Perfect Storm? After a quiet summer, clouds gather over Rome...

Inside the Vatican ^ | September 24, 2009 | Robert Moynihan

[NYer]

A storm is about to be unleashed on the Pope, the Vatican, and, by extension, the Catholic Church.

The first drops of rain have just fallen, with public accusations that the Pope lied this winter in connection with the "Williamson affair." (see below)
 

============================

What is it about?

 

Whether this storm will "blow over," or intensify into a "perfect storm," only time will tell.

But whatever happens, there is this to keep in mind: many, inside and outside of the Church, would like the Church's traditional liturgy, known as the Latin Mass -- the old liturgy celebrated up until 1970, and two years ago designated by Pope Benedict XVI as the "extraordinary rite" of the Mass -- to disappear.

 

And they are irritated that Benedict -- against many and vociferous objections --  "restored" the old liturgy, which many thought had been buried definitively.

 

As strange as it may seem, this battle is in part about that -- about the survival of the Church's old liturgy -- about her way of worshipping God.

 

But when I say this, I do not mean to downplay other, quite obvious concerns, for example, the tense situation in the Middle East, or in the world economy.

 

I mean to say that, on a fundamental level, it is not simply a political or economic battle, as important as political and economic factors are, but a spiritual battle.

 

=============================== 

Is Rome alone?
 

And at a time like this, when many forces in the West (the European Union, the new US administration)  seem to be aligning themselves in favor of a thoroughly secularized "new world order," the ally most helpful to Rome may well be the ally who still celebrates a divine liturgy which has not been modernized: the Orthodox.

 

And the most numerous and powerful of the Orthodox are the Russians.

 

In this perspective, these attacks on the Pope and the Vatican may drive Rome to ally herself, after a thousand years of separation, with Contantinople, and with Moscow -- reuniting the "three Romes"...

 

====================================

The allegation this morning is that Vatican officials (but not the Pope) lied when they said this winter that no one in the Vatican knew about Bishop Richard Williamson's views about the Holocaust when the Pope decided to lift his excommication on January 24.

However, this allegation has been exploited by the Church's current antagonist in Italy, Prime Minsiter Silvio Berlusconi, through his media empire, to suggest that the Pope, too, lied.

Here is the headline being run right now on Google news:

 

Swedish TV: Vatican knew about Holocaust-denier

Here is a link to the entire story:
 
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iSmeUYxiL3cK2bBxxIHl9aTafLoAD9AT13984
 
Here are the first few few paragraphs to give you the gist of what is being said:

 

By KARL RITTER (AP) – 4 hours ago

STOCKHOLM — A Swedish TV program to be aired Wednesday (Note: today) claims that top Vatican officials knew that an ultraconservative British bishop was a Holocaust-denier when his excommunication was lifted in January. The program, which was obtained by The Associated Press prior to broadcast, could add new fuel to the controversy over Bishop Richard Williamson.

Jews and Catholics worldwide were outraged after Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication of Williamson, along with three other ultraconservative bishops, in an attempt to bring dissidents back into the mainstream church.

The order, dated Jan. 21, came as Sweden's SVT aired an interview recorded two months earlier in which Williamson said he didn't believe any Jews were killed in gas chambers during World War II.
Vatican officials have said they didn't know about the interview at the time. Benedict later condemned Williamson's remarks and spoke out against anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.

Yet in a follow-up report, SVT says the Vatican had been informed of Williamson's Holocaust-denial shortly after the interview was recorded in November. It doesn't suggest, however, that the pope knew about the remarks.

The program singles out Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, who had been leading efforts to heal the schism with the ultraconservative Society of St. Pius X. The Vatican announced in July that Castrillon Hoyos was stepping down after reaching the customary retirement age of 80.

The SVT program says Sweden's Catholic diocese informed the apostolic nuncio — the Vatican envoy to Sweden — about Williamson's remarks and that he in turn informed Vatican officials, including Castrillon Hoyos...

 

===================

The Italian Front: "He Lied"

 

The second allegation is that the Pope himself knew.

