Sadly, you won't see pictures like this in "Catholic" countries in Europe. Because, of course, that would violate the "spirit" of Vatican II and its modernist, relativist and masonic inspired documents such as Dignitatis humanae. Sad.
I've always enjoyed your sense of humor.
Unfortunately for them, it's not working out so well. For example, abortion is legal there and they have one of the highest abortion rates in Europe.Is it good to be the state church of a state with evil laws? Is that uniting Christ and Belial? (obviously its good to be the state Church when the state upholds the natural law and true justice, etc.)
I love it! Can anyone name the clerics?
It's Archbishop Ieronymos II of Athens.
Greece is a mess. And so are the Eastern churches in schism. Come on, folks, some humor...
"Is it good to be the state church of a state with evil laws? Is that uniting Christ and Belial?"So do you agree that the Catholic Church was right to abdicate its position as the State Church of Italy in 1985 because Italy had, by then, legalized divorce and abortion? Many Traditionalists, then and now, have condemned that decision. And should the Catholic Church in Argentina now demand that it be removed as the state religion there because Argentina now has homosex marriage?And should the Catholic Church in Malta now dismantle its deep relationship with the state because Malta has legalized divorce?
Even more sad than the fact that this doesn't go in Catholic countries, as Francis pointed out, is the fact that this kind of church-state relationship has seemingly done nothing/very little to actually influence Greek politics or people in a positive way. Many Greek leaders are non-believers, agnostics, secularists, etc. A significant proportion of the Greek people are similarly unbelieving.Let's put it this way: we all know how bad France has become, but the "far-right" Christian candidate took a higher percentage - by a long shot - of the French population than similar Greek candidates. Not that one is to necessarily conclude that a higher percentage of the French are more traditional/religious than the Greeks, but again, the kind of church-state relationship in Greece seems to me to have had no really important, lasting effect.So, cheer up. Perhaps those "Catholic" countries aren't missing out on much after all.
OutsideObserver,I am unsure in the matter, which is why I asked. My gut says that it is at the very least scandalous, since it publicly implies that such laws are consonant with Catholicism.
As an Orthodox priest I can tell you the grass is not greener on the other side. We have a slew of problems.
The Orthodox are suffering from the same problems we are. They are a good reminder that modern, materialistic, relativism--not Vatican II, per se--is the problem.Vatican II was a high-jacked attempt to respond to the problem, but no one knows what the world would have looked like without it.
Nothing will change until the Pope in union with the Bishop's consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary as Our Lady has requested, the Greek Orthodox through the influence of the Russian Orthodox Church will be also converted when Russia is.
There is a political (economic) babylon and a religious babylon...
In another instance if Christ-Belial relations, shouldn't the Vatican State think about establishing its own code of civil law and stop following Italian law? It's a scandal that sodomy with sixteen-year-olds is perfectly legal there.
OutsideObserver,Yes; it/they should.Cardinal Manning saw a century and a half ago that the era of the fully-fledged secularist and objectively anti-Catholic government was right around the corner. In such historical circumstances, he assumed, if the Church were to maintain its “internal unity” and integrity, that it would be necessary for the Church to effect a “separation” from those worldly governments, and from their money. Far from being distressed at this providential turn of events which, after all, he wrote, was just a “return” to the original, us-against-the-world-and-the-pagan-state condition of the Church, Manning emphasized that the Church would “derive many graces” from that necessary separation. Among those graces:"Its pastors will be poor. They will receive nothing from princes, or courts, or governments. They will re-enter their apostolic liberty and detachment from all things: They will live of the altar by the oblations of the faithful. This will also rekindle the zeal, charity, and generosity of the Catholic people of the world. Pastors and people are held together by an intimate bond of charity and generous reciprocal service which consolidates the Church with the closest unity…"
Is it good to be the state church of a state with evil laws?A state without "evil laws" and which governed with perfect justice would have no need of a state Church. Among the roles of a state Church is to serve as the conscience of the state (which even the Church of England -- wayward as it is -- is now doing with respect to same-sex marriage in that country).In the case of Greece it is part of that country's organic law that the Greek people do, and should, adhere to the Orthodox Christian faith. The fact that abortion is legal is certainly inconsistent with the Greeks' profession of the Orthodox faith. But if the Church of Greece were to abandon her relationship with the state, and thus implicitly to forswear her role as the Church of the Greek people, it would serve only to weaken the position of the Church with the people at large, and would do nothing to bring about the repeal the "evil laws" that you decry.
