Stupid Condescending site.

[Anastasios]

http://www.vatican2.org/

[Hypo-Ortho]

http://www.vatican2.org/

Please give this site credit by referring to www.womenpriests.org, it says at the bottom of one of this site's pages, Anastasios.

But on the subject of the infamous Pio Nono's beatification by John Paul II, I am in agreement with those RC's on the site who opposed it.  Pius IX is the Pope of Vatican I, the Pope who dogmatized Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception for the Roman Catholics, the Pope who said: "I am Tradition!" and the Pope who placed his foot on the head of the Melkite Greek-Catholic (Uniate) Patriarch of Antioch to show the Melkite Patriarch who was boss!  Not anything for me, as an Orthodox Christian, to admire in such a haughty, strong-armed man.  His beatification by John Paul II tells me where JPII really stands on the issues of Papal Infallibility/Supremacy, all professional ecumenists' statements to the contrary notwithstanding.

Hypo-Ortho

[Orthodoc]

[Pius IX is the Pope of Vatican I, the Pope who dogmatized Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception for the Roman Catholics, the Pope who said: "I am Tradition!" and the Pope who placed his foot on the head of the Melkite Greek-Catholic (Uniate) Patriarch of Antioch to show the Melkite Patriarch who was boss!  Not anything for me, as an Orthodox Christian, to admire in such a haughty, strong-armed man.  His beatification by John Paul II tells me where JPII really stands on the issues of Papal Infallibility/Supremacy, all professional ecumenists' statements to the contrary notwithstanding.]

AMEN!  Just another example of what we Orthodox Catholics mean when we say things like - (1) What the RCC says and what it does are two entirely different things.  (2)  The Pope talks out of both sides of his mouth at the same time.  

Another example is the start of the beatification process of Cardinal Stepinac.  Lets not even discuss if he's guilty of what we Orthodox Catholics accuse him or not.  Let' just wonder why, if the Pope is so sincere in establishing unity or better relations with the Orthodox, he would start the process of bestowing sainthood on a man only fifty some years after his death while memories of what he did or is accused of, are still fresh in the minds of so many Orthodox people that lived through it.  Why the rush to sainthood for this particular perso when others have had to wait centuries?  Especially if you are claiming you want better relations with the Orthodox and are sincere about it.

Orthodoc

[Mor Ephrem]

I have no idea what Cardinal Stepinac is accused of, but I think the reason why canonisation processes are started so soon is so that there can be witnesses for the various inquiries at the diocesan/Vatican levels to testify for the person's life.  I don't think canonisation causes are started five hundred years after a person dies, although they may take that much time to come to fruit in a canonisation.  

With that said, I would think that each Church could canonise its saints and we could all leave it at that.  Saints are canonised because of the holiness of their lives.  Surely they have sinned too, and may have done things we find absolutely disagreeable (at least).  But the assumption is that by the time of their death, they have become holy.  I would hope we could give the saints, on both sides, the benefit of the doubt.  

As for holding off on such things to improve relations, I don't know...does it work both ways?  I sympathise with Saint Alexis Toth when I hear his story, but I can't help looking at his icon, the one with the scroll/book/whatever and an exhortation on it, and (not knowing too much about him) wondering whether or not he would agree with what the icon has his scroll/book/whatever say (I have the icon saved to my computer at school, I think, so I'd have to be there to insert the quote here).  Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.  But either way, I can see Roman Catholics being offended by such a thing.  Should we have held off on canonising him?  Why?  If he was canonised because he led a holy life, why should we not canonise him, even if others may find it scandalous?  Instead of promoting the scandalous, we should look to the holiness in the particular saint, and promote that.  But if canonisation is nothing more than the ultimate ecclesiastical merit badge for being a team player or going above and beyond, then there are probably a lot of people on both sides who look "interesting" enough to merit a second look.