 

This allegation made headlines today in Italy, where the Catholic Church and the Italian government of Prime Minister Berlusconi have been sparring for months over Berlusconi's immiration policies and his alleged sexual impropriety. This morning, Berlusconi (or those close to him) took the gloves off.

 

(Here, in better times, Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi greets Pope Benedict XVI in Cagliari on the Italian island of Sardinia in this September 7, 2008,  photo -- CNS photo/Reuters)

 

For the first time in the many months of acrimony, Berlusconi (or his associates) directly attacked the Pope. This escalates the battle.

 

Il Giornale, a newspaper owned by Berlusconi's family, carried the exaggerated headline "He Lied" ("Ha mentito"), referring to the Pope and his handling of the "Williamson affair."

 

(Below is a photo from three weeks ago of women reading Il Giornale. The Sept. 3 newspaper front page has a picture of Dino Boffo, editor of the Catholic newspaper Avvenire. Boffo resigned from Avvenire, the newspaper of the Italian bishops' conference, in a row that has strained relations between the Vatican and the Italian government -- CNS photo/Stefano Rellandini, Reuters)  

Here are a few lines from a British newspaper today explaining this story:

 

Silvio Berlusconi turns his guns on Pope Benedict XVI
 

The Italian newspaper Il Giornale, owned by the family of Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi, carries a headline today dominated by the words “Ha mentito” - “he lied”, referring to Pope Benedict XVI. The paper is busy stirring up trouble over the claims by Swedish TV, due to be aired tonight, that the Vatican knew in advance about the Holocaust-denying background of Bishop Richard Williamson before his excommunication was lifted.

The words “he lied” are admittedly taken from the programme. But it’s a malicious allegation: Benedict has told no lies whatsoever regarding this matter, even if Vatican officials working for him have a case to answer.

The background you need to know is that Il Giornale has been engaged in a furious battle with Vatican Radio and the Catholic newspaper Avvenire, whose editor Dino Boffo it forced to resign after claiming he was a homosexual with a police record. Avvenire, not coincidentally, had consistently opposed Berlusconi, with the backing of the Italian Bishops’ Conference.

That struggle, which is part of a left-right, secular-Catholic battle at the heart of Italian society and government, has already damaged relations between the gruesomely oversexed Berlusconi and the Holy Father...

 

Here is a link to the complete article: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100011034/berlusconi-turns-his-guns-on-pope-benedict-xvi/

 

=====================================

 

One consideration is the Italian situation.

 

There isn't space or time here to go into the entire sordid affair. Suffice it to say that a rift between the Vatican and the government of Silvio Berlusconi has now become a chasm.

 

Since the Vatican, humanly speaking, is a tiny state entirely surrounded by Italian territory, it is naturally always a hope of the Vatican to be on close and friendly terms with the Italian government.

 

Therefore, this deteriorating relationship with the Italian governement led by Berlusconi is a real concern.

 

Here is a link to an Associated Press article on the background to this story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090906/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_scandal_3

And here is a link to a Time magazine story on Berlusconi: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1923076,00.html
==============================

 

A second consideration is the relationship of the Vatican to the world Jewish community.

 

The re-emergence of the "Williamson affair" under these circumstances, with new allegations, shows that the "affair" was not settled in March, when the Pope on March 12 issued a dramatic letter of apology to the bishops of the Church.

 

Here are some key lines from that March 12 letter:

 

"An unforeseen mishap for me was the fact that the Williamson case came on top of the remission of the excommunication," the Pope wrote.
 

"I have been told that consulting the information available on the internet would have made it possible to perceive the problem early on. I have learned the lesson that in the future in the Holy See we will have to pay greater attention to that source of news. I was saddened by the fact that even Catholics who, after all, might have had a better knowledge of the situation, thought they had to attack me with open hostility.

 

"Precisely for this reason I thank all the more our Jewish friends, who quickly helped to clear up the misunderstanding and to restore the atmosphere of friendship and trust which – as in the days of Pope John Paul II – has also existed throughout my pontificate and, thank God, continues to exist."

 

(Here is a link to the official tect of that letter: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica_en.html)

 

Will the world Jewish community come to the Pope's defense?

