The Thinks I Think

You see how no one quote could possibly do justice to the letter as a whole.

From:

cramerica.livejournal.com

Thought the same thing... "OMG print-medium troll!"

From:

lemurtanis.livejournal.com

"true universities are for ideas, ideas are not for true girls, so true universities are not for true girls"

QED, bitches!

From:

You wouldn't say that if you were a true girl.

From:

janne.livejournal.com

Ahahahaha! That really pushed through the 'offensive' barrier and straight on into the realms of the amusingly ludicrous. :D

From:

I would have been more amused to read it a year ago, when he was a secessionist Catholic with perhaps a small following, than to read it now, when his views have been more or less sanctioned by Pope Benedict. Even so: no doubt that it's gone to ludicrous speed, or perhaps past that into plaid.

From:

That's plaid, alright.

From:

You know, I was agreeing with this until I hit

Eve was created by God to be a "help" to Adam (Gen. 11,18). She was to help him, says St Thomas Aquinas elsewhere (1a,92,1), not for any other work than that of generation (or reproduction), because for any other work man could be more suitably helped by another man.

and then I stopped reading because smashing my fist through the monitor is counterproductive.

From:

bookishfellow.livejournal.com

You got a heck of a lot farther than I did. I had to close the tab before I finished the second paragraph.

From:

jadelennox

there was a second paragraph? I'm not sure I made it to the second SENTENCE.

From:

jordanwillow.livejournal.com

i know i didn't. (make it to the second sentence.)

bishop williamson, pope benedict, the holy spirit, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints and the forgiveness of sins can bite me.

sorry. i had a flashback there for a second.

From:

leighjen.livejournal.com

Man can help man, if you know what I mean. Ah yeah...

Sorry. I just can't thinking he would like "Adam and Steve" a little more than he can admit.

From:

devjoe.livejournal.com

Since google caches of deleted pages don't last forever, the same page on archive.org, for anybody coming along later who cares to see the utter absurdity of this letter.

The intolerance and hypocrisy of the Catholic Church are stunning sometimes, but seeing people like this in charge makes it clearer how it can be so messed up as it is.

From:

I should stress that I bear no ill will towards Catholics, just towards their current leadership (just as I bore no ill will towards Americans for the last eight years).

But—insofar as this isn't some random priest, not even someone who sneaked his way into bishophood and then started expressing extremist views, but rather someone the Pope specifically welcomed back into the Church and its leadership...well, it's like Bush saying "Heckuva job, Brownie." Perhaps the College of Cardinals will swing back to a more liberal Pope next time.

From:

I'm torn on this, really. One the one hand, Williamson is a flaming fuckwit, and every time he opens his mouth and spews this bigoted crap, some of it splatters on the Church. On the other hand, people are excommunicated from the Church for being heretics or rebels, not for being assholes, so the undeniable fact that one IS an asshole should not, in theory, be a barrier to being restored to communion with the church if the original doctrinal issue has been resolved somehow.

Back on the first hand, especially given Benedict's well-known conservative views, it's impossible for me to believe that this sort of olive branch would have been extended to someone he didn't on some level agree with - perhaps not in all particulars, but enough to be sympathetic.

On the second hand again...hrm. Okay, understand that what I'm going to try to explain here is Catholic dogma, not my personal opinion; I offer it only as a perspective, not to argue in its favor. It's been quite a while since the Church wanted anything to do with me. That out of the way:

Resolving schisms (without compromising doctrine) and bringing schismatics back to the flock is part of the Pope's job. And from within the logic of the church, it does make sense. You have to understand that from their perspective, excommunication is not ostracism because you disapprove of someone (with its removal indicating approval). Excommunication means those people are (by Catholic dogma) going straight to Hell. Restoring them to the Church means they may STILL go to Hell for other sins (and we might hope that intolerance would count....), but those are God's to judge, not the Pope's.

From:

That's not my understanding of things. Excommunication is the removal of authority, not the removal of Catholicism. Williamson still can go to Heaven if he's excommunicated, he just can't lead a flock. He also can't receive the eucharist and other sacraments, but that also doesn't stop him from going to Heaven, because the big one, baptism, still applies. Even with his excommunication lifted, he's still not allowed to be a bishop, though he can have the eucharist.

