Although the proposed litigation is unlikely to be taken seriously by courts in Britain (see my post Singh v Singh and the unlikelihood of a heresy trial in the British courts) I can understand Fr Clilfton's reluctance to be subjected to all the strain and anxiety that even the threat of such a process might engender but I am saddened to think that we can no longer benefit from his honest, good humoured comments.
Fr Ray Blake has also been threatened with legal action. He comments:
This is an important justice issue of freedom of speech that affects a fundamental right to debate in the Church, it should not be ignored!Quite so!
In a recent article for the Catholic Times, Mgr Loftus speculated on the nature of Christ's risen body. He quoted St Paul's talk of a "spiritual body" after the resurrection and then quite wrongly drew the conclusion that Christ "was not physically present when he appeared to the disciples after the resurrection." Even a relatively inexperienced apologist would be able to refute that on the basis of the texts of the gospels:
Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side (Jn 20.27)and even more plainly:
See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have. (Lk 24.39)The idea that Christ's risen body was not physical was refuted as long ago as the second century by St Irenaeus. (Adversus Haereses 5.7.1)
The second letter of Cyril to Nestorius was declared by the Council of Ephesus to be in agreement with the Council of Nicea. It stated:
So too, when his flesh was raised to life, we refer to this again as his resurrection, not as though he had fallen into corruption--God forbid--but because his body had been raised again.The 4th Lateran Council (1215) states succinctly in its profession of faith:
He descended in the soul, rose in the flesh, and ascended in both.St Thomas Aquinas deals skilfully with various questions related to Christ's risen body in the Summa Theologica, part 3, question 54. In the first article of the question, the Angelic Doctor replies specifically to the objection which Monsignor Loftus raises (as though it were new) about Christ's body entering through doors that were closed.
It would be tedious and unnecessary to detail all of the various ways in which Monsignor Loftus has contradicted Pope Benedict's project of the hermeneutic of continuity in his analysis of the second Vatican Council. Suffice it to say that his weekly articles for the Catholic Times are considered by many good Catholics a negative element in that otherwise worthy newspaper which features, for example, an excellent weekly article by my good friend Fr Francis Marsden.
A while back, during a controversy about traditional liturgy in my parish, Monsignor Loftus wrote to The Tablet (quae delenda est) to encourage my parishioners not to contribute financially to my parish. I suppose I would have had some ground to sue him in the civil or ecclesiastical courts for this, but I felt that it was more sensible simply to offer a reasoned refutation of the claims made in his letter and then carry on with my life.
Social interaction on the internet has its pitfalls of course, and we have all had some comments that we might consider offensive. The internet offers us the opportunity to reply according to the scholastic maxim "quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur". Litigation might be necessary in some extreme circumstances but it seems to me a foolish and, frankly, uncouth path to take in the face of the ordinary business of theological discussion.
Some other links
St Mary Magdalen's Brighton: Fr Michael Clifton's last post?
That the Bones you have crushed may thrill: Litigious Priests
Libera me: Contemptible . . . what else can you call it?
Bara Brith: Very Sorry
The Muniment Room: Support Fr Mildew
Mulier Fortis: Sad ...
Porta Caeli: From Lofty heights
Stella Maris: Fr Clifton's blog closes
Australia Incognita: The word we are not allowed to use: heresy
25 comments:
Thank you Father for your clear and memorable defence of the physical Resurrection. I must print it.
Perhaps you might send the Monsignor a copy, as a Spiritual Work of Mercy, if such are still allowed.
If this were happening in another ecclesial organisation, one might be tempted to an uncharitable smirk.
As it is in the Bosom of Holy Mother Church, I and many others are grieved, sickened, ashamed.
I hope Father Clifton is aware of the prayers and support of so many Catholics.
Good commentary on Msgr. Loftus' position on Resurrection. That commentary needs wider circulation!
Am sorry Father Michael decided to close his blog, even though I did not always agree with him.
Very well expressed Fr Tim.
I am very interested in how this 'affair' will now be counter spun. I can almost see the Tablet/Times story about how Mgr Loftus has been subject to 'viscous' attacks by those crazy Catholic bloggers and how there needs to be some kind of pastoral regulation of those dangerous web-logs!
I tried to Google loftus and got loftus.com and with this:
Welcome to Loftus International. We are the leader in providing great products to the Wholesale, Costume, Novelty, Magic and Balloon Supplier. We are a wholesale/distributor selling to businesses,schools, churches, organizations and non-profits.
Seems to match the UK version too!
Of course misguided litigation can have one beneficial result for others . . . financial ruin for the person misguided enough to pursue it.
@ Father Finigan
I was saddened to read that a litigious bully has closed down 'Fr Mildew' a blog by your old teacher Fr Michael Clifton, who is a retired Catholic priest of a traditional mould.
I hope that the following news will cheer poor old Fr Michael Clifton up a bit.