============================  

A third consideration is the relationship between traditional Catholics, now un-excommunicated, and those we may call "conciliar" Catholics.

 

Is this case only about Williamson and his views, or are the "conciliar" Catholics actually unwilling to accept the readmission of "traditionalist" Catholics into communion with Rome, and themselves?

 

In this regard, a question arrises: who is really behind the re-emergence of attacks on the Pope for his January 24 action in un-excommunicating the four Lefebvrist bishops?

It isn't fully clear.

 

But it has been reported in the La Stampa of Milan, Italy, that the Catholic bishop of Stockholm, Anders Arborelius, is in a very cordial relationship with the Swedish TV -- and that he is a firm opponent of the Society of St. Pius X (the SSPX).

 

This report can be found at: http://www.lastampa.it/_web/cmstp/tmplrubriche/giornalisti/grubrica.asp?ID_blog=242&ID_articolo=921&ID_sezione=524&sezione=%20teresa

 

Arborelius said Wednesday in a statement posted on his diocese's website that he was aware of negationist remarks Williamson made to an investigative news program filmed by Swedish public television SVT in November 2008 and which aired on January 21, 2009.

Arborelius wrote: "The content of the interview with Richard Williamson ... was sent to the Vatican in November 2008, forewarning that the program with the Holocaust denial would be broadcast on January 21, 2009.

"We, at the diocese office in Stockholm, as we always do in matters of the Church, had forwarded the information we had about SSPX and Richard Williamson, including what we knew about the content in the interview Uppdrag Granskning had with him, to the Vatican," Arborelius said.

"I want to underline that forwarding information to the Vatican is pure routine, and not something exceptional for this case," he added.

 

(Of course, it is evident that such information could possibly have been held up on one desk or another, and never reached the Pope or his top advisors.)  

====================================

A fourth consideration is the relationship of the Roman Catholic Church to the world's Orthodox Churches.

 

It became clear last week, during a very cordial visit to Rome by a representative of the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow, that relations between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, especially Russian Orthodoxy, at least on the surface, are much improved over the past few years.

Here are excerpts from an account of that visit I wrote for the Monday, September 21 edition of the Zenit news agency:
 

Recent Meeting Could Mark Turning Point

On September 18, inside Castel Gandolfo, the Pope's summer palace about 30 miles outside Rome, a Russian Orthodox Archbishop named Hilarion Alfeyev (photo), 43 (a scholar, theologian, expert on the liturgy, composer and lover of music), met with Benedict XVI, 82 (also a scholar, theologian, expert on the liturgy and lover of music), for almost two hours, according to informed sources.

 

(There are as yet no "official" sources about this meeting -- the Holy See has still not released an official communiqué.)

The silence suggests that what transpired was important -- perhaps so important that the Holy See thinks it isn't yet prudent to reveal publicly what was discussed.

But there are numerous "signs" that the meeting was remarkably harmonious...

In memory of the visit, Archbishop Hilarion gave the Pope a pectoral cross, made in workshops of Russian Orthodox Church...

It is especially significant, in this context, that Hilarion, Patriarch Kirill's "Foreign Minister," has some of the same deep interests as Benedict XVI: the liturgy, and music.

"As a 15-year-old boy I first entered the sanctuary of the Lord, the Holy of Holies of the Orthodox Church,” Hilarion once wrote about the Orthodox liturgy. “But it was only after my entrance into the altar that the 'theourgia,' the mystery, and 'feast of faith' began, which continues to this very day.

"After my ordination, I saw my destiny and main calling in serving the Divine Liturgy. Indeed, everything else, such as sermons, pastoral care and theological scholarship were centered around the main focal point of my life -- the liturgy."

These words seem to echo the feelings and experiences of Benedict XVI, who has written that the liturgies of Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday in Bavaria when he was a child were formative for his entire being, and that his writing on the liturgy (one of his books is entitled "Feast of Faith") is the most important to him of all his scholarly endeavors.

"Orthodox divine services are a priceless treasure that we must carefully guard," Hilarion has written. "I have had the opportunity to be present at both Protestant and Catholic services, which were, with rare exceptions, quite disappointing… Since the liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council, services in some Catholic churches have become little different from Protestant ones."