Williamson wasn't excommunicated for denying the Holocaust, or saying that women should be barefoot and pregnant, or any of the other dumb things he did. He was excommunicated for agreeing to be ordained without papal approval, as the Pius X people were trying to fragment the authority of the Holy See. (Benedict's predecessor, John Paul II, wasn't so keen on Holocaust denial either, but again, not the point.) After 20 years, Pope Benedict said, "Hey guys, this schism bites. Let's get you chumps back under the tent. But maybe you could shut your yaps?" And Williamson said, "Thanks, Benny! And hey, now that I have your attention, the Holocaust still didn't happen." And so the church is faced with using the nuclear option because of opinion rather than action, which isn't a particularly good spot to be in, and is quite amusing to watch.

Excommunication is a lot more like a prison sentence than a lightning bolt to the forehead. Normally, excommunication is lifted if the Pope believes you're no longer doing the stupid thing that you did to get excommunicated. Since the Pius X folks are still pandering their separatist agitprop, this particular Pope is a fool. (An infallible fool, to be sure.) But he is following the rules.

Mike

From:

Hmm. I believe

touchstone's definition is closer, but still not entirely right based on my rather skimmed reading of the Catholic Encyclopedia on excommunication. It's a pretty dense read, but here are a few relevant bits:

excommunication is the forfeiture of the spiritual privileges of ecclesiastical society

the Church excommunicates not only those who abandon the true faith to embrace schism or heresy, but likewise the members of heretical and schismatic communities who have been born therein. As to the latter, however, it is not question of personal excommunication; the censure overtakes them in their corporate capacity, as members of a community in revolt against the true Church of Jesus Christ.

Catholics, on the contrary, cannot be excommunicated unless for some personal, grievously offensive act.

Based on this, it sound like the Catholic Church can kick you out if it thinks that you're not really a part of it anyway. It can also kick you out if you're a Really Bad Person.

And apparently there are two types of excommunicated person: the vitandi and the tolerus. The later are tolerated; they can come to mass, say prayers and even be buried in a consecrated grave. The vitandi can not. If a vidandi comes to mass, the Mass must be halted. If they are buried in a consecrated grave, it becomes desecrated. Also, when you're on your deathbed, it looks like you can be absolved of almost anything.

My guess is that Williamson was excommunicated under the third papal excommunication power: "Schismatics and those who elude or obstinately withdraw from the authority of the reigning Roman pontiff." Once Williamson said "Oh, hey, We're willing to be under your authority again," the Pope pretty much had to take him back.

(Also,

touchstone, it looks like that for almost everything, deathbed confessionals are the exception. Excommunicated priests can hear them and have them count; excommunicated lay-people can give them and so on. Unless you're a priest absolving the sin from the person with whom you violated your oath of chastity. Then, you can get excommunicated just for that.)

This is like reading the Talmud, only less fun and more depressing.

From:

My point was that when you're excommunicated, you can still go to Heaven. From the Catholic Encyclopedia: "The excommunicated person, it is true, does not cease to be a Christian, since his baptism can never be effaced; he can, however, be considered as an exile from Christian society and as non-existent, for a time at least, in the sight of ecclesiastical authority." Williamson and company weren't suffering the loss of something beyond the pale, just something in the here and now.

The "vitandi" rule hasn't been in effect since 1983. The Code of Canon Law did away with that monstrosity. But excommunication still matters, as, for example, everyone who's ever gotten an abortion is automatically excommunicated by law, even if the church never finds out. (Not that anyone who could get an abortion could be a Catholic priest, but that's another matter.)

Mike

Edited Date: 2009-02-13 04:51 pm (UTC)

From:

Huh.

I think I need a legal degree before trying to read anymore. My eyes are crossing as it is.

If you're automatically excommunicated, but no one knows, does the falling tree make a sound?

From:

Huh. I hadn't realized they loosened it up; that was after Sunday school ended for me :) I thought it was still the case that the excommunicated couldn't receive sacraments (which, if one takes the orthodox view, has its own consequences). It sounds like you're considerably more up to date on this than I am. The basic point, though, it sounds like we're more or less together on - excommunication is levied for specific causes and is withdrawn if those causes cease to exist.

From:

No, you're right, they can't receive sacraments. Though the anointing of the sick isn't required to get to Heaven, the lack of sacraments could be a real problem if you think you're in need of penance before you line up for Heaven. Which maybe a jackass like Williamson might think, and maybe he might not.

As for the causes bit, yeah, if Williamson had said, "I renounce being a bishop, I don't know what the hell I was thinking," he'd have gotten de-excommunicated right away. He didn't do that. So why the Pope felt it was the right time to take the metaphorical chains off these guys is beyond me.