[Orthodoc]

[I have no idea what Cardinal Stepinac is accused of, but I think the reason why canonisation processes are started so soon is so that there can be witnesses for the various inquiries at the diocesan/Vatican levels to testify for the person's life.]  

Perhaps you should look into the accusations to better understand what I am saying.  To compare the future canonization of Stepinac with St Alexis Toth is like comparing apples and oranges.  St Alexis was never accused of being complacent in the murders and forced conversions of over 700,000  fellow  Christians.

The Pope, or anyone else in the Vatican for that matter, is very much aware of what Stepinac is accused of during WWII.  Knowing this, out of respect for the feelings of so many Orthodox they could have waited until the emotions died down. No matter if they agree with the accusations are not.  That is the point.
Once again, why the rush to canonize if he is so sensitive to the feelings of others?  Especially those of us who are Orthodox Catholics.

Orthodoc

[Mor Ephrem]

Perhaps you should look into the accusations to better understand what I am saying.  To compare the future canonization of Stepinac with St Alexis Toth is like comparing apples and oranges.  St Alexis was never accused of being complacent in the murders and forced conversions of over 700,000  fellow  Christians.

Or perhaps when bringing up something that hasn't been discussed, you should present some of the facts of the matter rather than vaguely mention something which some of us may know nothing about?  

My point regarding Saint Alexis was made when I didn't (and still do not know) all the facts about Stepinac.  It is simply that, if we're all going to be concerned about ecumenical sensitivities when canonising saints, we've all probably got people we'd need to take a second look at and examine as to why they were canonised in the first place, if not for the holiness of their lives (merit badge?).  But if they are being canonised for lives of holiness, then it is assumed that they have repented for any evil they have done, and it is up to us to look for the good in them and promote that, rather than harp on their sins.  We've got enough of our own that we should be trying to fix.

[The young fogey]

Ingrid Shafer is obviously intelligent and has made a well-crafted page. She is also wrong and misrepresenting John XXIII and Vatican II as far as I can tell. AFAIK he never repudiated a belief in one true Church. (Wonder what Frau Shafer thinks of his 1961 ban on ordaining homosexuals, or his letter instructing that Latin be promoted more in seminaries. Funny, she mentions neither.) This thing is full of code for dissenter types. Ugh. Note it's 'Spirit', not 'Holy Spirit'.

Well, such types tend to be old. They've had their day and hopefully will repent before they die, which will be soon.

[Orthodoc]

My point regarding Saint Alexis was made when I didn't (and still do not know) all the facts about Stepinac. ]

Then perhaps you shouldn't make comparisions when you have only half the info.

I could  post quite a few web sites here regarding Cardinal Stepinac written by Roman Catholics but that would only fuel the fires. And put this discussion on another level.  Would suggest you read a book called 'The Vatican Holocaust' written by a devout Roman Catholic Avro  Manhattan.

There are other web sites that are written by non Orthodox regarding the decision to beatify this man.  So it is not only Orthodox but jewish organizations that see it as a slap in the face by the Pope.  For a jewish comment you might want to access -

http://www.wjc.org.il/publications/policy_dispatches/pub_dis36.html

This will give you an idea what the 'World Jewish Congress' has to say about the beatification.  How, most Jewish organizations are, like the Orthodox,  confused by what the Pope says and what the Pope does.  If you read the article you will see that the beatification of Cardinal Stepinac is given as an example of that confusion.