Again, these words of Hilarion seem to echo Benedict XVI's own concerns. The Pope has made it clear that he wishes to reform the Catholic Church's liturgy, and preserve what was contained in the old liturgy and now risks being lost.

Hilarion has cited the Orthodox St. John of Kronstadt approvingly. St. John of Kronstadt wrote: "The Church and its divine services are an embodiment and realization of everything in Christianity... It is the divine wisdom, accessible to simple, loving hearts."

These words echo words written by Cardinal Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, who often said that the liturgy is a "school" for the simple Christian, imparting the deep truths of the faith even to the unlearned through its prayers, gestures and hymns.

Hilarion in recent years has become known for his musical compositions, especially for Christmas and for Good Friday, celebrating the birth and the Passion of Jesus Christ. These works have been performed in Moscow and in the West, in Rome in March 2007 and in Washington DC in December 2007.

Closer relations between Rome and Moscow, then, could have profound implications also for the cultural and liturgical life of the Church in the West. There could be a renewal of Christian art and culture, as well as of faith... 
 

(Here is a link to the complete article: http://www.zenit.org/article-26932?l=english.)

====================================

As I said at the outset, the "Williamson affair," and the effort to ascertain what the Vatican knew, and when, about Williamson's views, may continue to dominate news headlines, or it may pass away into silence. Time will tell.

 

But the re-emergence of the issue reminds us that there is a larger battle occurring, a battle for the "deposit of the faith," a battle for our tradition and the beliefs handed down to us from the Apostles, and it is that battle that we should be aware of and concerned about.

Last week, I had a wonderful and productive meeting in New Rochelle, New York, with Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, 86, who has given me some documents which may help me to understand better the history of the Church in our time.

 

I will be returning to Rome soon, God willing, and reporting on these documents, and on other matters which I have left unfinished.

 

====================================
 

“He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God's providence to lead him aright.” —Blaise Pascal (French mathematician, philosopher, physicist and writer, 1623-1662)

[resources: Inside the Vatican]

[PatriotGirl827]

I hope it really is soon. I can’t wait.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

[Desdemona]

This article brings up something a good friend who is a music director in a local Russian Orthodox parish and I talked about this morning - the need for majesty in liturgy. Yes, there are some differences in theology (in the larger scheme of things, not all that much - some pretty thorny sticking points, though), but majestic liturgy and the sense that we do this in honor of a being that is not of this world is something pretty major we do have in common.

It seems that the entire objection to the SSPX excommunication lifting smacks of some of the same tactics the left uses ALL THE TIME against conservatives politcally everywhere. This is a battle against the MAJESTY that is our worship. Make God just one of us, and the propect of eternal damnation doesn't strike fear in anyone. But, with the majesty, and the solemnness, liturgy becomes other-worldly and inspiring. We want to live up to God's image. Why would anyone fight against that? Smoke of Satan...?

[Antoninus]

He who eats of the Pope will die of it.

Remember that, Silvio.

[cpforlife.org]

“friend who is a music director...the need for majesty in liturgy”

Amen to that.

One parish I frequent just presented a new music variation for the Lamb of God. It sounds like it was based on Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue. It wasn't disrespectful, it just DID NOT belong.

In my limited experience of the Liturgy, the Mass at the Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament at Our Lady of the Angels Monastery in Hanceville AL, Mother Angelica’s home, is IMO the best.*

It’s been 8 years since I’ve been so they may have gone to the Tridentine but the last time I was there I believe the Liturgy they used is known as the "real" Paul VI Mass: readings in English but much of the Liturgy is in Latin: the Preparation, always Eucharistic Prayer I in Latin facing the Tabernacle with Incense and candle bearers. Several Monks and nuns lay face down in worship. I almost started crying when I first witnessed this and I'm a “tough guy”.

Communion is at a rail and the Priest actually says Corpus Christi.

The music is incredible—always traditional sacred music with the nun’s choir and the huge pipe organ and sometimes violins.

