Liberal Catholic Theologians Call for Pope to Resign Over Holocaust Denier

[PalJoey]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 12:23pm

Has a pope ever resigned?

===


Call for pope to step down over Holocaust denier

Feb 2 04:21 PM US/Eastern

Attacks on Pope Benedict XVI's decision to lift the excommunication of a Holocaust denier escalated Monday, with one theologian calling on him to step down as the head of the Roman Catholic Church.

Criticism following the pope's January 24 announcement has been particularly cutting in Germany, where denying the Holocaust is a crime punishable with a jail sentence.

"If the pope wants to do some good for the Church, he should leave his job," eminent liberal Catholic theologian Hermann Haering told the German daily Tageszeitung.

"That would not be a scandal, a bishop has to relinquish his position at 75 years, a cardinal loses his rights at 80 years," he said. Pope Benedict is 81.

Meanwhile, a senior Vatican official acknowledged the Vatican administration may have made "management errors" with the decision to lift excommunication against four bishops, including Richard Williamson, whose comments sparked the controversy.

"I observe the debate with great concern. There were misunderstandings and management errors in the Curia," said Cardinal Walter Kasper, who is in charge of the Vatican department that deals with Jewish relations.

"The Pope wanted to open the debate because he wanted unity inside and outside," the German cardinal told Vatican Radio.

He also noted that "these bishops are still suspended."

An international uproar followed the decision to rehabilitate Williamson, an English bishop who has dismissed as "lies" historical evidence that six million Jews were gassed by the Nazis during World War II. Jews and Catholics alike have produced widespread criticism.

"A pardon that tastes of poison," wrote Franco Garelli, an expert in religious history, in Italy's daily La Stampa Monday.

"The trouble caused by this complicated affair is evident not only outside the Church but within it," wrote the academic, who spoke of the "profound discomfort stirred up by the lifting of the excommunication in numerous Catholic circles."

Back in Germany, high-ranking Catholic officials said the pope risked losing vital support.

"There is obviously a loss of confidence" in the pope and "rehabilitating a denier is always a bad idea," the bishop of Hamburg, Werner Thissen, told the daily Hamburger Abendblatt on Monday.

The bishop of Rottenburg-Stuttgart, Gebhard Furst, meanwhile spoke of his "uncertainty, incomprehension and deception" in the national Bild.

In France, home to Europe's largest Jewish population, chief rabbi Gilles Bernheim denounced Williamson's remarks as "despicable" in an interview with Le Monde.

Williamson claimed that only between 200,000 and 300,000 Jews died before and during World War II, and none in the gas chambers.

French government spokesman Luc Chatel called Williamson's remarks "unacceptable, abject and intolerable."

In Austria, where Pope Benedict last week named a controversial ultra-conservative priest as auxiliary bishop in Linz, criticism also came from within the Church.

Vienna's cardinal and archbishop, Christoph Schoenborn, on Sunday lashed out at the decision to bring Williamson back into the fold, saying that "he who denies the Holocaust cannot be rehabilitated within the Church."

Belgian daily La Libre Belgique slammed the Vatican's "blindness" and "deafness," drawing links between Williamson and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"Apparently no one can make the Iranian president and his henchman see reason" when they deny the "truth" of the Holocaust, and it is the same with the "bishop recently anointed by the highest authority of the Catholic Church," it said.

For the pope, the "blunder is extraordinary, especially given that his willingness for a dialogue with Judaism is indisputable," said French daily Liberation.
Call for pope to step down over Holocaust denier

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 12:32pm

Some liberals they are. I believe that we should give a platform to all differing points of view. That's the way we do it in the New America. These so-called "liberal" Catholics (which is an oxymoron, no?) should look to use for example. Updated On: 2/3/09 at 12:32 PM

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 12:56pm

"Liberal Catholics"???? That's funny. There is also no such thing, except in their little made-up world.

[Q]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:01pm

Reading the comments section is pretty interesting.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:04pm

i cannot see how benedict can withstand this outpouring. oh wait, yeah i can. he's the pope.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:09pm

Q, did you see this one?

Then Christians should ask All the Rabbis in the world to step down for denying that Jesus is the Son of the Living God!
Yes, you heard me: Step down, all of you!

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:33pm

Popes can and have resigned.

Does this guy still deny the holocaust? Or did he make a full confession and do penance? If the pop abolved him and told him "Go, and deny no more!" I don't know how anyone could challenge that.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:42pm

I still don't know why it's so difficult for some that there are liberal Christians--even liberal Catholics.

Do ALL Catholics believe that birth control is a sin? No.

Do ALL Catholics believe that a woman should not have a right to choose? No.

Do ALL Cathlics believe that being gay is a sin? No.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:46pm

Then they aren't Catholics. They just call themselves Catholics. Why? I don't know. And, I've never seen anything that says that being gay is a sin.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:49pm

But that doesn't matter. You can't write your own morality and still say you are a part of the organization with which your made up dogma conflicts.