'Sadly, you won't see pictures like this in "Catholic" countries in Europe. Because, of course, that would violate the "spirit" of Vatican II and its modernist, relativist and masonic inspired documents such as Dignitatis humanae. Sad.'Actually, if I recall correctly, they still do something similar in Malta (I think the PM has to pledge allegiance to the Catholic Church and publicly venerate the Crucifix).
The three chaps on the left are just fine. The problem is the one on the left who is on the right in the photograph. Of course, the French have just proved that they are just as crazy as the Greeks.P.K.T.P.
"Vatican II was a high-jacked attempt to respond to the problem, but no one knows what the world would have looked like without it".I agree with the first part of your comment. The schemas of the Council were definitely hijacked by the modernists, the liberals, the religious relativists and the indifferentists. Yet I'm more concerned with what the Catholic Church, and her two-thousand years of de-fide dogmas look like WITH Vatican II than what the world would look like without Vatican II.
To our dear New Catholic and Outsideobserver :Concordates are not forbidden by Vatican II, Dignitatis humanae (1965). Not at all. Many conventions have been signed up by the Holy See after the Council. Besides the 1984 Agreement with Italy is revising the 1929 concordate ; the civil effect of religious marriage is still there. Many guaranties are given to the Church and a protection to her churches. Moreover the title "religion of the state" granted in the Lateran concordate of 1929 was more symbolic than anything else : freedom of religion was a law under the Savoy dynasty and the Italian Republic was defined in 1946 as a secular state. However freedom of religion in GREECE precisely has been often harmed,especially against Catholics. It is going slightly better after the historical visit of pope John Paul II in this country but the Greek state has been condemned several times by European courts for not fully respecting religious freedom. In particular ID cards have the religion of the bearer printed on them and several Catholics have been mistreated by the police and authorities devoted to the Orthodox Church. In the USA you have the president being sworn in with an oath I think on the Bible. I remember well to have seen 2 pastors reciting prayers during the inauguration ceremony of the incumbent in 2008. Though separation between Churches and State and religious freedom are cardinal in the US constitution. Vatican II is asking to Catholics to be more concerned by the content of the legislation - to be as close as possible to Catholic guidelines/doctrine - than by the label stuck to the state. Traditionalists, like Bp Tissier de Mallerais, who keep looking only at the label of the state are making imho a big mistake. Finally whether the State is labeled "Catholic" or not is not linked with the crisis of the Church. Such an obsession is basically a waste of time and energy. Like for a bottle of wine, the sticker can be very nice and is adding a touch of esthetics but the quantity of liquid inside and its intrisic quality are much more important for the customers in the end.Convert people, make the earth Catholic, then it will be time to care about the label to be stuck on a state. Alsaticus
By the way, not to change the subject but has anyone noticed that, aside from an emergency appointment of an apostolic administrator in Latvia, the Pope has this week made zero appointments of diocesan bishops, zero appointments of auxiliary bishops and zero appointments of any kind? What on earth is going on? Has he entirely stopped governing the Church? In the past, these slowdowns suggest work on something else. It's either the S.S.P.X or more Vatileaks, or both. Meanwhile, the curia tries to wear him down, hoping to kill him, no doubt, with yet another trip, this to to Emilia Romagna. Let's pray that our Blessed Lord gives him the time he needs to seal the breach with the Society. Bishop Fellay? You should soon be responding to the Pope's 'evaluation'. You told us to ignore what anyone says except the Vatican or Menzinger. Well, Menzingen said "seven to ten days". Day Ten is Monday.P.K.T.P.
OutsideObserver said, "Italy... Argentina... Malta..."You left out Ireland. They did that themselves. When they rewrote their constitution in the 90s, they wrote the Church right out of it along with any reference to the Roman Faith.State church/religion, whatever. Unless it's part of the national life and infrastructure, it's really rather meaningless. P.K.T.P. said, "The problem is the one on the right in the photograph. Of course, the French have just proved that they are just as crazy as the Greeks."Yes, and the same for us Americans for voting for Obama!
Cosmos is exactly right.
Here in Spain, although the official institutions are madly secularized, all members of the Government swear their charges before the Scriptures and the Crucifix. Sadly, they can choose not to mention Our Lord in the pledge.
Vlad Pepes said, "Here in Spain, although the official institutions are madly secularized, all members of the Government swear their charges before the Scriptures and the Crucifix. Sadly, they can choose not to mention Our Lord in the pledge."That is sad and also what makes such things meaningless. At that point it becomes mockery.!...