Mike

From:

As I recall, thinking you have no sins to worry about is usually one of the leading signs that you're wrong ;)

Regarding the timing...I remember hearing when he was a cardinal, he was deeply involved in trying to patch things up with Williamson's group. I don't know if that was because of a personal interest, or if he was assigned the task. That might have put it on his list?

From:

I think that question might be why folks are so mad, including a whole lot of cardinals. Why was this a cause of Benedict's? It may be Benedict's way of saying "Even the most vile will be forgiven by me," but he didn't articulate that. Instead the Vatican seemed surprised that people would be upset. Perhaps when the Pope goes to Israel in May, he'll understand the depth of people's anger.

Mike

From:

I gather from Wikipedia that the excommunication was latae sententiae, i.e., it was an automatic consequence of the act of illicit bishop ordination. I have no clue how and why that can or must be rescinded. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latae_sententiae)

From:

Interesting question. I suppose that if the ordination is given official sanction, it's no longer illicit. But that amounts to completely caving to the 'renegades', which does seem out of character. Puzzling.

From:

That's what I was saying about excommunication happening at the moment of sin. The church had no choice but to excommunicate the Pius X believers. It does have a choice as to whether to change its mind. There is no automatic rescinding mechanism other than a papal decree.

It's like a life sentence in prison. The governor or president can commute it, but it's not going to expire till you do.

Mike

From:

jordanwillow.livejournal.com

On a different but related topic, it has always bothered me that a Catholic cannot officially stop being a Catholic unless she's excommunicated or officially converts to another religion. Once you're baptized, they have you for life. (And beyond. ^_^) They can and will include you in their population counts and, well, it's just stuck to you, no matter what you believe or how you choose to identify yourself.

Is this the case with other religions?

From:

"Jewish" is an ethnicity, so you can't really get rid of it even if you convert to Islam or Santaria or anything else. Not that I want to, mind you.

From:

I admit I can't really claim to know how excommunication works. On the other hand, he's still called "bishop"; it seems like they could acknowledge the end of the heresy without recognizing the, er, embishoping.

Er, presuming the heresy ended. Or...no, wait, it wasn't heresy, it was...this stuff makes me dizzy.

From:

He's a bishop, just not in the eyes of the Catholic Church. Xemu's a president, but he doesn't get the nuclear launch codes. Though he should.

From:

Is he a bishop, though? He was (illicitly) made a bishop of the Catholic Church; when excommunicated, did he get to keep the title anyway? Or did he keep it because he was a bishop in a schismatic branch of the Church? And if the latter and he rejoins the main body of the Church, does that mean he's leaving the organization in which he's a bishop, and is thus no longer one?

From:

The Society of St. Pius X still exists, and it has bishops, and he's still one of them. The Church doesn't recognize SSPX's bishops as its own, but SSPX sure does. So he's a bishop, and is still suspended a divinis because of this. He has not stopped doing the thing for which he was excommunicated (and no one at Pope Central seems to think that's a contradiction), but he's still suspended from doing anything on behalf of the Catholic church.

To put it another way, the church has said he's not a heretic any more, but they aren't letting him near their pulpits just to be safe.

Mike

From:

jmjoyce.livejournal.com

*Sigh* And I wonder why I don't go to church anymore. Most of the Catholics, even priests, I've known in my life are the nicest, kindest people you'd ever want to meet. Then there's this guy. And don't get me started on the Catholic League and Bill Donohue, although even they seem mild compared to Williamson. Stuff like this just keeps pushing me closer to atheism, which I'm finding more and more appealing personally.

From:

And you know, that's the thing. I didn't want to make it some sort of "some of my best friends are Catholic" thing, but I'm angry at the Church because I know many if not most of its adherents are better than this. So I hate to see this being [some of] the stuff that gets the Official Seal of Approval.

From:

If you start from "This man controls whether you get into Heaven," you never end up anywhere good.

Mike

From:

arianhwyvar.livejournal.com

This man's opinions on women make me want to throw up and to hit him repeatedly with bricks.

From:

No word as to whether Williamson supports the return of stoning. Let me see if I can imagine what he might say on the subject:

"Tomorrow is the feastday of St. Valentine, where many dutiful husbands give their faithful wives a precious stone. This comes from the Old Testament tradition of 'lapidation,' a just response for when a woman sought the providences reserved for her husband. So remember, all you would-be lawyeresses and doctoresses, you have a choice: a precious stone for obedience, or a precious stoning for disobedience. Choose wisely."

Naw, I'm sure he wouldn't say anything as dumb as that.

From:

jadelennox

Hmm. I hate diamonds, and I don't particularly want to get killed. Could I get preciously stoned, instead?

From: