More Oddness from Bob Sungenis
Bob, most recently arguing that the Earth does not rotate and is the center of the universe around which everything else rotates, that Einstein was wrong, and that the Pope doesn’t understand theology enough to say that some aspects of evolutionary theory are compatible with Catholic faith, has now decided to write a very long piece on the recent gathering in Assisi. In the course of it, Bob (who calls letters to Salon “articles”), also seems to think off-the-cuff remarks made by me on a BBS some months ago are formal debating points. They’re not. They’re my quick impressions of an article written by somebody who was extremely critical of Assisi for reasons that I could not and still can’t fathom. Somehow, Bob got hold of these (I think somebody took my scribbles from the board and posted them on their site, and Bob noticed them). Anyhow, Bob has stitched together my off-the-cuff remarks into an amazingly windy tract, the substance of which is “Be afraid! Be very afraid! They’re tunnelling under your house!”
Me? I’m sticking with the Pope and saying “Be not afraid.” I still don’t get what the big deal was with Assisi. The Church basically affirmed what could be affirmed in common with other religions (as that civil peace is preferable to death on a massive scale, people should not run with scissors, and love of the human person is, on the whole, better than hatred of the human person). There was no common worship, no common prayer. Yes, people did go off and pray according to their particular traditions (that’s called “religious liberty”. You can read about it in Dignitatis Humanae.) But there was no pretense by the Church that “we’re all really saying the same thing”. Remember? This is the same Church that caused a firestorm two years ago by publishing Dominus Jesus, which said “We’re not all saying the same thing. Catholic faith is the fullness of revelation.”
When Progressives all freak out that the Church is triumphalist and Reactionaries all freak out that the Church is completely abandoning the faith in pursuit of ecumenism, my instincts tell me John Paul is probably doing just about right. To paraphrase Chesterton, when you see a thing condemned for being too fat and too thin, too tall and too short, too round and too square, too red and too green, you may be sure that it is very good.