www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Bishop's Lent Message and Just War

Hi:
I think we all have to thank our good friend the Administrator for that one.

Since this statement is coming from a particular bishop, I'd say that using the sins of others to disqualify the moral stature of this particular hierarch is pointless, and also biased, unjust and I'd consider it a fault against the Eighth Commandment.

I don't get your point. Even if I am dressed in robes, I am still a layman. Bishop John Michael, even naked, is still a Bishop of the Catholic Church, endowed by God with authority to teach his flock about faith and morals.

Bishop John Michael is not only a cleric, such as the ones we've been hearing supporting the war. He is a bishop and his authority stands within his jurisdition, and sounds throughout the Church.

We need to define "political". I don't see any partisan implication in this Lenten message, therefore, I don't think Bishop John Michael is using Lent to convey "personal political views".

Politics do have a moral dimension, and it is the DUTY of the Church to single-out political acts that are morally wrong.

Failing to condemn the legalization of voluntary abortion would be a grave sin. Failing to condemn any other form of mass-inflicted murder would be equally sinful.

The Catholic Church has no obligation to be popular. The door is wide open to let out those who disagree with the Church in essential matters.

Says who?

What about promoting justice? And assisting the poor? And educating? And caring for the sick and the imprisoned?

All of those have an undeniable political dimension!

Have you considered that bishops, such as this one, might be willing to take that risk?

Shame on those who are not!

Shalom,
Memo.

comments withdrawn

Alex

.

Dear Memo and Cantor Joseph,

I withdraw my comments and myself from any further discussion of this.

My comments were unnecessary and I ask forgiveness for anything sinful or tending towards sinfulness in them.

Alex

.

Alex:

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I'm inclined to view this war as one that meets the requirements of ius ad bellum, but I have to disagree with the following statement:

"And I think you are doing here what that bishop is doing, calling on religion to justify what I will again say is a political viewpoint that has NOTHING to do with Christianity."

There is NOTHING in this world that exists outside of or beyond the Church's power to transfigure and redeem -- even government and politics. As Father Schmemann of blessed memory once wrote, the Church is meant to "to assume the whole creation... It belongs thus to the very 'institution' of the Church to be a people, a community, a family, an organization, a nation, a hierarchy; to assume, in other words, all the natural forms of human existence in the world, in time and space. She is an organic continuity with the whole of human life, with the totality of human history. She is the pars pro toto of the whole creation."

On this understanding of the Church I fail to see how one can ever separate religion from politics, or religion from the study of sociology, or religion from auto repair.

Bishop John Michael should be speaking out about the war and "using" Christianity as the medium through which he speaks. But, as I pointed out in an earlier post, his speech ought to be tempered by humility, an awareness of the complexity of the issue, and an understanding that other reasonable men may disagree.

I think Bishop John Michael's blanket condemnation deserves censure, but not because he is a bishop engaging in politics. Rather, because his statements make a mockery of the Catholic just war tradition (there is no equivalence between military force and violence/murder; there is no presumption against force, but a presumption for justice; etc.) and are likely to confuse and harm his sheep.

In Christ,
Theophilos

I agree with Monk Silouan. Well said.

Dear Theophilos,

Well, as I don't want to engage in this discussion any more, I just wanted to say that there MUST be some sort of distinction drawn with respect to clergy involvement in politics, as it comes directly from Pope John Paul II.

There is, of course, the political environment that none of us can get away from and then there is partisan politics.

However, one wishes to understand this, it is a fine line that any clergyman trods when he determines to take an overtly political stand.

Ultimately, we ourselves are drawn into that kind of politics depending on whether we agree or disagree with the position being taken.

As my own position of disagreement has been taken here to imply a disrespect for clergy and even sinfulness, things which I, for the record, disagree with - since I don't wish to be a cause of anger or discord for anyone on this matter especially - I withdraw my comments made earlier and myself from this discussion, as I've said.

Alex