recognize one if it hit you in the head (judging by the sources you site). There are plenty of Catholic aggregation sites that post news links from reliable sources, all you gotta do is pull your head out of the sand and look.
Madeline as for your comment: "outraged over the silence of the Church Hierarchy "
I didn't say these things were OK. However, the Church Hierarchy has been far from silent. Haven't you heard about any of the specific actions that the Vatican has taken in response to these kinds of situations and about the specific statements they have made recently concerning about changes to the liturgy (including one that was made yesterday). Of course, if you hang out on this blog (which posts outdated stories about clowns), then you will be about 5-10 years behind on the latest Vatican news. You also won't hear much about these statements and actions on sources (such as National Catholic Reporter) which delight in publishing the rantings of dissenters.
Contrary to what you gals have been saying, the Vatican IS taking action. It is targeted at the entire problem rather than at specific individuals (which is the most effective and productive way to deal with issues that are on a world-wide scale).
One final comment....given that people are being blown up in the Middle East, India, and elsewhere, do you honestly think that clowns, or even a bishop getting married is the most important issue right now??
Jackson said: "Of course, if you hang out on this blog (which posts outdated stories about clowns), then you will be about 5-10 years behind on the latest Vatican news"
The post to which you are referring merely had an old picture of a clown. The text was regarding a statement by the Vatican issued July 13th (2006, not 1991-2001, as you imply).
Jackson said "One final comment....given that people are being blown up in the Middle East, India, and elsewhere, do you honestly think that clowns, or even a bishop getting married is the most important issue right now??"
I wasn't aware that the world was waiting, with bated breath, for M. Alexander to solve their political problems with her blog. Do you mean to imply that we should only discuss issues depending upon their importance, as ranked by you? Then, please, please submit the list. I am dying to see it.
I guess I do think that blasphemy, irreverence, and rebellion against the One True Church are more important than whatever wars are currently being waged between whomever. I propose that fixing the one, would go a long way towards fixing the other.
So, once again Jackson avoids a direct question - what is THE best source for information about the Church. He doesn't know, and hedges around and changes the point to hide his ignorance - which is all too apparent anyway.
And yes, the bishops and the Church ARE the most important issues of the day, of more importance than any other atrocities. If rot starts from the top down, none of us are safe.
You have read plenty of solutions to the problems we are discussing on this blog, but don't recognize them . The SSPX is one temporary solution which you dismiss out of hand and, as you don't even recognize the seriousness of the difficulties in the Church today you don't recognize the solution. But you were most likely not brought up with a superficial teaching in the Faith anyway and cannot help it. You are probably some Eucharistic minister someplace or RCIA instructor.
By the way, what is YOU solution to the problem of the bishops gone wayward - sit and wait until Rome does something? Turn away and pretend not to notice? Pray?? Yes, prayer is the ultimate solution, but I haven't heard you mention that.
As for seeing everythink on this blog somewhere else, I doubt that is actually true. Even if you have seen things elsewhere, maybe all of us don't have the free time you do to have seen it as well. Not all information must be NEW here. Discussion of old topics can yield good fruit as you must know, though maybe not.
By the way, the worldwide picture of people getting 'blown up'all over the middle East is terrible, but not the greatest terror of all. Here in the US millions of babies have been 'legally' killed in the crime of abortion. Great terror that is. But, the bishop problems IS more important in the long run. With no faithful bishops, there will be no priests - with no priest there is no Eucharist. This is why these articles should stir up ire within us to do something about it even if it is to beef up our own faith for the struggle.
"I guess I do think that blasphemy, irreverence, and rebellion against the One True Church are more important than whatever wars are currently being waged between whomever."
Ah yes. You have it sussed. I'm sure the terrorists are all upset at the liturgical problems in the Catholic Church.
"So, once again Jackson avoids a direct question - what is THE best source for information about the Church. He doesn't know, and hedges around and changes the point to hide his ignorance - which is all too apparent anyway."
I DID say how to find out. Check out the Catholic aggregators and before you rely on a source check out how many of the articles are from dissenters. WAS THAT TOO HARD FOR YOU TO FOLLOW?? or did you want a list of all such sources?