Seconds after Mass ends Eucharistic Adoration begins: The second largest Monstrance in the world is unveiled EIGHT FEET TALL about 20 feet above the Tabernacle. The Choir of Nuns also immediently starts; w the violins and organ are very inspiring. I watched several people get quite emotional, old and not so old.

Benediction is televised live from the Shrine on Sundays at 5pm CENTRAL on EWTN.

I guess I need to go back for a retreat.

* http://www.olamshrine.com/

[kosta50]

Is that a picture of God the Father in human form? Isn’t that blasphemy?

[Salvation]

A priest, not even the Pope, can reveal the content of any confession.

Read a book written by a priest about this: “The Seal” by Fr. Timothy Mockaitis

[Salvation]

Oops, that should have been,

NO priest, not even the Pope, can reveal the content of any confession.

Read a book written by a priest about this: “The Seal” by Fr. Timothy Mockaitis

[melsec]

“As strange as it may seem, this battle is in part about that — about the survival of the Church’s old liturgy — about her way of worshipping God.”

I am sorry but this is BS. If a group of, seemingly evergrowing, Catholics wish to worship in this manner because they feel closer to God and the Church this way then who is to deny them this. This is more about the progressives getting rid of any vestiges of the “Old” Catholic Church.

And BTW I do not attend the Latin Mass but I fully support those who wish to.

Blessings

Mel

[Traianus]

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/martin_luther_on_mary.htm

Martin Luther, Founder of the Reform, Speaks on Mary

In his sermon of August 15, 1522, the last time Martin Luther preached on the Feast of the Assumption, he stated:

There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know. And since the Holy Spirit has told us nothing about it, we can make of it no article of faith . . . It is enough to know that she lives in Christ.

The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart. (Sermon, September 1, 1522).

[She is the] highest woman and the noblest gem in Christianity after Christ . . . She is nobility, wisdom, and holiness personified. We can never honor her enough. Still honor and praise must be given to her in such a way as to injure neither Christ nor the Scriptures. (Sermon, Christmas, 1531).

No woman is like you. You are more than Eve or Sarah, blessed above all nobility, wisdom, and sanctity. (Sermon, Feast of the Visitation, 1537).

One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God’s grace . . . Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ . . . Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God. (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521).

Luther gives the Blessed Virgin the exalted position of “Spiritual Mother” for Christians:

It is the consolation and the superabundant goodness of God, that man is able to exult in such a treasure. Mary is his true Mother .. (Sermon, Christmas, 1522)

Mary is the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all of us even though it was Christ alone who reposed on her knees . . . If he is ours, we ought to be in his situation; there where he is, we ought also to be and all that he has ought to be ours, and his mother is also our mother. (Sermon, Christmas, 1529).

Martin Luther had the belief of Mary’s Immaculate Conception, Luther’s words follow:

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).

She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin- something exceedingly great. For God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. (Personal {”Little”} Prayer Book, 1522).

Martin Luther on Mary’s Perpetual Virginity

Here are some of the founders of refom commenting on Mary:

Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary’s virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that.

{Luther’s Works, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan (vols. 1-30) & Helmut T. Lehmann (vols. 31-55), St. Louis: Concordia Pub. House (vols. 1-30); Philadelphia: Fortress Press (vols. 31-55), 1955, v.22:23 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539) }

Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that ‘brothers’ really mean ‘cousins’ here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.

{Pelikan, ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539) }

A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ . . .

{Pelikan, ibid.,v.45:199 / That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew (1523) }

Scripture does not say or indicate that she later lost her virginity . . .

When Matthew [1:25] says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her . . . This babble . . . is without justification . . . he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom.

{Pelikan, ibid.,v.45:206,212-3 / That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew (1523) }

Editor Jaroslav Pelikan (Lutheran) adds:

Luther . . . does not even consider the possibility that Mary might have had other children than Jesus. This is consistent with his lifelong acceptance of the idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary.