My individual case for the defence against NF/BNP entry-ism into London's Sporting/Planning arena as evidenced by my FOOTBALL AGAINST RACISM IN EUROPE (FARE) 1991-2010 case focus is with our ConDem Nation Home Secretary after John Austin, the former leader of Greenwich Council, and my former MP for Erith & Thamesmead wrote to her about the case. David Evennett my new Bexleyheath & Crayford MP has also written to the Home Secretary to express his concerns about the case.
My 'state of the art' FARE KICK IT OUT case is best represented by the two following threads on the Friends Reunited UK General Election group's message board:
i/ Ed Miliband's new shadow cabinet http://www.friendsreunited.co.uk/SignedIn/MessageBoard/Responses.aspx?mk=1257040&g_t=6&g_k=20583
ii/ Junior Cameron http://www.friendsreunited.co.uk/SignedIn/MessageBoard/Responses.aspx?mk=1237891&g_t=6&g_k=20583
At the General Election former Met Police Inspector Michael Barnbrook, the malevolent neo-Nazi BNP Police Spokesman, stood as a candidate for MP in the Dagenham and Rainham Parliamentary constituency. Nick Griffin MEP, the BNP's leader stood as a candidate for MP in the neighbouring Parliamentary constituency of Barking. The BNP also put up candidates in all three London Borough of Bexley constituencies : Stephen James in Bexleyheath and Crayford : Kevin Saunders in Erith & Thamesmead : John Brooks in Old Bexley and Sidcup. The BNP Parliamentary AGENT FROM HELL 666, for Bexley's Parliamentary constituencies 999 +, was Mr Michael Barnbrook, 24 Holbeach Gardens, Sidcup, Kent DA15 8QW, which is on the doorstep of Our Lady of the Rosary Catholic Primary School in Blackfen +
I would be failing in my professional 'duty of care' if I failed to identify, and actively oppose the evil on the doorstep of Our Lady of the Rosary Catholic Primary School in Blackfen +, and in Greater London too.
I would therefore also like to dedicate my own anti-Nazi, You-Tube video performance at Barking & Dagenham Town Hall to England's first Green MP Caroline Lucas, & BEXLEY COUNCIL'S CULTURAL OLYMPIAD POETRY WORKSHOP:THEME SPORT at North Heath Library too, You Tube - Roy Hobson's anti-Nazi performance in Barking & Dagenham 2007 (From Dark to Light Too) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS9cKgj4UB4
Our Lady of the Rosary ( http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/2010/10/celebrating-parish-feast-day.html ) pray for us in BNP leader Nick Griffin MEP's EU/GLA/LDA/ODA NEO-NAZI DEVELOPMENT TIMES Amen
PAPA RATZI ( http://www.thepapalvisit.org ) ORA PRO NOBIS!
Best regards
Roy Hobson aka Our Lady's "Vesper" ON-LINE +
Charlton Athletic's player Roy Hobson 1971/72 aka Millwall's supporter "Vesper" 2010/11
ROY HOBSON FRICES1990, FRICS1984,Grad Dipl QS
PS "UNDER ATTACK WE FIGHT BACK"
Thank you for a very clear and reasoned statement Father.
It is a positive example of the Christianity which you believe and preach. It also exposes and elegantly demolishes unacceptable opinions and attitudes. This heals and calms someone like myself, who, not being a direct party in this dispute, is unable to do anything practical, yet boils with loathing and disgust at the situation.
That any christian, let alone a prelate, should threaten a priest with secular court action, in direct disobedience to St Paul's clear teaching in 1 Cor.6, shows that person's disregard of the Apostolic teaching of Christ's Church. The respect he can expect within it diminishes accordingly, even if his title remains as a rag to cover his ignominy.
How sad, and what a shame Fr Clifton has decided to close his blog.
Thank you for your reasoned defence of orthodox Catholic teaching.
God bless.
Is Monsignor Loftus' opinion possibly based on Rahner's philosophy/theology?
Thanks for your flattering comment on me ! much underserved. I had a note from Total Catholic which gave an extract from correspondence about the mgR. AND this shows how dangerous he can be if crossed.
Seems like a case of over reaction, inability to reflect honestly and an inclination to bully another. A poor example for any priest to emulate and a lack of respect for the elderly. Let's hope reason and charity return.
Can anyone provide a link to the actual post by Fr. Clifton for which Monsignor Loftus found offensive?
This story has been posted all over the traditional blogosphere, but as yet the entire post has not been provided.
When the clergy or laity presume to correct a member of the Catholic heirarchy, it always needs to be done in an absolutley factual, and, just as importantly, in a charitable manner as well.
I've a feeling that Fr. Clifton's words were, well, less than charitable. Many traditional, or traditional-minded Catholics are used to saying whatever they like, and getting away with it. Perhaps this is a wake-up call that this needs to change.