" SSPX is one temporary solution which you dismiss out of hand "
Uh, if that's the solution, then you sure don't understand the problem. Followers of this group are NOT faithful Catholics. Period. Go to the Cafeteria is Closed to hear some horror stories (inthe comments section) about the kinds of nutty things that happen at these meetings.
I find it odd that you (TradCath) are so enamored with this group and their version latin mass, when your comment on another post clearly revealed that you don't even understand simple latin!! Perhaps you prefer listening to things you don't understand??
About understanding the faith, I note that elsewhere you revealed some misunderstandings of the Church's teaching (e.g., your statement that people are saved through Jesus alone).
" With no faithful bishops, there will be no priests"
The facts show that the number of priests have been INCREASING not decreasing.
Also,your so-called solution (SSPX) has (and will continue to) reduced the number of priests because the bishops can't validly ordain new priests.
" Here in the US millions of babies have been 'legally' killed in the crime of abortion."
Oh well then, let's ignore the terrorists and let's all get killed. The attacks in the Middle East DO affect the US. You can't hide forever. Also, the majority of people in the US are not Catholic and don't see abortion as murder.
As for reputable services: "Catholic World News
http://www.cwnews.com"
is MUCH more reliable than "Catholic News Service" or National Catholic Reporter (which, as mentioned, supports gay priests, among other non-Catholic things). Also, Sr. Joan Chittister is a columnist for the NCR; she's definitely not a traditional Catholic!!
CNS routinely publishes articles with questional content and links to dissent groups. For example, one article applauds one of its columnists for receiving an award from Pax Christi, a notoriously heretical organization. In case you didn't know the Pax Christi group are heavily focused finding common ground with abortionists and the gay rights lobby (something that Mary, TradCatholic, Hilary, should find objectionable).
I would have thought that a blog called Against ALL Heresies would avoid this particular news service like the plague!!
Why support a news service that employs journalists who support abortion???
I find it especially ironic that you (TradCatholic) would defend the Catholic News Service given the kinds of groups they are linked with! (Unless you are secretely pro-aborations, and I HOPE that you are not) Also, how can you defend the National Catholic Reporter when at least one of its journalists is a known feminist and supporter of female priests???
And dont' forget that you can get Vatican news from the Vatican ITSELF if you want to know first hand what the Vatican actually said instead of reading it second-hand.
TradCatholic wrote:
"He doesn't know, and hedges around and changes the point to hide his ignorance - which is all too apparent anyway."
So, did my last post help? I am NOT ignorant about the sources and am well aware of the problems with both the National Catholic Reporter and the Catholic News Service (given your defense of NCR, perhaps you are more ignorant about them than you realized). Hence, my earlier point about always checking whether dissents work for or publish in the journal. These are just two examples of problematic sources.
If YOU truly are a Tradional Catholic (or even a Faithful Catholic), I hope you now understand why these sources are problematic and should be avoided.
"sit and wait until Rome does something?"
Solution: Pray, talk to my local priest and bishop, become active in my church, and then, yes, wait. (Prayers don't come with a promised due-by date, you know).
Contrary to the news posted on this blog, the Church is NOT completely ignoring abuses and IS doing something. Occurance of sexual abuse, for example, has dropped steadily (and rapidly) since the time of Pope JPII's election.
on a more recent issue, Mary posted an Update on Milingo,but I noticed she didn't include the most recent update (from July 18). Hmmm. Did this info go unreported here because it goes against her thesis that the Vatican is ignoring cases such as this?
Zambia: Vatican Censures Milingo Over Celibacy
The Post (Lusaka)
July 18, 2006
Posted to the web July 18, 2006
Bivan Saluseki
Lusaka
THE Vatican has censured Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo over his call for an end to celibacy.
According to a statement from the Vatican press office on Sunday, the Holy See stated that the discipline of the Church over celibacy was clear.
"The Holy See has not yet received precise information concerning the aim of the journey to the United States of America by Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo, emeritus of Lusaka, Zambia," stated the brief declaration. "In any case, if the declarations attributed to him concerning ecclesiastical celibacy were to prove authentic, the only thing to do would be to deplore them, Church discipline on this matter being well known."
How much more direct can the Bishops get than this? Milingo is OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
From the web.