"Meanwhile, the curia tries to wear him down, hoping to kill him, no doubt, with yet another trip, this to to Emilia Romagna". I agree P.K.T.P.This modernist cabal in the Curia, and elsewhere in the episcopacy, would like nothing more IMHO to see (God forbid) The Holy Father suffer some terminal issue. He's a threat (even though His Holiness has had modernist theology himself, yet maybe realizes that things have gone too far) to their affirmation of the modernist and relativist NWO as promulgated at Vatican II. These people are no better than Judas. He needs our prayers.
I hope I am not the only one who is scandalized at the spectacle of 'Traditionalist' Catholics suddenly praising separation of Church and State and Vatican II whenever the Orthodox Churches get mentioned. I mean, gee, we don't believe what the Orthodox teach in contradiction to the Catholic faith but that doesn't mean that we have to go to the extreme length of proving that they've got or done nothing right, even in those matters that we Traditionalists share with them!
The key problem with Church states, even when the states *are* good, is that it gives rise to Cultural Catholicism, Cultural Anglicanism, Cultural Lutheranism, and Cultural Orthodox. People who never enter a church except for weddings and funerals and couldn't name a single one of the 10 commandments (besides "love your neighbour as yourself" and "be nice") have no problems calling themselves Catholic/Anglican/Lutheran/Orthodox because to them religion is equal to nationalism.To be effective, the Church must be a thorn on the side of the secular rulers, and have no problems with doing as St Ambrose did, in excommunicating the emperor. The laity also have to be a thorn in the side of the state, since without the laity, the emperor would no scruple about defying Ambrose. If nationalism equals religion, religion gets watered down "to be practical".IMO, in an ideal state, Catholicism is protected and has veto power on the government affirmed by the constitution. This ensures that citizens are protected from evil laws and ensures that nationalism is never confused with religion since in some sense religion is codified as being anti-nationalistic.
Alsaticus, Alsaticus... I didn't say anything! I know you also have a better sense of humor than that, dear friend.
Yes I recall seeing the scene 3 times in the last year!I do love the Orthodox...most truely. Look as a Latin Rite Trad who studied Byzantine history and have visited Constantinople we Latins have NOT been as good and kind to them. The loss of Byzantium to the Turk is enough to pull ones eyes out in misery.
Augustinus,No need to be scandalized. "Traditionalists" -- like Cardinal Manning -- are perfectly free to be, are even at times obliged to be, "separationists." It depends, obviously, on which Church/church and what type of state you're talking about. In a non- or anti-Catholic state, traditionalists should push for a healthy and honest separation between the State and the Church, as Cardinal Manning did.
"The key problem with Church states, even when the states *are* good, is that it gives rise to Cultural Catholicism, Cultural Anglicanism, Cultural Lutheranism, and Cultural Orthodox."It will happen even when there is no state Church."People who never enter a church except for weddings and funerals and couldn't name a single one of the 10 commandments (besides "love your neighbour as yourself" and "be nice") have no problems calling themselves Catholic/Anglican/Lutheran/Orthodox because to them religion is equal to nationalism."Would you rather that they never entered a church at all? "To be effective, the Church must be a thorn on the side of the secular rulers, and have no problems with doing as St Ambrose did, in excommunicating the emperor. The laity also have to be a thorn in the side of the state, since without the laity, the emperor would no scruple about defying Ambrose. If nationalism equals religion, religion gets watered down "to be practical"."Talk about not knowing your history! St. Ambrose defied Emperor Theodosius precisely at the time when the Catholic Church had the position of the religion of the state. Same thing with St. John Chrysostom and countless other saints who defied unjust nobles and kings. Prior to Vatican II, the Magisterium of the Catholic Church never saw anything contradictory between espousing the need for the State to support the Church and the need for the Church to speak out against the excesses of the State.
Let's be honest. We are all a mess. Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants. Its up to individuals to live the Faith of the Fathers with integrity. The old models are dying and passing away.Its sad to say but nobody has their house in sufficent order to point fingers. These outward signs, divorced from a true and living faith, mean nothing and could actually be an afront to God. The time of catacomb Christianity is upon us. Serve the Lord with faithfulness and holiness in your homes and parishes and let the world go the way it so desperately wants to.How I make sense of the current state of the world and the Church is through a quote from JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Ring;s series. “The world is all grown strange…How shall a man judge what to doin such times?” asked Eomer.“As he ever has judged,” said Aragorn. “Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man’s part to discern them,as much in the Golden Woodas in his own house.”
"The old models are dying and passing away"True enough, Andrew, but this does not mean that the principles behind the old models ought to be discarded as well, especially in the case of principles that were upheld by the Magisterium.