Here is an excerpt from that site -

[The centerpiece of John Paul II's October 1998 pastoral visit to Croatia was the mass at which he beatified Cardinal Alojzije Stepinac. In this overwhelmingly Catholic country, the wartime head of the Croatian episcopate and archbishop of Zagreb is admired as a hero of the Church's patriotism and resistance to Communism. Yet Orthodox Christians, Jews and Gypsies recall different aspects of Stepinac's history: during the Second World War, Stepinac cooperated with the Ustasha regime that was responsible for genocidal policies towards Serbian Orthodox, Jews, Muslims and Gypsies. As head of the Croatian episcopate, he is responsible for the often active support many clergy provided to implement the state's barbarous agenda; as chaplain of the Croatian army, he is implicated in the horrors committed by soldiers of the state. The Croatian Episcopate has expressed no regret for the acts committed during the war in its name or by its faithful. Stepinac's wartime cooperation with the Ustasha state is not regarded as problematic by most Croatians - or by the Vatican. Indeed, Church statements regarding the beatification have instead cited instances in which Stepinac did indeed save Jews. A tiny minority in present-day Croatia, today's Jewish community also recalls the positive side of Stepinac's relations with to the Jews. They did not object to the beatification - while Jewish organizations expressed regret that the cardinal's past did not prevent his elevation. The prospect of a Ustasha collaborator as a saint is a source of deep foreboding: one who deserves to be remembered with disdain is enshrined as holy.]

I will be happy to provide you more web sites privately regarding non Orthodox evaluations of this subject if you want to learn more.

The point I'm trying to get across is that 'By Their Deeds They Shall Be Known'.  Unfortunately, in many cases the Popes words are in direct contrast to his deeds.  This is but one example.  Others have already been discussed here and elsewhere.

Orthodoc

[Mor Ephrem]

Then perhaps you shouldn't make comparisions when you have only half the info.

The assumption here is that I have half the information, which I do not.  I know almost nothing about Cardinal Stepinac.  I'd be happy to take you up on your offer of websites (thank you for your private message of the other day), but even then, I would only have one side of the story...I'd still have to hear what the Catholics have to say.  Thanks again.

[theodore]

Orthodoc wrote:
"I could  post quite a few web sites here regarding Cardinal Stepinac written by Roman Catholics but that would only fuel the fires. And put this discussion on another level.  Would suggest you read a book called 'The Vatican Holocaust' written by a devout Roman Catholic Avro  Manhattan."

One note about Avro Manhattan.  He was NOT a devout Roman Catholic (or Catholic in any sense of the word), but rather, quite the the opposite.  A telling indicator is the fact that many of his works were published by the noted Anti-Catholic polemicists at Chick Publications, as well as by Zondervan, which is a noted Fundie-gelical publishing house, not known for being nice to Roman Catholics.

Theodore

[Hypo-Ortho]

For a list of 171 Martyred Serbian Clergymen, see "Orthodox Life," No. 1, 1983, published by the Brotherhood of St. Job of Pochaev at Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, NY 13361, USA.

Also included in this issue of "Orthodox Life" on pp. 15-26, is an article by Joachim Wertz entitled "On the Serbian Orthodox New Martyrs of the Second World War, A Brief Historical Background."

In Mr. Wertz's article several references are given concerning Cardinal Stepinac's complicity with the Croatian Ustashi, who are regarded even worse than the Nazis themselves in the treatment of Serbian Orthodox, Gypsies, etc.  

Imprisoned during this time were Serbian Patriarch Gavrilo himself and Bishop (now Saint) Nikolai Velimirovich of Zicha, both of whom were interned together at the infamous Dachau concentration camp.  St. Nikolai is known especially as the compiler of "The Prologue from Ochrid," the lives of the Saints for every day of the year.  When he reposed he was serving as Rector of St. Tikhon's Seminary, South Canaan, PA.  His body was buried in St. Sava's Cemetery, Libertyville, IL.

Hypo-Ortho

[theodore]

Imprisoned during this time were Serbian Patriarch Gavrilo himself and Bishop (now Saint) Nikolai Velimirovich of Zicha, both of whom were interned together at the infamous Dachau concentration camp.  St. Nikolai is known especially as the compiler of "The Prologue from Ochrid," the lives of the Saints for every day of the year.  When he reposed he was serving as Rector of St. Tikhon's Seminary, South Canaan, PA.  His body was buried in St. Sava's Cemetery, Libertyville, IL.
Hypo-Ortho

Thanks for the brief info on St. Nicholas of Zicha.  I hear his name commemorated every week among the Saints of North America, but did not know the facts of his life, nor that I live (relatively speaking) close to his burial site.  I'll have to go visit his grave at St. Sava's some day.