"In spite of all the efforts made by us and others, he decided to go on with his plan to marry, thereby turning his back on the Catholic Church." The Bishops stated that by his action, the former Archbishop has put himself outside the Catholic Church.
"This implies that he is no longer a Bishop nor part of the Catholic Church," the statement read in part. They stated that the former Archbishop has betrayed his vows by attempting marriage while still under his priestly commitments.
Mary, What makes you think that Vatican does NOT know what is going on with Milingo? The Vatican has clearly issued a statement against him in 2001 and then asked people to pray for him! Note the "FORMER" in front of Archbishop.
Here is an exerpt
"The Bishops invited all Christians to continue praying for the former Archbishop in the hope that he will decide to repent and come back to the Church. The Vatican has also expressed deep regret at the decision by Milingo to marry in the Moon Sect.
According to a statement issued by the Press Office of the Holy See on Monday, the Vatican regretted that Milingo has caused a deep injury to the Church Communion by breaking away from the vows which Bishops have to live with. The Vatican stated that by his action, Milingo will not be considered Bishop of the Catholic Church anymore."
Oh, before you jump all over me, yes, I know that after these statements Milingo repented, left his "wife", and was not excommunicated. Given the Church teaching on forgiveness how could the Vatican do otherwise? (Even Peter denied Jesus, yet was forgiven when he repented)
As for the recent developments (the news conference), the Vatican is not ignoring it. A Vatican source said Church officials were "shocked" by Milingo's new outburst and said disciplinary measures could be announced soon.
Sanctions could be as severe as excommunication, the most serious penalty, which inflicts a total cut-off from the Church.
I don't agree with what Milango did and, yes, he loves the spotlight, but I disagree with qlinger's statement that the Vatican's reconciliation with him was disingenous. After all, isn't the forgiveness of sins the Church's main "business"? If he truly repented, the Vatican was obligated to forgive him, otherwise they would be hypocritical.
I think they were shocked because they did not think that he would again risk excommunication.
qlinger said " sex abuse. The way they dealt with it were pay offs, relocating and promotions." That is the secular media's version of the events. However, that is not the whole story (it did happen in some cases, but was not the typical way of dealing with this situation); the number of incidents have decreased dramatically since 1984 (see, for example, http://closedcafeteria.blogspot.com/2006/04/sexual-abuse-john-paul-ii.html)
Also, even though there is a tendancy by ultra-conservative Catholics to blame JPII, the fact is that most of the bishops responsible for the sexual abuse crisis in this country were NOT appointed by JPII.
Other recent headlines (this one about conflict in the Ivory Coast) "Pope to Ivory Coast bishops, peace can only come through generous forgiveness, true reconciliation"
This is the crux of the problem. The Catholic church preaches forgiveness and reconciliation but from what I see on this blog (and some other allegedgly Catholic blogs) what the laypeople want is vengeance and are extremely unwilling to forgive. After confession the sin is forgiven AND FORGOTTEN. That is the official teaching of the church. Again, that's a problem for the hugely popular secular way of thinking. If someone does something wrong, we want them punished, and punished severely.
We can't have it both ways. We can't be a religion of forgiveness and also expect revenge. Otherwise, we'd be as hypocritical as pseudo-muslim terrorists who claim to be the "religion of peace" and yet murder innocent people.
By the way, I think that Milingo is mentally ill. This makes the situation even harder to deal with because he might not be fully able to control his actions. He has classic narcisstic symptoms (in the clinical sense). He needs medication.
Anonymous and Sally;
You may have misinterpreted the interest that many people have in a strong censure and rebuke from the Vatican re: Archbishop Miligno's actions and advocations.
Excommunication "is also a medicinal rather than a vindictive penalty, being intended, not so much to punish the culprit, as to correct him and bring him back to the path of righteousness. It necessarily, therefore, contemplates the future, either to prevent the recurrence of certain culpable acts that have grievous external consequences, or, more especially, to induce the delinquent to satisfy the obligations incurred by his offence." from the Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm
As an ordained clergyman, who acts in the person of Jesus Christ, and is supposed to be the "Good Shepherd" Archbishop Miligno is in a position to influence and lead many, many people astray, to the detriment of their eternal souls, let alone his. If there is not a strong mandate from the Vatican (or from the faithful, in the silence of the Vatican) to reject Archbishop Miligno's actions and advocations, how many people will be led astray?
