Rod Dreher is back in the blogosphere, and has two very good blogs (here and here) on the situation in Kansas City, where Bishop Finn has just been indicted.
Dreher makes most of the important points. I have only a few words to add.
Bishops cannot be trusted implicitly. Some consider it their duty to lie to protect themselves. They do not consider anything they promise to be binding.
The Catholic Church suffers from a serious misunderstanding of the role of the clergy. The laity are infantilized, and want to regard the clergy as living oracles and saints, rather than as ordinary sinners who have a difficult and demanding role in the Catholic community. The higher clergy especially are politicians, and should be given no more trust than any other politician, whether in corporate, military, or governmental life. The laity in general turn a blind eye to this; recognizing it would make life too uncomfortable.
The Catholic Church (and other forms of Christianity) also suffers from a widespread misunderstanding of forgiveness. Forgiveness is a gift, first of all; it cannot be demanded. To be forgiven the sinner must truly repent, and part of repentance is accepting the just punishment for one’s sins (in Bishop Finn’s case, time in jail) and a desire to, as far as possible, remedy the evil that one’s sin has caused.
The role of penance has been forgotten. One has only to consider how abusive priests would have been treated in the early church. Even if repentant, they would have had to do lifelong, harsh physical penance and would have been reconciled to the church only on their deathbed.
In Newfoundland, after Archbishop Penney had transferred abusers, he appointed a commission to investigate his actions The committee told Penney that he was indeed at fault. Penney, being a faulty but an honorable man, resigned his office and devoted his life to prayer and penance for the harm he had caused. If Finn were an honorable man, he would resign, plead guilty, and tell the court he would accept whatever punishment the court saw fit. If, that is, he were an honorable man. If he knew what honor was.
That’s exactly the problem. None of them know what honor is. They either have no understanding of the ugly, evil sin that child molestation is, or they simply don’t care. How this can happen to the clergy of a Christian religion is beyond all understanding. The failure of the Catholic faith to transform the character of these sick individuals is one of the reasons I left Catholicism.
You probably know this piece by Catholic commentator “Diogenes,” Bishops in the eyes of bishops. But just in case you don’t, it’s good…
…In an honor-driven institution, sudden and unexplained disappearances are a fact of life. You remark on an empty seat at the table and you’re told with a grim smile, “Captain So-and-So will no longer be favoring us with his presence.” The message is clear: we acted, before others had a chance to. In a corrupt institution, almost no vice merits dismissal, and the indignation of the corps is trained on fault-finders. The brotherhood operates not to rebuke its own malefactors, but to appeal to outsiders for amnesty. A honorable institution insists on integrity. A corrupt one pleads for “healing.”…
The charismatic view of forgiveness stems from Scriptural passages concerning forgiveness by embracing the sinner over and over turning the other cheek ,if you will. . They forget the requirenment of repentance and avoidance of the near occasion of sin.
Chirst healed the demoniac in one town by casting the demons into the swine and the townspeople turned against him for doing so. He passed through them and left and so we are given an example to do the same to those who would continue to do us harm .
I wonder if Opus Dei gave as good advice and spiritual direction to Bishop Robert Finn as they gave to the traitor Robert Hanson? Randy Engel, author, The Rite of Sodomy
I am very disappointed with Dr. Fitzgibbons. A friend in Opus Dei had told me of his work and showed several of us priests a DVD of some of his talks. Fitzgibbons seemed solid enough. However, to think having a large collection of photographs of little girls’ crotches wasn’t a red flag for pedophilia is beyond belief. He should have his credentials challenged.
With regards to Opus Dei’s spiritual direction, I have found a variety of approaches. Over the years, I’ve gone to several Opus Dei priests for confession and direction. They are not cookie cutter personalities and they differ rather significantly from one another in approach. For those of us priests in Novus Ordo land (where most Catholics in need of the sacraments still live) there aren’t many avenues for good, solid spiritual direction and formation. For many of us in the trenches, Opus Dei priests have been a Godsend.