Theodore

[Orthodoc]

[One note about Avro Manhattan.  He was NOT a devout Roman Catholic (or Catholic in any sense of the word), but rather, quite the the opposite.  A telling indicator is the fact that many of his works were published by the noted Anti-Catholic polemicists at Chick Publications, as well as by Zondervan, which is a noted Fundie-gelical publishing house, not known for being nice to Roman Catholics.]

===============================================
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:AVRO MANHATTAN is world-renowned authority on Roman Catholicism in politics. A resident of London, during World War II he operated a radio station called "Radio Freedom," broadcasting to occupied Europe. He also wrote political commentaries for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).Besides lecturing and writing short stories, essays, articles, novels and plays, he has written several best-sellers, including THE VATICAN IN WORLD POLITICS, twice Book-Of-The-Month and going through 57 editions.FROM THE PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITIONS (quote): THE VATICAN'S HOLOCAUST is not a misnomer, an accusation, and even less a speculation. It is a historical fact. Rabid nationalism and religious dogmatism were its two main ingredients. During existence of Croatia as an independent Catholic State, over 700,000 men, women and children perished. Many were executed, tortured, died of starvation, buried alive, or were burned to death.Hundreds were forced to become Catholic. Catholic padres ran concentration camps; Catholic priests were officers of the military corps which committed such atrocities.700,000 in a total population of a few million, proportionally, would be as if one-third of the USA population had been exterminated by a Catholic militia.What had been gathered in this book will vindicate the veracity of these facts. Dates, names, and places, as well as photos are there to prove them.They should become known to the American public, not to foster vindictiveness, but to warn them of the danger, which racialism and sectarianism, when allied with religious intolerance can bring to any contemporary nation, whether in Europe or in the New World.This work should be assessed without prejudice and as a lesson; but even more vital, as a warning for the future of the Americans, beginning with that of the USA. ááá

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

Yes I have seen Jack Chick productions pick up on what Avro Manhattan has to write.   However, that in itself is not a justifiable reason to discredit him.  Jack Chick productions is so violently anti Roman Catholic (and Orthodox Catholic too) that even if the Pope himself made an anti RC remark Jack Chick productions would have no problem either quoting him or using it.

How about another Roman Catholic author - John Cornwell  who is a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Cambridge, England, and an award winning journalist and author.  His 'A thief in the night:  The Death of Pope John Paul I was a world bestseller.  He was profiled Pope John Paul II for Vanity Fair and the London Sunday Times magazine and written on Roman Catholic issues for many publications around the world.

Excerpts from Hitler's Pope Pages 253 & 254:

From the outset, the archishop of Zagreb, Alojzije Stepinac (currently beng considered for beatification in Rome), was wholly in accord with the general goals of the new Croation state, and bent on having it recognized by the Pope.  He called personally on Pavelic on April 16, 1941,  and listened to the new leader declare that he would "not show tolerance,"  as Stepinac declared  in his diary,  "toward the Serbian Orthodox Church because, as he saw things, it was not a church but a political organization."  This gave Stepinac the impression that the Poglavnik was a sincere Roman  Catholic."  That same evening Stepinac gave a dinner party for Pavelic and its leading Utashe to celebrate  their return from exile.  On April 28, on the very day that 250 Orthodox Serbs were massacred at Bjelovar, a pastoral letter by Stepinac was read from all Roman Catholic pulpits calling on the clergy and faithful to collaborate in the work of the leader.