From the same website cited above, the following constitues an excommunicable offense:
(1) "Ecclesiastics in Holy orders and regulars or nuns who dare to contract marriage after having made a solemn vow of chastity, also those who dare to contract marriage with one of these persons." The ecclesiastics whose marriage is null in consequence of the impediment of Holy orders are subdeacons and those in still higher orders; the nuns and male religious whose marriage is null through the impediment of vow are members of the great orders. Nevertheless, the impediment does not exist from the time of their first profession that follows the novitiate, but only from the solemn profession made three years later. The penalty is incurred by an attempt at marriage, not by an act of betrothal; such an attempt is recognized in any contract having the figura matrimonii, i. e. which would constitute a marriage if there were no impediment; consequently the penalty is incurred for civil marriage (Holy Office, 22 Dec., 1880), even if there were other impediments, e.g. consanguinity (Holy Office, 16 Jan., 1892).
In light of this information, if an excommunication does not take place, what are we to think?
"If there is not a strong mandate from the Vatican (or from the faithful, in the silence of the Vatican) to reject Archbishop Miligno's actions and advocations, how many people will be led astray? "
True, but you can't excommunicate someone who has repented. By the definition you quoted, the purpose it to have the person return to the path of righteousness. If they truly repent, then they are back on path and excommuniation would serve no purpose other than punishment (but punishment is God's business not ours).
"if an excommunication does not take place, what are we to think?"
We are to think that the offender repented and showed true remorse for his/her action, and presumably is doing or did penance. In Milingo's case, that is why he was not excommunicated -- he repented, left his faux wife, and returned to his healing ministry in Rome.
This newest digression, though, might very well result in excommunication because Milango shows no intention of repenting. Personally, as things stand now I think he should be excommuniated.
However, if he is indeed mentally ill, then he might not be excommunicated because he would not be fully responsible for his actions.
Oh, forgot to add that section IV on the website that Madeline quote is also relevant to this issue.
VI. ABSOLUTION FROM EXCOMMUNICATION
"Apart from the rare cases in which excommunication is imposed for a fixed period and then ceases of itself, it is always removed by absolution. "
"(Absolution) reinstates the repentant sinner in the Church ; restores the rights of which he had been deprived, beginning with participation in the sacraments; and for this very reason, it should precede sacramental absolution, which it thenceforth renders possible and efficacious. "
If Milango repented in 2001 (as all news sources report), then he would have received absolution (even if the excommunication had taken place). So, this isn't a case of double-standard, it is regular procedure.
I can tell their is a lot of intensity on this string. That's good.
"I can tell their is a lot of intensity on this string. That's good."
Well, then. Join in! :-)
Hey, am I the only one that finds it odd that Mary reads the National Catholic Reporter (a magazine that supports gay priests and has Chittister (Ms. pro-female priest herself) as a regular columnist?
And madeline has the nerve to call Jackson a liberal! Sounds like Mary's been reading some dicey journals and is a closet liberal.
Now that's a double-standard!
anonymous wrote I the only one that finds it odd ...
Ok, I'll fess up. I find it odd how an alledged traditional catholic frequenty post quotes from liberal news sources and then conveniently ignores comments that point this out.
I think it's time to change the name of the blog from "Against All Heresies' to "Against all heresies unless I happen to agree with the heresy" (Or maybe something catchier like "heresy schmersy, as long as it's in latin").
Quiz time.
Which Archbishop is being described in this news quote? The justification has a familiar ring, don't it, folks?
"Archbishop X is not seeking to defy or divide the Church, but is acting out of deep love for the Church and concern for its future"
Quiz time 2:
Who is Archbishop Y?
"Archbishop Y does all he can to be faithful to the grace of his episcopacy, traveling the world to encourage Catholics to hold fast to the faith..."
Come on, don't be shy, take a guess. Who is Archbishop Y? Who is Archbishop X?
Need choices?
Lefebreve
Mahony
Milingo
Arinze
Let me take a guess - I saw where Mahony had thousands and thousands at a 'mass' in LA after a huge catechetical conference in LA (news from NCR and the Wanderer,as we are quoting sources) That's good, isn't it??
