...to a friendly Anglican church in Mitcham to give a talk to an afternoon group re Traditional Feasts and Seasons (ref Yearbook of Seasons and Celebrations see Gracewing Books, here).
Cycling along past Mitcham Common, stretches of open land, litter-strewn but still with semi-rural feel, so near to London...after my talk, put bike on train and up to Blackfriars. Haven't been there for some while and it felt good to be pedalling along the Embankment.London looks rather...well...cosy in a curious way in the misty chilly January dusk, street-lights glowing, buses cheerful, ugly vast office blocks less daunting than in glaring summer sun. Hot cup of coffee at Waterloo station, ten minutes with newspaper, opportunity to take stock...
Well, the H. Father has spoken out clearly about how the Church views the horror of the Holocaust, and makes clear his opinion of those who make anti-semitic comments...thank God, his own personal standing on this, as well as the clear teaching of the Church, speaks volumes. But the Lefebvrists have caused incalculable damage to the Church, quite apart from the cruel insult they have given to the families of those murdered. And still no formal apology for the latter, which is honestly peculiar as it would cost them nothing except their pride...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
The SSPX has not reacted graciously to the lifting of the excommunication. Notably missing from the initial statement were the three elements that Sister Faustina mentioned specifically as neccessary in our response to God's mercy: trust, sorrow, and humility. There was no statement of gratitude to the Holy Father - the formal statement saying that he had made a "benevolent and courageous" gesture was the courteous, even friendly, diplomatic language that people use when they want to be polite, but not the language used by people who have been excommunicated and now see the possibility of being restored to the fullness of life in the Church. There was no affirmation of trust, no sorrow for the schism (for which they must at the very least accept some blame, even if they have decided that it was all a misunderstanding?) and a complete absence of anything humble at all.
In the statement made following the revelation of Bishop Williamson's atrocious remarks, there was no apology for the remarks as such, merely for the embarrassment they had caused. But the people who had been hurt and offended - the Jewish people whose families had been murdered in such ghastly circumstances - received no apology, and it is simple Catholic teaching that the right thing to do is make amends and say a genuine "I'm sorry" when we have done wrong. It really won't do merely to say that we are sorry about the problems our sin has caused us or others - that is not sorrow or repentance but only regret. If I have lied and been unkind, and then I and many of my friends have lost our reputations as a result, saying that I am sorry we are all sad and lonely is not good enough...I have to say:"I lied and said unkind things, and I am truly sorry to have offended."
It's as if the Parable has been amended to read:
"The Father saw his son approaching from a long way off, and ran out to greet him. And the son said 'Good. Now I am coming home, let's discuss the terms on which I will return. First, let's establish that I never really left. Next, please be clear that I have every right to be at home and that in fact my ideas on how the place should be run are the only ones
which accord with the original plan. Third, if I have offended the neighbours,
well I'm sorry it's caused you inconvenience....' And the older brother, who had remained faithful, knowing that the house and farm were not as they ought to be, and that the father was sad about this, desperately wanted to talk to his younger brother and enlist his help in the fields, but whenever he tried to talk the younger one just shouted that the only way forward was his and that there was nothing else worth
discussing."
Goodness, gracious. Mrs. Bogle and the first poster are not showing the attitude that brings others to reconciliation.
First, Williamson said he isn't convinced by being told what he has to think about motives and means and subsequent numbers in events that can't be studied or questioned 65 years ago; he didn't say nothing happened. He doesn't think he did something "wrong", "sinful", "immoral", etc. It doesn't matter that we don't agree with him.. His personal reflections on that have nothing to do with the matter at hand so belaboring it is tendentious and mischievous.
Second, The Parable: the Pope and the people in the pews see the prodigal returning; all that matters is that here he comes; welcome!
Remember the debtor whose debt was forgiven but who then didn't forgive someone who owed him? What did Jesus say about that? Remember those about to throw stones at the woman taken in adultery? Remember the elder brother who always pleased his father until it came to the thing his father most wanted him to do? Remember what that was? Uncritically, unreservedly, welcome his brother home.
Why don't we quietly try to do the same.
The whole point about the parable of the Prodigal Son is that the son, even though he only came home because he was hungry, did actually fall on his knees and say "Sorry".
Of course we must all accept this sorrow from the Lefebvrists as soon as it is offered.
Mrs. Bogle,
I'm not sure "the whole point" was passing a contrition test, with all due respect.
I think the point is: "Your brother was dead and is alive; he was lost and is found".
