I thought this interview well worth the read. Particularly this comment by Fr Robert Taft, SJ:
Vatican II, with an assist from those Council Fathers with a less naïve Disney-World view of their own Church’s past, managed to put aside this historically ludicrous, self-centered, self-congratulatory perception of reality.
Unfortunately there are still many traditionalists out there who support this demonstrably erroneous view of the Roman Communion; the solution to all problems being for the whole Christian world to once again kneel in the snow at the pope's feet and do penance. But the tide has turned! Even if any of us would be inclined to kiss the pope's toe, against our consciences, I doubt whether pope Francis would have anybody do such an idolatrous, scandalous thing. I have high hopes for pope Francis. Who knows, if he abrogates Summorum Pontificum, transfers curial powers to episcopal conferences and ceases inter-religious dialogue with Jews and Muslims then he might begin the hoped-for process of the destruction of the Papacy itself, by his own authority! Then let him abase himself before an Orthodox bishop and himself do penance for a thousand years of corruption.
While I agree with the dissolution of the papacy, the sooner the better, doing so for the sake of union with Eastern Orthodoxy is not the answer. Orthodoxy has its share of problems. The Orthodox Church in America has been infiltrated by a multitude of ex-Episcopalians (Anglicans) who they brought their problems with them. The Russians suffer from chronic xenophobia, "Occidentalitis", the ROCOR has devolved into a cult of morbidly obese bearded "Rooskie Wannabeeskie" converts using an antiquated and dreadfully incorrect calendar and the Greeks are..........the Greeks. Once you get past the grandiose Byzantine ritual, the klobuks, the riassas, the beards and the multitude of pectoral crosses and encolpions they are not much different than Rome. Just a different language and cut of the chasuble (phelonion).
ReplyDeleteWell, there's always apathy! Look at me! I haven't been nigh a church in God alone knows how long and I'm getting along just fine. It's just a question of not losing one's nerve.
ReplyDeleteUnless you are willing to denounce your western heritage and culture Orthodoxy is not the answer. I'll take a good choir and organ any day over a group of caterwauling Greek and Arab monks.
ReplyDeleteSorry, westerns dumped their liturgical patrimony all on their own without help from the Orthodox. Don't blame us if your magisterium loves to suck up to the Zeitgeist; the price you pay for subservience to the innovations of the Papacy is your own liturgical patrimony. Leave us alone and out of your self-destruction, please.
DeletePrior Martin,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote ' a cult of morbidly obese bearded "Rooskie Wannabeeskie" converts using an antiquated and dreadfully incorrect calendar'. Surely, the point is that no one ever claimed that the Julian Kalendar was, astronomically, accurate. The point is that for the greater part of its existence the Christian Church used the Julian Calendar. The adoption of a more accurate calendar means that the cycle of commemoration of saints etc is broken. For instance, I plan next Thursday to beat witness at the Banqueting House, Whitehall, marking the 'anniversary' of the judicial murder of King Charles the Martyr. The problem is, as far as King Charles is concerned, the date is now wrong and what he would have called the 18th January, what in the Julian Calendar, is now the 17th January and certainly not the 30th.
Might I ask whether your first name is Roger?
Good for you! No.
DeleteWell, Jesus wasn't born on December 25 either.
DeleteAnd the actual anniversary (in earth-time) of Charles' death has changed since 1649. Thus the Julian date is not the actual anniversary anymore either.