You can say you're a pro-choice Catholic, but it doesn't work that way. And if you DO believe that you know better than what the church says, why go to church at all? It doesn't make a lick of sense.



(That's a general "you" up there)

[blueroses]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:50pm

John, even if we leave abortion and birth control out of the equation, what about the Catholics who are in favor of ending the war and are against the death penalty? Who are in favor of government social programs to help the homeless and the poor, protect the elderly and spend on education? How would they not be considered liberal?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:52pm

i side with phyllis.


ghostlight2 is eliminated

Posted: 2/3/09 at 1:53pm

I think you'd have to call them "Bad" catholics, not liberal. After all, a basic tenet of the church is that the Pope is infallible when he speaks on matters of faith. HE says abortion is wrong, if you think it isn't you are wrong, not him.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 2:02pm

exactly, joe.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 2:11pm

Well, it is my understanding that those who are liberal Catholics, want the traditions and customs of the Catholics church, but disagree with some of the decrees or interpretations.

I don't think any intelligent person is going to agree 100% with ANY religious leader or overall church policies all the time. That seems as likely to me as someone agreeing 100% with a politician or party platform all the time.

And, the reality is that there ARE Catholics who don't follow 100% of the pope's decrees. If we truly kicked everyone out for this, there wouldn't be a Catholic church.

Perfectionism is a fool's paradise.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 2:13pm

John, even if we leave abortion and birth control out of the equation, what about the Catholics who are in favor of ending the war and are against the death penalty? Who are in favor of government social programs to help the homeless and the poor, protect the elderly and spend on education? How would they not be considered liberal?

But that something different, entirely. Yes, in a secular world, you might be considered liberal, but in a Catholic world, you would just be considered Catholic. That is not what was intended by the original post, however.

[Q]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 2:31pm

"I don't think any intelligent person is going to agree 100% with ANY religious leader or overall church policies all the time."

Setting aside for a moment the whole dogma issue, there's the simple foundation of the 'sky god' principle and the attendant virgin birth/miracle child/salvation in space business. So I haven't yet reconciled intelligent people participating in the overall mumbo-jumbo, much less how they might feel about the fine print.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 3:13pm

I spent many years of my youth in the church, and I never once was taught that we could handpick what we wanted to follow and what we didn't. I get that people DO do that, but they seem to miss the thing that I NEVER forgot for a second - don't follow the church's teachings and risk burning in Hell for eternity.

Intellectually we've evolved to the point that we HAVE to make concessions and explain away the stuff we don't like (or rather, don't want to obey), lest we continue to live in the 1st century. The problem is that the more you evolve intellectually, the harder it is to keep justifying following ANY of it.


Updated On: 2/3/09 at 03:13 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 3:59pm

As a non-Catholic (uppercase) with catholic (lowercase) interests, I've always been fascinated by the liberal (lowercase) Catholic (uppercase) writings of Swiss theologian Hans Kung.

Is he considered an apostate to those of you who are orthodox (lowercase) Catholics (uppercase)?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 4:07pm

My sex life is very catholic.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 4:10pm

As I said to the Abbot, "I'll get in the Habit, but not in the habit."
Updated On: 2/3/09 at 04:10 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/3/09 at 7:56pm

if it ain't kung pow it's an apostasy.

[TheHumanTorch]

Posted: 2/4/09 at 5:01am

"After all, a basic tenet of the church is that the Pope is infallible when he speaks on matters of faith."

That's not true at all. Papal infallibility has only been exercised twice in the history of the Church and only officially 'ex cathedra' once, both having to do with Marian Theology. After the Second Vatican Council there was a push towards individual Catholic communities. Because of Vatican II, any given church can alter its teaching so to make it "fit" for the community. THAT is how liberal Catholicism works.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/4/09 at 8:04am

fit the community, huh?

the church on homosexual unions

Updated On: 2/4/09 at 08:04 AM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 2/4/09 at 8:15am

Papa--as a student of Catholic history, surely you're aware of the 10th and 11th century Christianc documents the "Office of Same-Sex Union" and the "Order for Uniting Two Men."

These church rites had all the symbols of a heterosexual marriage: the whole community gathered in a church, a blessing of the couple before the altar was conducted with their right hands joined, holy vows were exchanged, a priest officiatied in the taking of the Eucharist and a wedding feast for the guests was celebrated afterwards. These elements all appear in contemporary illustrations of the holy union of the Byzantine Warrior-Emperor, Basil the First (867-886 CE) and his companion John.


Saint Sergius, openly celebrated as the "sweet companion and lover" of St. Bacchus. Sergius and Bacchus's close relationship has led many modern scholars to believe they were lovers. But the most compelling evidence for this view is that the oldest text of their martyrology, written in New Testament Greek describes them as "erastai," or "lovers."...Their orientation and relationship was not only acknowledged, but it was fully accepted and celebrated by the early Christian church, which was far more tolerant than it is today.

When Same-Sex Marriage Was a Christian Rite

Updated On: 2/4/09 at 08:15 AM