I have relatives and Opus Dei and have gone to retreats and gone to confession to Opus Dei priests. Like other priests they are a mixed bag. In general they follow papal thought, but I wouldn’t call them rigorist.
I doubt that Bishop Finn asked his spiritual director about decisions he had to make in the diocese. A priest would be reluctant to direct a bishop, although he might advise him.
Opus Dei does discourage its members from criticizing clerics, as its members tend to be conservative and pounce on the slightest deviation from what they regard as orthodoxy or orthopraxis. Such criticism would not endear the clergy to Opus Dei, so it is discouraged. But the policy may also have discouraged valid and important criticism.
Here is a comment from somebody on Dreher’s blog regarding Opus Dei.
John L, on October 17th, 2011 at 11:54 pm Said:
A fact that should be picked up on is Bp. Finn’s connection to Opus Dei. This organisation has an approach to discipline and authority that takes blind obedience and surrender of the intellect and will to the superior to be the norm. Such an approach of its nature totally corrupts both superior and inferior; the superior is treated as having a Godlike authority that is beyond question. Naturally the inferior completely loses the capacity for moral judgment, and when he becomes a superior imagines that he is God and can do no wrong. A note on ‘conservative Catholics’; they typically conform to this pattern, and so it is in fact not a surprise to find them acting in the way that Bishop Finn did. As a traditionalist Catholic, rather than a conservative Catholic, I am not at all surprised to find that Bishop Finn did what he did. I use ‘traditionalist Catholic’ in the sense of a Catholic who attends the old Latin mass and rejects the Novus Ordo. If you do this – which means rebelling against unjust actions on the part of ecclesiastical authority – you soon run across this corrupt understanding of authority on the part of conservative Catholics in general, and members of Opus Dei – which is a kind of cult – in particular. This understanding of authority is based in nominalism and was promoted by the Jesuits; it was ubiquitous in the preconciliar church, and explains to a great extent the utter corruption of the clergy in the sexual abuse scandals.
The laity are infantilized, and want to regard the clergy as living oracles and saints, rather than as ordinary sinners who have a difficult and demanding role in the Catholic community. The higher clergy especially are politicians, and should be given no more trust than any other politician, whether in corporate, military, or governmental life. The laity in general turn a blind eye to this; recognizing it would make life too uncomfortable.
That’s because the laity have been brainwashed into thinking not only that they’re spiritually inferior but that they need the clergy (let alone Mary and the saints) to get close to God. That brainwashing is deliberate; it reflects the fundamental sense of entitlement that pervades the Church and the kind of European class structure that the Church imitated, with the laity being the serfs and peasants.
Of course, other religions and organizations have problems with incompetent, unaccountable, corrupt leadership. But the fact that this problem is so pervasive in the Church means that the problem is systemic. It has been for centuries and Church leaders (including and especially Pope Benedict) don’t seem to give a damn.
Catholicism is not a religion dedicated to God, let alone to His Son. It’s a religious Mafia designed of, by and for the clergy. It has no more to do with Christianity than Islam, Marxism, Scientology or National Socialism.
I was baptised in the Church, raised as a Catholic, went to Catholic high school and worshipped as a Catholic for the vast majority of my life. Though I’m a single man with no children, I would never allow my children to attend a Catholic school nor encourage them to become Catholic.
Catholicism is an abomination to a holy, righteous God. It must be destroyed.
“When the Son of Man comes, do you think he will find faith on earth?”
Well Joseph, Jesus is the center of my life and He, His Father and the Holy Spirit are the ones I give my heart and soul to as well as the ones for whom I live. I know of many Catholics, clergy and laity for whom this is true. We are not the equivalent of Nazis and Islamists. If Catholicism is an invention of the clergy it’s rather an old one, certainly as old as Iraeneus of Lyons and Ignatius of Antioch in the 2nd century. God did nothing to prevent this invention nor did He do anything to keep it from monopolizing Trinitarian Christianity for more than a thousand years.
Christ never promised that the Church would be governed well. In fact, He seemed to suggest the opposite.
There really are a lot of us Catholic laity and priests who are trying to live as disciples, please don’t forget that.
As for Opus Dei. I’ve never given that unquestioning obedience to anyone but Christ in His clear teachings. Perhaps if I got more into it I would find what the writer you quote describes. He’s a traditionalist, asomething with which I’m sympathetic as his position holds popes, bishops, priests and laity to the standard of belief and practice that has been embraced “always, everywhere and by everyone” in the Church. Many of the conservatives seem to believe that our leaders (especially popes) are living oracles. I should think JP II’s very embarassing and disastrous support of Marcel Maciel would have put an end to that nonsense.
Father Michael, my last post was not meant to include you, and I apologize. I know you are an honest man dedicated to Christ, as many Catholic lay people are. I am just so damn sick and tired of the Church of my birth being run by scoundrels, crooks, perverts, effete pseudo-intellectuals, power-hungry careerists, bureaucratic lackeys and morons of all stripes. The fact that Christ never promised that the church would be governed well does not mean that it should be governed this poorly, without any regard for the Triune God nor those who truly worship Him.
All of vain garbage I just described is an abomination to a holy, righteous God. Of course, it would not be good for mankind to destroy the Church, because what would replace it would be even worse (especially because the secular Left and Islam seem to want to be in on most of the destruction). But God will not be mocked. His righteousness *will* prevail. If that means that He will destroy the Catholic Church, so be it.
Look up the vision of Pope Leo XIII. It’s not very pretty.
Thanks Joseph. I understand where you’re coming from and sympathize with your dissapointment and disgust. You love Our Lord and want people to know Him. I get the frustration.
An anonymously written book in Italy (purportedly by a Vatican insider) said that a full one third of those working in the Vatican are careerists, while two thirds are good guys going quietly about their work. If true, this stat ties in to the Book of Revelations, where the devil drags a third of the stars down from Heaven. Over the centuries that one third has been seen as both the fallen angels and corrupted clergy. That a large minority should have a disproportionate influence is explained by the Lord: “The children of this age are more astute in their dealings than are the children of light.”
Can you give me a reference for Pope Leo’s vision? I’d love to read about it.
Father Michael, this is the best I can do:
Leo XIII – a Vision of a Looming Crisis…
On October 13, 1884 Leo XIII had just completed a celebration of Mass in one of the Vatican’s private chapels. Standing at the foot of the altar, he suddenly turned ashen and collapsed to the floor, apparently the victim of a stroke or heart attack. However, neither malady was the cause of his collapse. For he had just been given a vision of the future of the Church he loved so much. After a few minutes spent in what seemed like a coma, he revived and remarked to those around him, “Oh, what a horrible picture I was permitted to see!”
During Pope Leo’s ecstacy he heard two voices, one deep and coarse which he understood to be Satan challenging the other voice, Jesus. Paraphrasing:
Satan: “Given enough time and enough power I can defeat your church.”
Jesus: “How much time and how much power?”
Satan: “100 years and the power over those who would serve me.”
Jesus: “You will have the power and the time.”
What Leo XIII apparently saw, as described later by those who talked to him at the time of his vision, was a period of about one hundred years when the power of Satan would reach its zenith. That period was to be the twentieth century. Leo was so shaken by the spectre of the destruction of moral and spiritual values both inside and outside the Church, that he composed a prayer which was to be said at the end of each Mass celebrated anywhere in the Catholic Church. This prayer to Michael the Archangel was said continuously until the Mass was restructured in the Second Vatican council. The prayer is as follows:
“Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle; be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray; and do you, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and the other evil spirits who prowl about the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.”
While this prayer may now seem quaint and mildly embarrassing to the modern reader with its reference to Satan and evil spirits, it should be noted that virtually all measures of social pathology and moral decline (things like the crime rate, percentage of unwed mothers, abortion rate, divorce rate, etc.) each started to rise sharply as the 1960’s ended…a few years after this prayer had ceased being used in Church liturgies. Regardless, while the precise details of Leo’s visions are not known, it would certainly appear that his concern about the coming difficulties in his Church and the world in which it found itself were well founded.
Thanks Joseph. I had heard some of this before, but that’s the most detailed account I’ve been given. So when is this all supposed to be over?!
Father, I wish I knew for sure but I don’t. The only thing I know is that Scripture predicts a general apostasy before Christ returns (see mary’s entry on this thread), which I assume would include all churches on some level. 2 Timothy 3: 1-8 suggests how some will behave in the “last days” (which actually began at Pentecost). The phrase “having a form of godliness but denying its power” could be applied to all sorts of “Christian leaders,” including, sadly, bishops like Finn.
BTW, Leon, you’ll find this of interest. It concerns the darling of the conservatives, Absp. Chaput:
http://articles.philly.com/2011-10-05/news/30247067_1_archdiocesan-priests-defrocked-priest-sexually-abusive-priests
“The bishops are not trustworthy.” Oh so grievously shamefully horribly true!
So, which bishop is overseeing the Sacred Heart Convent School in Thailand that had a Nazi parade on September 28?
From a commentor at another Christian blog:
“Were these children taught anything true in world history class or did they get the Khomeini-Ahmadinejad version of European history?
Are they also getting the Notre Dame University (aka Spong) version of human life and morality in their health class?
What exactly are they learning at this (evidently well-funded*) convent school?
*The students’ Nazi uniforms were well-made and well-fitted. This was not a spur-of the moment, spray-paint-your-bedsheet-with-slogans type demonstration.”
Link to the Nazi parade story and photo:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2784894/posts
When it all comes down to it, THIS ISSUE is all about protecting innocent kids!
These men need to be held accountable, Bishop Finn needs to spend some time in jail. The bishops who believe they are above the law need to know for sure that “They” are NOT above the law. otherwise they have absolutely NO reason to stop covering up sex crimes. Therefore more children are getting sexually used and abused.
The horror, trauma, and damage done to kids causes a life sentence for them. Those who cause this, need to get stopped.!!
Judy Jones, SNAP Midwest Associate Director, USA, 636-433-2511
snapjudy@gmail.com
“Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests” and all clergy.
http://www.snapnetwork.org/
“If Finn were an honorable man, he would resign, plead guilty, and tell the court he would accept whatever punishment the court saw fit. If, that is, he were an honorable man. If he knew what honor was.”
Amen!
When catholic priests molest children and their bishops enable this (or worse) there is nothing about these men that makes them “ordinary sinners.” The fact that these crimes are committed by men considered to be “Other Christs”, to themselves and the entire faith community, takes these perverted acts to levels not reached by “ordinary sinners.”
The fact that Finn has not resigned is in keeping with his belief, that as the Shepherd to his Other Christs, he is above civil law. And the beat goes on.
aw
Mother Theresa’s Spiritual Advisor was found to be guilty of pedophilia.! What say you on that one. Ck it out!
Sigh! Finn is not going to resign as he believes himself to be above the law, let alone considerate of the children in his care. It is now the responsibility of the people in the pews to determine their own responsibility and follow their hearts and their consciences as this issue develops. Finn can serve the time and be a bishop while in jail; that would most assuredly send a message worldwide. A few years ago he write a treatise on pornography that ran in the Catholic Key; he warned us all of the dangers. I cannot beleve that he could not understand what constitutes pornography! Now he will plead guilty and he has two lawyers, charging $400 hourly to defend a fine $1,000? Unbelievable! However this case works out, ultimately it is the responsibility of every human being to make the choice to support or withdraw from any organized religion that uses crime in God’s name as it’s base.
This is not that complicated. If the bishop resigns, he gets a window seat (taking advantage of The Madonna in a Major way). If he faces the music,will he be convicted? My apostles have access too the best of everything. Either way he will receive a standing ovation from the fellows in the good old boys’ club. Our oath is not, to God, nor to godliness. Nor to the One Good Shepherd, nor His ewes, nor His lambs. The oath is to the institution itself as if to God.
Franklyn, truer words were rarely spoken, and sadder words hardly ever spoken.
Glorybe1929, do you have evidence of this? If so, then the problem is far more pervasive than Catholics want to admit.
Mother Theresa’s Spiritual Advisor was Fr. Donald Maguire/Jesuit. Look it up. He was convicted in 2007 I believe.
Pervasive… My God it has been going on since the middle of the first century when St. Paul warned the new believers of a new gospel that was being taught. He said do not listen to them! It was from man and not the Gospel Of Jesus Christ.
In my home town, a baptist minister sodomized a young boy with a metal pipe. Through the Dutch connection I have heard of abuse among Calvinists. This stuff is pervasive throughout Christendom. St. Paul had to warn his readers that “Abusers of themselves with boys…will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven” He was warning beleivers and told them “Do not be decieved”. He would not have been so adamant about this (and other things) if it were not present in the first Christian communities. We cannot go back to any time or place where Christians were perfect and everyone who confessed Christ as lord and savior behaved. We must all be on the watch for abuse and never think our own group or confession is immune.
Father Michael, do you have any evidence about how the Baptists or the Calvinists reacted in the incidents you cite? Did the laity raise a hue and cry? Did those authorities take steps to punish the perpetrators and prevent future contact with children? Or did the authorities try to cover their biological seat cushions and the laity go back to “business as usual”?
Joseph. I believe the Baptist congregation dealt with it well. If you look on the net there are some good stories and sites concerned with how this is treated within various Protestant groups. Some do well, others don’t.
With respect to the Dutch, the problem I was told of concerned families. My relatives in Holland are Catholic but I have Calvinist friends (actually, I admire Reform Christians I’ve met for all sorts of things). Most likely it is no more a problem within Calvinist families than it is any other group. It was mentioned because a Dutch Calvinist friend told me about it illustrating the universality of the problem.
Studies show conservative religions- such as Roman Catholicism and most Baptists- are more prone to abuse. Certainly a patriarchal system which rewards obedience to authority over freedom poses a grave danger to those not in power, i.e. women and children.
Janet, please cite the studies which document more abuse in patriarchal church systems. My personal experience as an elder in the Presbyterian Church USA, where my congregation had a five year period of denouncing patriarchy and promoting gay rights, was that the only two situations that I read about both involved female ministers, one of whom I knew. The ministers were disciplined by the Presbyteries; but, since minors were not involved, there was no crime committed. As a matter of fact one of those situations involved two ministers in the misconduct, making me think that it was best not to have female ministers.
Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what really took place in the situation at Vienna Presbyterian Church in Vienna, VA. I read the newspaper accounts on Abuse Tracker at least three times trying to figure it out. A youth worker, not a minister, apparently gave some teenage girls cause to think that he was romantically interested in them. What he actually did was not stated. His immediate superior who had only been employed by the church for a matter of months was fired for not doing something about it, but it is not said how that superior came to find out about it. Since there was no indictment, I have to assume that no crime was committed; and, if no crime was committed, why does this church want to air it’s dirty linen in public like it is a soap opera keeping its audience in suspense? Perhaps someone on this blog can enlighten me about this.
In a Calvinistic system, where leaders are elected by the congregation to set policies and implement changes, all complaints are supposed to be made to the elders who have the power to hire and fire the workers, including the minister. I do think that these electoral systems work well in general; but, there are always some instances where even the best designed systems fail.
“Certainly a patriarchal system which rewards obedience to authority over freedom poses a grave danger to those not in power, i.e. women and children.”
What a NON-SENSE!
It is a fact that the Bible teaches patriarchy in both the Old and New Testaments while at the same time holding up for praise the actions of some women (Ruth, Esther, Deborah). The Intertestamental Books give the further example of Judith; but, she is rather chilling. Any culture that tolerates polygamy is patriarchal. Read 1 Timothy 2:11-12 for the New Testament instructions.
If men are given more authority, then it is absolutely necessary that they obey the Ten Commandments and devote themselves to the welfare of one wife. Any other course of action will result in hell on earth. Just think of the grief caused by John Edwards’ inability to say no.
I found this quote from “Conradg” on Rod Dreher’s blog at “The American Conservative” magazine. It brilliantly summarizes the attitudes many Catholics have:
The Church as an institution is about authority, not spiritual truth, and it protects its authority above all else, because it actually equates its own authority with spiritual truth. So it creates a circular logic that makes it impossible to deal with matters like these in a clear and humane manner. It’s how authoritarian cults always work, and how they distort and pervert the normal human cognitive process, as well as the normal human compassionate empathetic process. This sort of thing happens wherever authority is made the supreme value. Ought to make you wonder about the value of “spiritual authority” in the overall religious process.
The piece is so , so very wrong about the early church, i.e., the church we read about in Paul’s epistles. There was no such thing as “penance” in the form described here. Nonsense! No wonder the Catholic Church is screwed up; even it’s critics don’t know the bible. !!!
Re: Many of the comments here:
You and others talk as if , somehow, the catholic church is the “church the body of christ” paul talks about in his letters , and that it has been sorta “infiltrated” by the “bad guys” but you are so far from the truth!
It never was the church of the bible— it is not even based on the gospel– the gospel is free to those whom believe! RCC has nothing to do with that gospel of the cross of christ. Nothing!
Gerald, From where did you get the Bible and who told you the books in it were inspired? Chrisitians (without breaking fellowship) around the Mediterranean disagreed for almost four centuries over which books and letters should be included in the canon of scripture. It took two councils to settle the matter. To accept the New Testament is to accept the authority of either the Catholic or Orthodox Church (depending on which half of the former undivided communion one concludes is “right”).
The Gospel IS free but demands the fellowship of the “Assembly”, “Quahal”, Ecclesia”, that is the Church. The Church Jesus instructed to excommunicate (“Treat as a tax collector or gentile.”) wayward and unrepentent menbers. The Church Paul describes as the “Pilar of truth”. God calls a people and makes them a “Holy nation, a royal priesthood”, it’s not a matter of “Me and Jesus ” and some loose association of folks who believe “only what’s in the Bible” and which, by the way, they interpret differently from the “Bible believing church” down the street. (“Once saved, always saved” vs Arminian free will groups; pentecostal and charismatic vs. dispensationalist groups, etc.). And finally, where was this “Church of the Bible” for more than a thousand years if not in the Catholic or Orthodox communions?!
To: “Father Michael Koening
Thank you for the opportunity to clarify my post and respond to the questions you pose to me.
First, I am a little surprised you challenge that believers knew and used the inspired scriptures [both OT and Christian] from the outset of the Body of Christ. Later, after much apostasy and perversion of the gospel, so-called church councils merely made lists of those books and letters which had been circulated , read, and [most importantly] preserved by God for The Church, the Body of Christ. So, I find your defense of “authority” in the Roman or Greek “Christendom” churches a blunder, albeit a blunder which has blinded and misguided many.
Being “free” to all who will believe, the gospel does not , as you claim, “demand” anything beyond true trust and , simply “belief.”
Discipline of a member who falls into sin is certainly not the same as your “penance”.
Nor is the Body of Christ “a holy nation or a royal priesthood.” Tappellationstions may have been applied to the nation of Israel but never to the church [body of Christ] Paul led as the apostle of the Gentiles. Finally you asked:
“where was this “Church of the Bible” for more than a thousand years if not in the Catholic or Orthodox communions?!”