Carlis:It is true that at times we need to be 'separationists', but NOT on principle, and more as an exception to the norm, brought about by the need to defend Catholic truth. Furthermore, regarding the idea that we ought always and everywhere, as a matter of principle, to combat the unity of (non-Catholic) churches and State in countries that are not Catholic, simply because these churches are not Catholic: As long as the Catholic Church is free to serve its faithful and to spread its teachings (even if there are some mild 'restrictions'), it is not necessarily prudent to want to bring down the dominant church or ecclesial community in the said country. The fact of the matter is that in most such cases the alternative to the collapse of the non-Catholic 'State Church' is not the magical conversion of everyone to Catholicism, but the triumph of secularist or anti-religious ideologies.
Ok folks. Tell me why are the magisterium of liberal nuns allowed to spew their heresies while the SSPX is considered schismatic on some level? Before you criticize the Orthodox clean up your own household of Faith. Amen.
We don't know what the world would have looked like without Vatican II?Is that supposed to be some sort of oblique defense of the council and it's aftermath? What kind of reasoning is that?Can one of the three or so commenters who either stated or seconded this thought clarify?
JTLiuzza - you are right of coursethomas t.: "Bravo to Cosmos. Exactly right. Things may have actually turned out worse without it."- are you kidding??Alsaticus:No, not irrelevant - for two reasons:1) it´s not only a "label" - it´s a question of principle, of Cath. doctrine. There is the question what is ideal and also required by doctrine. In that sense even a label is a good reminder how things idealiter should be, were the truth is, what the rights of CHRIST the KING are, what normally should influence the laws.2) Even on a pure practical level it is not irrelevant or a pure label. Well, in some states that might be true (but even there it is good for the reason given in 1),But there are / were countries where it would have/has/had a real - negative - effect not to have the Catholic Church as the Religion of State (anymore). I think for example of Columbia. (Many souls now will probably get lost because of the agressive protestant propaganda now)And then we can add 3) - combined with 1) - that even if it´s now only a label it remembers that the true religion should have more public influence and perhaps over time we can restore more influence, so that it is not only a label anymore but falls under 2) then!Why beeing so un-enthusiastic in restoring the rights of CHRIST our King? - It is not impossible! Let´s fight and work!A pesimist and capitulating attitude is not good, we have to have high goals! And we have to hold up the ideal as well as the principel, the doctrine (of the Social Kingship of Christ)!Liberal Catholicism began with exacty that minimalistic and pessimistic attitude.
To Picard who draws a wrong conclusion :"Why beeing so un-enthusiastic in restoring the rights of CHRIST our King? - It is not impossible! Let´s fight and work!A pesimist and capitulating attitude is not good, we have to have high goals! And we have to hold up the ideal as well as the principel, the doctrine (of the Social Kingship of Christ)!" ------------------If you read my conclusion, I'm just saying that : setting aside the false question of the labeled "Catholic state" - there is just one in the world i.e. the State of the City of the Vatican (1929) -, is in no way connected to the doctrine of social Kingship of Christ. Post Vatican II Magisterium is still asserting the social doctrine of the Church unchanged. Try to sell the Inquisition and the state "right" to torture or expel non Catholics in the USA, in the E.U., China, India, Russia etc. You may end in a lunatic asylum very quickly. Portugal was a so-called "Catholic state" in the XVIIIth under Marquis of Pombal and nevertheless persecuted Catholics by the thousands (re the Jesuits) with the active complicity of the king of Spain, another "Catholic state" then. Even France which was then too a "Catholic state" in name and in the law, with official prosecution of Protestants. Both Iberic kingdoms were responsible on putting a brake on evangelization in the XVIIIth. On the contrary, Catholicism in Africa was able to grow in a spectacular way under a mostly secular regime in the XIXth to XXIst centuries, though not aggressively "secularist". Just the same for the USA etc. Besides "Dignitatis humanae" is not excluding a "Catholic state" - in Pius IX's definition i.e. exclusively Catholic - but only in a 100% Catholic country. The Declaration and post-Vatican II Magisterium are not against a positive legal status for the Church btw. John Paul II asked for it all his life. The social kingship of Christ is not given by a mere label but is to be built day after day : it's a goal ahead of us. This goal, Vatican II is taking it very seriously and never endorsed Liberal Catholicism. The whole Catholic Church is working for this goal everywhere in numerous good works before Vatican II like after. India was never a "Catholic state" but it doesn't prevent the admirable work of Mother Teresa among a quantity of others : she and them was/are the living stones of the social kingship of Christ.Alsaticus
Post a Comment