If there is a test, it is a reception test: it is one those of us seeing the Prodigal coming up the road, seeing the Prodigal feted and given gifts, it is a test we must pass, don't you think?
You have a lovely blog award waiting for you at Bevansinc :)
I think everyone identifies to some extent with the elder brother in the parable of the prodigal.
However many Catholics, including myself, are concerned that someone who appears to be a very unsuitable choice of bishop has been validly so ordained, and how that situation will be regularised now that he back in communion with the Church. A public show of repentance for his schismatic actions and anti-Jewish sentiments would make the Holy Fathers' job a lot easier, but it doesn't appear to be forthcoming.
However these are early days. We shouldn't expect Williamson to respond in soundbites for consumption of the media, but in his own time and in a considered manner.
I would like to know where all these Catholics who are screaming about apologies from the SSPX, were when Tony Blair was received into the church and issued no apology for leading some of most anti-life policies in this country to increase the number of abortions (the modern-day holocaust, if not worse) in the UK?
Joanna - I am sure you must have by now visited Fr. Z or the Rorate Caeli blog to see that apologies were posted at least four days ago?
There was, and continues to be, a massive outcry about the Blairs' support for organisations supporting abortion, and not least on this Blog, as poor Ottaviani would know if he read it regularly: we would like to have his support for our campaigns so hope that in the future he will join us. But he is attempting to evade the central issue: Catholics have been appalled and shocked by Dr Williamson's remarks, and although Dr W. has now at last expressed regret to the Pope for what has occurred, he has not apologised to the families of the slaughtered or even accepted that his remarks were lies, or offered any reparation for the hurt caused by what we now know has been a sustained campaign of statements on this issue over several years. This apparent inability to ask forgiveness of those he has hurt is all the more dreadful given the Holy Father's huge gesture of mercy in offering a lifting of excommunication, an extraordinary opportunity, for reflection, repentance and renewal.
Mrs. Bogle,
You write "Catholics have been appalled and shocked by Dr Williamson's remarks"...the remarks about political events 65 years ago have been annoying maybe and tiresome maybe but definitely irrelevant to the matter at hand: regularization - something both Pope Benedict XVI & Pope JPII deeply desired.
I myself have been "appalled and shocked" on a regular basis by priests who don't believe in the Resurrection, clerics of all ranks who support homosexual marriage and women priests, etc.etc.
You also write:
Dr. W. "has not apologised to the families of the slaughtered or even accepted that his remarks were lies, or offered any reparation for the hurt caused". His remarks were opinions that didn't make anyone more or less dead.
Really, Mrs. Bogle, you must harbor an animus toward the SSPX to write something so histrionically ludicrous as a condition that must be met.
If I can live with Father Richard McBrian on TV and in newsprint, we can live with a silenced on non-Church matters (and he has been)Dr. W. Let's be welcoming to our brothers, even if they aren't as perfect and pc as we are.
No Formal apology is very telling!
This type of attitude for the Jews can not be tolerated!
Acknowledging ones guilt and turning from it is key to restoration. There are standards to be kept and this is an important one.
"Acknowledging ones guilt and turning from it is key to restoration."
Thank heavens you are just a condemning fault finder lurking behind an internet curtain and not someone we need to rely on for leadership.
You are the unrepentent elder brother in the Prodigal story. How sad.
Just a point about comments, please, in view of some that I have decided to reject.
Comments here should be relevant to the discussion about the schismatics coming back to the Church, why we should be glad they are returning etc (and of course it's quite right that we mustn't be elder-brother-ish...even though he only came back because he was eating husks, he did return, and fell on his knees in repentance, and as soon as that happens it would be horrid to do anything except be welcoming and help with the ring, fatted calf, etc). But I won't be printing comments that stray off the point.
I don't mind printing comments that are rude about me, though I won't if they are anonymous. But I won't be printing comments about Jewish people, Israel, Church/state relations in the Middle East,etc.
If you don't want to print this-thats fine with me..
But we as a church do have standards to keep and keeping them in Christ's love is what we are to do. The other party acknowledging this and accepting the standards is key to a united faith and belief. It has nothing to do with forgiveness as that is commanded. I do not understand why the prodical son is being brought into this.
If the prodical son had just stopped home long enogh to grab a bite to eat, take a shower and ask for more money then I can understand, but he was a BROKEN man who had learned great lessons-he was completely humbled. The brothers attitude was wrong as he should of been happy to see his brother understand truth at last and come home.
Some people have to be "anonymous" because it won't go through other wise-not because we are hiding.
Debra Jacobs
Joanna, Thanks for being honorable and brave!
Post a Comment