For the most part the true Body of Christ was persecuted, if not destroyed, and branded as heretics by the very institutions you seem to champion. Again, thanks for the opportunity to respond.
Gerald Nichols
Well Gerald, the last I looked the two letters of Peter were part of the New Testament. In 1 Peter 2 verse 9 it says, addressing Christians “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people”.
I did not say that Christians in the first centuries did not read or know the scriptures. What I said is that different communities of Christians had different lists (canons) of which books and letters constituted scripture. They agreed on most of the New Testament, but not all. Hebrews, James, Rev, etc. were diputed. This is a simple fact of history.lations
As to the true Church existing in the form of persecuted groups, which groups, where and when? Montanists rejected the Old Testament, Donatists rejected the Catholic/Orthodox Church but believed in an ordained priesthood and sacraments, Arians did’t accept Christ’s divinity. In fact there was NO group during the first millenium that in any way resembled fundmentalist or evangelical groups. It wasn’t until Peter Waldo, Wycliff and Hus in the late middle ages before anything like that appeared.
Finally, if “sola scriptura” is the way God wants us to come to truth, why doesn’t it work. I mean, the Reformation side has had five centuries to get this together and they’re more divided than ever. Divisions about essentials (the nature of sacraments, salvation, etc.) were present from the start, as any good book on the Reformation shows.
Gerald, you make many points, but can you explain how discipline in the early church/ New Testament is different from traditional penance in liturgical churches.
Jesus said “If you truly seek me, you shall find me.” Does it really matter if a person encounters Christ from attending church services or from reading the Bible and praying in private? The result is the same if that person begins to live a more moral life.
Wycliff and other reformers worked for universal literacy and the opportunity for even peasants to read the Bible and know as much about its contents as any bishop or other cleric. I think that we can all agree that this was an honorable endeavor.
The oft quoted maxim: “In essentials unity, in non essentials diversity, and in all things charity. ” Rupertus Meldenius, 1627
Actually Janice, Augustine said it centuries before Rupertus. It’s a good quote and wise principle.
Many writings from Christianity’s first three hundred years have come down to us. We have letters from men like Polycarp and Clement who knew the apostles. They reveal a church that was both Catholic/Orthodox and Evangelical. Justin in the mid 100’s described the celebration of the Eucharist every Sunday (bread and wine brought by members of the community and described as becoming the presence of the “Incarnate Word”) and baptism as being “born again”. Other writings show us the important role of bishops but also tell us they were elected by their communities. Jesus was very real and personal and peoples’ lives were changed in radical ways. The care Christians gave to the poor and sick, whether of the faith or no, made a deep impresion on their contemporaries. It would seem there is much we can learn from looking back at the first believers.
Father Michael, I have done some reading on this quote and, if you google it, a Georgetown University website will come up where the unknown author says that it cannot be found in the writings of Augustine. This site also credits a very colorful character named Marco Antonio de Dominis with the phrase in 1617. De Dominis was a very colorful character who fled his position as Archbishop of Split for England where he became an Anglican and wrote DE RESPUBLICA ECCLESIASTICA where this phrase appears in Book 4 Chapter 8. Later de Dominis fled England for no good reason since no one was threatening him, and returned to Rome and reconciled with Pope Gregory XV. At Gregory’s death he was imprisoned for heresy in the Castel Sant’Angelo where he died a natural death in 1624. Three months later his corpse was convicted of heresy and burned at the Campo di Fiore. I guess this just shows how little common sense was being used in this historical period.
The next to put the phrase into print was Rupertus Meldenius and he was a lesser known Lutheran divine. This is the Latin form of his name which was really Peter Meiderlin.
Later the phrase was used by Richard Baxter, one of the Wesley brothers and Blessed Pope John XXIII.
Thanks Janice. That’s quite a colorful story! Imagine finding a corpse guilty of something! Though I’ve read that in medeival England pigs were sometimes hung for “crimes”.