{Pelikan, ibid.,v.22:214-5}

“. . . she is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin. . . . God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. . . . God is with her, meaning that all she did or left undone is divine and the action of God in her. Moreover, God guarded and protected her from all that might be hurtful to her.”
Ref: Luther’s Works, American edition, vol. 43, p. 40, ed. H. Lehmann, Fortress, 1968

“. . . she is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God. . . . it is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God.”
Ref: Sermon on John 14. 16: Luther’s Works (St. Louis, ed. Jaroslav, Pelican, Concordia. vol. 24. p. 107)

“Christ our Savior was the real and natural fruit of Mary’s virginal womb. . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that.”
(REf: On the Gospel of St. John: Luther’s Works, vol. 22. p. 23, ed. Jaroslav Pelican, Concordia, 1957)

“Men have crowded all her glory into a single phrase: The Mother of God. No one can say anything greater of her, though he had as many tongues as there are leaves on the trees.” (From the Commentary on the Magnificat.)

Commentaries on Luther

“. . . in the resolutions of the 95 theses Luther rejects every blasphemy against the Virgin, and thinks that one should ask for pardon for any evil said or thought against her.” (Ref: Wm. J. Cole, “Was Luther a Devotee of Mary?” in Marian Studies 1970, p. 116:)

“In Luther’s Explanation of the Magnificat in 1521, he begins and ends with an invocation to Mary, which Wright feels compelled to call ‘surprising’”.
(David F. Wright, Chosen by God: Mary in Evangelical Perspecive, London: Marshall Pickering, 1989, p. 178, Cited from Faith & Reason, Spring 1994, p. 6.)

Martin Luther defends the Eucharist

In 1529 Martin Luther engaged the question of transubstantiation in the famous conference at Marburg with Zwingli and other Swiss theologians; he maintained his view that Christ is present in the bread and wine of the Eucharist.
Other Reformers on Mary’s Perpetual Virginity
John Calvin

Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s ‘brothers’ are sometimes mentioned.

{Harmony of Matthew, Mark & Luke, sec. 39 (Geneva, 1562), vol. 2 / From Calvin’s Commentaries, tr. William Pringle, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1949, p.215; on Matthew 13:55}

[On Matt 1:25:] The inference he [Helvidius] drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband . . . No just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words . . . as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called ‘first-born’; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin . . . What took place afterwards the historian does not inform us . . . No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.

{Pringle, ibid., vol. I, p. 107}

Under the word ‘brethren’ the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.

{Pringle, ibid., vol. I, p. 283 / Commentary on John, (7:3) }
Huldreich Zwingli

He turns, in September 1522, to a lyrical defense of the perpetual virginity of the mother of Christ . . . To deny that Mary remained ‘inviolata’ before, during and after the birth of her Son, was to doubt the omnipotence of God . . . and it was right and profitable to repeat the angelic greeting - not prayer - ‘Hail Mary’ . . . God esteemed Mary above all creatures, including the saints and angels - it was her purity, innocence and invincible faith that mankind must follow. Prayer, however, must be . . . to God alone . . .

‘Fidei expositio,’ the last pamphlet from his pen . . . There is a special insistence upon the perpetual virginity of Mary.

{G. R. Potter, Zwingli, London: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976, pp.88-9,395 / The Perpetual Virginity of Mary . . ., Sep. 17, 1522}

Zwingli had printed in 1524 a sermon on ‘Mary, ever virgin, mother of God.’

{Thurian, ibid., p.76}

I have never thought, still less taught, or declared publicly, anything concerning the subject of the ever Virgin Mary, Mother of our salvation, which could be considered dishonourable, impious, unworthy or evil . . . I believe with all my heart according to the word of holy gospel that this pure virgin bore for us the Son of God and that she remained, in the birth and after it, a pure and unsullied virgin, for eternity.

{Thurian, ibid., p.76 / same sermon}
Heinrich Bullinger

Bullinger (d. 1575) . . . defends Mary’s perpetual virginity . . . and inveighs against the false Christians who defraud her of her rightful praise: ‘In Mary everything is extraordinary and all the more glorious as it has sprung from pure faith and burning love of God.’ She is ‘the most unique and the noblest member’ of the Christian community . . .

‘The Virgin Mary . . . completely sanctified by the grace and blood of her only Son and abundantly endowed by the gift of the Holy Spirit and preferred to all . . . now lives happily with Christ in heaven and is called and remains ever-Virgin and Mother of God.’