<snipe>

Much has been made in the postwar years of the personal holiness of Archbishop Stepinac, Croatia's Roman Catholic primate, and his eventual protest against the the persecution and massacres.  Yet even if one believes him innocent of condoning murderous race hatred, it is palin that he and the espiscopate endorsed a contempt for religious freedom tantamount to complicity with the violence.  Stepinac wrote a long letter to Pavelic on the question of conversions and massacres.  It quotes the views of a number of his brother bishops, all with favor, including a letter by the Roman Catholic bishop of Mostar, a Dr Miscie, expressing the historic yearnings that the Croatian episcopate entertained for mass conversions to Roman Catholicism.
The Bishop starts by declaring that there "was never such agood occassion as now for us to help Croatia to save countless souls."  He writes enthusiastically of mass conversion.  He lists known massacres of mothers, girls, and children under eight, brought into the hills and thrown alive..ito deep ravines."  [Note:  many of these happened near Medjugorje ..Orthodoc]   Then he makes this astonishing statement:  "In the parish of Klepca seven hundred schismatics from the neighborhing villages were slaughtered.  The Sub-prefect of Mostar, Mr. Bajic, a Moslem, publically deeclared (as a state employee he should have held his tongue) that in Ljubina alone seven hundred schismatics have been thrown into one pit."
The letter reveals the moral dislocation implicit in the behaviour of the bishops, who took advantage of Yugoslavia's defeat in the hands of the Nazi's to increase the power and outreach of Roman Catholicism in the Balkans.

==========

You can also check out another Roman Catholic source-

>http://www.kronzer.org/news_visittorome.html
>>
>>
>>
>>A Visit to Rome - January, 2001
>>
>>Phillip Kronzer, a devout Roman Catholic and relentless foe of those who
>>seek to pervert the doctrines of the universal Church, recently
>>traveled to Europe to spread his message about the religious
>>fraud and corruption in Medjugorje, Bosnia.
>>
>>He was received at the Vatican in Rome and Fatima in Portugal
>>and has been a frequent visitor to the office of Cardinal Ratzinger.
>>
>>Kronzer has traveled extensively throughout the United States
>>and Europe in his quest and has been instrumental in exposing
>>charlatans and scam artists who prey on the unaware.
>>
>>Internationally, Phillip has brought his mission to Rome,
>>Medjugorje, Fatima, and London. Kronzer's investigations have
>>made it no longer safe for him to visit Medjugorje, but
>>investigators for the Kronzer Foundation maintain a presence
>>there and reports are received regularly on the abuses
>>committed.
>>
>>Phillip Kronzer and the Kronzer Foundation are unique; their
>>privately funded efforts provide a watchdog function for the
>>Church. However, the Kronzer Foundation does not just catalog
>>abuses, it takes action to expose the wicked betrayers of the
>>Church and provides help to their victims.
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>http://www.kronzer.org/commentary_page_1.html

Orthodoc {Whose paternal grandfather was born and raised in Croatia (Markarska Riveria) and is part of the old Croatian aristocracy}


ááá
ááá

[Anastasios]

Wait, did you REALLY cite "Hitler's Pope"....? Aren't you aware that that book is a bunch of non-scholarly nonsense?  It is not published by a reputable academic press, but rather by a for-profit press that obviously wants $$$ over truth.

Here's a rebuttal of the work: http://sycophants.info/piusxii.html

In Christ,

anastasios

[Orthodoc]

[It is not published by a reputable academic press, but rather by a for-profit press that obviously wants $$$ over truth.]

Anastasious:

Since when has Viking press a member of Penguin Putnam, Inc. stopped being a reputable press?  

The book got very good press reviews.  See -

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0670886939/reviews/ref=pm_dp_ln_b_6/002-6864320-7235200


Here's a rebuttal of the work: http://sycophants.info/piusxii.html

This doesn't surprise me.  Any controvsial book is bound to have rebuttal.  Anyhow the book is is about Pope Pius XII not Cardinal Stepinac.  What I gave were excerpts from the book which refer to Stepinac.  Are we to discredit the entire book because someone wrote a rebuttal and you think it was published by a non reputable publishing house like Viking Press?  

Orthodoc

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Catholic Discussion (Moderator: username!) > Topic: Stupid Condescending site.