Then I heard that Arinze is with one conservative group one day, a liberal the next...that's eccumenism, right? That's good--
Of course Maligno is trying to get Rome to let him marry some bimbo--marriage is good, isn't it?
That leaves Abp Lefebvre. I heard this may was truely missionary, was a member of the VII Council, Superior of the Holy Ghost Fathers, founded an approved seminary for Priests to be ordained to the Latin Rite, and seeing such abuses and error in the happenings in the Church, pleaded with the Pope to allow him to ordain bishops who celebrate the TLM. They agreed, and even set two dates for this to occur ---but, alas, they kept deferring the date ?hoping he would die first (he was old), so he told them he must do this to preserve the Latin Mass..So he did..and we continue to celebrate the Latin Mass to this day. That's VERY good, right?? So, he gets my vote.
For Jackson,
You have decided to attack my use of an exclusive interview published in the National Catholic Reporter by John Allen. You recommend instead that I refer to CWNews. Ironically, this statement shows your ignorance about the fact that CWNews frequently refers to John Allen as a trusted and fair journalist (though he is liberal). This is the type of subtlety that is clearly beyond you. It is a very good thing when we know our own limitations.
Laurie,
Thanks for that illuminating article from the Lusaka Post. Truly that is not one of my daily reads- and an article as recent as Sunday! Wow. That is up to the minute on this isn't it?
Strange that when you read the article it states that the Vatican has censured Milingo but then says that Vatican does not know what the statements are that he has made. The censure has not been noted on any official Vatican news sites.
The article is either premature or in error.
"CWNews frequently refers to John Allen as a trusted and fair journalist (though he is liberal)."
He maybe liberal (by your standards) but at least he's not pro-abortion or pro-female ordination!! That's much, much worse.
Unless you happen to support these things. (Which I hope you don't)
m. alexander said The censure has not been noted on any official Vatican news sites. The article is either premature or in error.
The story is also linked to other sites such as
http://www.vaticanradio.com/
English news is sometimes delayed on the official Vatican site due to translation delays. Also, the Holy Father is on vacation, so they might be waiting for furthre information until final censure is imposed.
The fact that Milingo was being "watched" by a group of nuns and then "escaped" (along with his other behavior) suggests that he might be mentally ill. Not sure which commenter mentioned this, but it is true that Milingo exhibits several symptoms such as illusions of grandeur, narcissim, and so on. Might also explain why he is an EX-Bishop.
The story in The Post were based on this official Vatican report (I searched for the quote). Here is a snippet.
VATICAN ISSUES STATEMENT ON MILINGO REAPPEARANCE
Vatican City, Jul. 13, 2006 (CNA) - At midday today, in Rome, the Holy See released a brief statement regarding the reappearance of Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo in Washington, D. C. yesterday.
The Holy See said that it has not yet received, “precise information concerning the aim of the journey to the United States of America by Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo.”
"In any case,” the statement continued, “if the declarations attributed to him concerning ecclesiastical celibacy were to prove authentic, the only thing to do would be to deplore them, Church discipline on this matter being well known."
The answers to the quiz are:
"Archbishop MILINGO is not seeking to defy or divide the Church, but is acting out of deep love for the Church and concern for its future"
"Archbishop LEFEBRVE does all he can to be faithful to the grace of his episcopacy, traveling the world to encourage Catholics to hold fast to the faith..."
Seems like anyone can get be judged to be "faithful" and acting out of the love for the Church. My point, just because someone says Archbishop X is not trying to destroy the Church, he is trying to save the Church because he loves it means absolutely nothing. It is an opinion only.
My opinion, both Milingo and Lefebrve actions were not in the best interest of the church. Although Milingo is more obviously mentally disturbed.
" Arinze is with one conservative group one day, a liberal the next...that's eccumenism, right? That's good-"
In what way is Arinze liberal??
In what way is Arinze liberal??
Who said he is a liberal?
You implied that he was by writing "Then I heard that Arinze is with one conservative group one day, a liberal the next"
You implied that he was by writing "Then I heard that Arinze is with one conservative group one day, a liberal the next"
Post a Comment