{In Hilda Graef, Mary: A history of Doctrine and Devotion, combined ed. of vols. 1 & 2, London: Sheed & Ward, 1965, vol.2, pp.14-5}
John Wesley (Founder of Methodism)

The Blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as when she brought him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.

{”Letter to a Roman Catholic” / In This Rock, Nov. 1990, p.25}

[dsc]

“You mean the 30,000+ different interpretations of the Word of God”

Who counted?

[MarineMomJ]

The Holy Ghost cannot be portrayed in human form. That’s blasphemy. The Holy Ghost is usually shown in the image of a dove or a white cloud. God the Father, however, is usually portrayed as a kindly, but powerful old man with a long white beard. Stereotypical, yes, but we get the point, a fatherly figure.

[kosta50]

God the Father, however, is usually portrayed as a kindly, but powerful old man with a long white beard. Stereotypical, yes, but we get the point, a fatherly figure.

So, then, the iconoclasts were right after all. God the Father has no body and cannot be portrayed as a man. Pictures such as Michelangelo's "finer of God" are so Greek pagan I can't even begin to tell you.

Show me one official Church document that says God the Father can be portrayed on an icon. One can even argue that Michelangelo's paintings are "art," but icons are holy images (that's what icon means) that are actually venerated.

[stfassisi]

Is that a picture of God the Father in human form? Isn’t that blasphemy?

Thanks for pointing that out,I did not realize that until I looked up the 2nd council of nicea.

[kosta50]

Thanks for pointing that out,I did not realize that until I looked up the 2nd council of nicea

Apparently Catholics are not properly catechized in that subject, as MarineMomJ seems to think portraying God the Father as a "fatherly" human figure is okay. Please let your brethren know this is not what the Church teaches...

[mdmathis6]

Yes...and my point was that if the pope and priests had had private talks with this man, and he poured out his soul in confession....then they would”know” though they couldn’t talk about it. Now whether or not they had been misled by this man...well that’s a whole other kettle of fish.

[MarkBsnr]

***Show me one official Church document that says God the Father can be portrayed on an icon. One can even argue that Michelangelo’s paintings are “art,” but icons are holy images (that’s what icon means) that are actually venerated.***

There aren’t any, obviously. Icons are lesser known in the West, certainly in the Americas. You know where I grew up; there were all the Catholic communities known under the sun, yet, icons were not as common or as explained as they should have been.

[kosta50]

You know where I grew up; there were all the Catholic communities known under the sun, yet, icons were not as common or as explained as they should have been.

I realize that, Mark. However, statues are icon-equivalents; they are holy images to which petitions are made. They are not works of art, which is not holy. As far as I know there are no statues of God the Father? Why would there be a Catholic icon?

Now, in all fairness, the Greeks and Russians have committed the same blasphemy circa 18. century in one famous icon whose name escapes me right now, depicting God the Father as a "grandfatherly" figure. I don't recall a repetition of the same.

I don't even understand the dove image representing the whole spirit (a bird!). How pagan is that? Yet it is straight out of the Bible!

[kosta50]

whole spirit = Holy Spirit (spell checker made the executive decision!)

[MarkBsnr]

***I realize that, Mark. However, statues are icon-equivalents; they are holy images to which petitions are made. They are not works of art, which is not holy. As far as I know there are no statues of God the Father? Why would there be a Catholic icon?***

Not of God the Father, no.

***I don’t even understand the dove image representing the whole spirit (a bird!). How pagan is that? Yet it is straight out of the Bible!***

Yup, Luke 3:
21
9 10 After all the people had been baptized and Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, heaven was opened
22
11 and the holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”

Much of what we know can be compared to pagan practices. The Monstrance, for instance has been compared to pagan sunburst vessels. The whole deal of sacrifice is pagan. The chanting and the robes come to us from the Jews and the pagans. I think that we have to distinguish between the necessary and the trimmings. Not that that matters overall - the trimmings are also necessary. But there is the difference between rigorous theology and church discipline.