Enoch - it was a comment on Fr Ray Blake's blog which Fr Blake deleted. He does not have a copy of the comment unfortunately.
Saying whatever they like and getting away with it is not confined to traditional Catholics. I agree with you that we should express ourselves charitably but a writer in a Catholic paper also needs to be prepared to accept robust criticism if his views are provocative.
(BTW Mgr Loftus is not a "member of the hierarchy".)
Fr. Finigan,
I was under the impression that a priest who is incardinated in a Catholic diocese is a member of the Catholic hierarchy. If I'm wrong, please let me know.
I agree that saying whatever they like and getting away with it is not confined to traditional Catholics. But surely, shouldn't traditional Catholics know better, given their continual exposure to the lives of the saints, as well as (presumably) correct Catholic doctrine being promulgated from the pulpit and blogs of traditional priests?
Sir,
Do you agree with me that in these challenging times, the nation needs, nay, requires the return of that great legal drama.....Misleading Cases.....???
When people start flaying each other over scarce "resources" we will need whole brigades of Philadelphia lawyers....Pronto.
Therefore the urgent return to our screens of this compelling real life drama can't come quick enough.
The burning question is: now that Moore Marriot is no longer with us......where can we find a matinee idol to play our hero, Albert Haddock....????
Enoch - the word hierarchy is used in different ways but normally when "the hierarchy" is used, it refers to the bishops.
A very well put demolition of Loftus's heterodox views. His bullying tactics stem no doubt from the knowledge, deep down, that he's wrong. Such misrepresentations of Catholic doctrinal teaching in public by a member of the clergy cause scandal and we as Catholics have a duty to challenge and correct them.
Enoch: your understandable concern assumes that any criticisms of the Monsignor were made in deadly earnest. There was a serious point but there was also a note of humour which was not that of maliciously sarcastic contempt.
Enoch
It goes without saying that the hierarchy, however we define it, deserves our respect. Imagine my surprise, then, on reading a letter in the Tablet this month, from a Monsignor Loftus, in which he objects to a comment by Monsignor Ignacio Carrasco de Paula, on the Nobel Prize awarded to the pioneers of IVF. Msgr Loftus omits the title Monsignor in naming this august member of the hierarchy, who is head of the Pontifical Academy of Life. He also says that the fact that Mr Edwards now 85 years of age is too feeble even to comment on his well-deserved and overdue award, simply adds to the crassness and insensitivity of the(de Paula's) comment.
This letter was published in the 9th October 2010 letters page of the Tablet. As Msgr Loftus has thoughtfully provided his contact details, Enoch - perhaps you could advise him of your views on respect for the hierarchy, preferably via the Tablet's letters page, as Msgr Loftus might not care to correspond in person.
Link obtained from googling - below, for those who wish to read the reported comments of Msgr de Paula and determine whether his comments were crass and insensitive...or merely obedient to the laws of the Church.
Of course you could also obtain a regular subscription to this worthy and doctrinally sound publication, and ask for a back copy.
http://www.thetablet.co.uk/pdf/4347
Perhaps as soneone growing old I have an insight into the lonlieness and `it is all over for me` kind of mindset that may well be that of Father Loftus. I once went to her an old modernist bishop speak and for the life of me I could not get angry with him. Perhaps it is just one of those silly outbrusts of old age that affected Loftus. The matter is dealt with by St Paul in 1Corinthains 6:1-9. We are all getting too hot and bothered, so Fr Clifton should go back top his blog, Fr Loftus should be left to huff and to puff, and the rest of us get on with our lives.
Mgr Loftus may well be out of order. But am I the only one to find the way some of this discussion is being conducted rather distasteful?
To help me, please, what is "traditional" priest or Catholic?
I've come to the conclusion that the real cause of unforgiving ire isn't caused by Fr Clifton's rather mild comments (anyone who thinks 'Lofty is at it again' is vicious needs to get out more) but by the election of Joseph Ratzinger to the Papacy. For the past couple of decades, the liberals spoke openly - and tastelessly - of 'when John Paul dies', imagining the payback once their candidate was elected, which he surely would be...
'The Next Pope' was even the title of a book by one liberal desperate for the great Pole's demise.
And then what? The next Pope is the very person the liberals hated more than John Paul II - it's their worst nightmare, and it gets worse... Summorum Pontificum.... and a completely different direction in liturgy and Church teaching than they had ever expected.
I feel rather sorry for them. But not that sorry.
This, I think, is what grates the most.
I think Clare has it is a nutshell.
The thing I don't understand is considering his work in the diplomatic service and his degree in canon law, why has Mgr Loftus threatening a course of action which has no hope of succeeding in an ecclesiastical Court in such an undiplomatic(let alone unchristian) fashion?
You may like to see an article by "Mgr Basil Foltus" discussion his contributions to Vatican II. It's on my blog:
http://ecclesandbosco.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/vatican-ii-50-years-on.html
Post a Comment