Tuesday, July 07, 2009

First, Obama's A Good Guy...
Now this

WARNING! Harsh language alert!

More Idiocy At L'Osservatore Romano. Here's some of the article from AFP; Emphasis and comments mine)
Vatican newspaper praises French Protestant John Calvin

VATICAN CITY (AFP) – The Vatican newspaper Friday praised influential French Protestant John Calvin, a critic of the Roman Catholic Church, hailing him an "extraordinary" figure. (Judas was extraordinary... your point?)

The Osservatore Romano, on the 500th anniversary of Calvin's birth, said it recognised the theologian as a Christian who had a major impact on European life. (The Bubonic Plague had a major impact on European life... your point?)

"Considering the strength of arguments against him, we think it necessary to point out that Calvin is a Christian," the daily paper said of the man who played a major role in the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century. (And I think it necessary to point out that he may have believed that Christ is the Redeemer, but he also disregarded much of what Christ taught... to the point of heresy.)

The paper ranked Calvin alongside 18th century French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau for his influence on modern European life. (Well, Hitler, Stalin and Mao were influential, too.)

The pair were the "only two men who influenced some Europeans to change course and were strong enough to lead them in a new direction," it wrote. (Much like Judas, the Bubonic Plague, Hitler, Stalin and Mao.)

The "mark left by the reformer was deep," the Osservatore Romano continued, praising Calvinism as a "ingenious creation" which resisted "all the changes or revolutions of modern life." (Pure, unadulterated bullshit. But then again, I'm sure some consider Zyklon B to be an ingenious creation.)

Calvin, who lived in the 16th century, broke with the Roman Catholic Church and became one of its most ardent critics and helped the Reformation to take root across Europe. (The gods of ecumania must receive their sacrifice. In this case, it's The Catholic Church that's offered up. Nice job L'Osservatore Romano !)

He was a contemporary of the father of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther. (If Calvin's the father, Luther's the bastard son.)

Awww, what bullshit. Calvin was a scumbag heretic that did everything in his power to destroy The Church and send souls to hell. Freakin' PERIOD!!

I just wonder if the boneheads at L'Osservatore Romano will publish a "clarification" article posthaste... just like they did when they praised The Zero.


Blogger Adeodatus49 said...

(If Calvin's the father, Luther's the bastard son.)

Actually, historically and theologically it would be the other way around.

Also, don't be so hard on Calvin. What you say about his heresy was correct, but we should all remember that this was ultimately started by Catholic bishops who were atrocious leaders and who forgot that they possessed the fulness of the Priesthood of Jesus Christ, the High Priest. They were venal, corrupt, and worldly. Sound familiar? (Hint. Ole Rembie, for example)

Calvin confronted these awful prelates . . . yes . . . inappropriately . . . but he didn't start the problems that ultimately led to what he and Luther had done.

And you among others have pointed out the problems with the modern American Catholic hierarchy. You can then imagine how what would be called "Protestantism" about 70 years after Luther got started. Whatever Calvin's sins may have been, the sins of Catholic Churchman back then were even worse IMHO!

One Calvin-like phenomena hitting the Church today is the growth of Protestantism in Central and South America. I believe the reason why Protestants are being so successful there is that they are preaching Jesus Christ crucified and risen from the dead (yes, I know I have harped on this before) while liberal Churchmen and laity are promoting social justice separated from the Lord's salvation. No one should be surprised by the result.

What L'Osservatore Romano left out was St. Francis de Sales whom the Pope appointed Bishop of Geneva, Calvin's city. St. Francis was very effective in returning Protestants (e.g., Calvinists) to the Catholic faith. He very much impressed Calvin, although sadly Calvin failed to follow his former co-religionists back into the Catholic fold. The Vatican should have played the St. Francis de Sales card rather than in misguided pseudo-ecumenical zeal, have showcased Jean Calvin.

IMHO, there is no way in which Calvin could be worse to Mao who was responsible for the deaths of 100 million Chinese (this is a conservative number). Even Genghis Khan, whose policies killed 15 million Chinese, is a saint compared with Mao. I believe that Mao is history's premier arch-villain followed by Stalin and Hitler.

Just my 2 cents worth.

10:53 PM  
Blogger Al said...

Is L'Osservatore Romano trying to become the Vatican equivelent of The National Enquiror or what?????

10:59 PM  
Blogger Old Bob said...

I've said it before, and I say it again: You're the greatest! Thanks!

12:53 AM  
Blogger Joe of St. Thérèse said...

If by attempting to destroy the Church with double pre-destination, then by all means he was great.

2:34 AM  
Blogger Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

You're correcr Re: weak and corrupt bishops. And the article fails to mention the Catholic Counter-Reformation (which we both know, nullified any legit complaint the rebels may have had.

And I suspect that we'd probably agree that Mao did everyting ininpower to ensure hell for millions in this world. Calvin did everything to ensure hell for millions in the world to come.


5:02 AM  
Blogger C said...

I love how liberals and evangelicals like to believe that the Protestant "Deformation" created a more tolerant, advanced, and progressive society and that it was a break from repressive and backward Catholicism. History does not support this. Luther and Calvin hated eachother and the protestants went after one another with about as much vehemence as they did to the Catholics. Calvin was no enlightened proto-liberal; he created a theocratic dictatorship in Geneva and burned anyone who disagreed with him at the stake. (What? I thought only those evil Cathylicks burned people at the stake!) Michael Servetus anyone? Or what about Luther, who advocated exterminating the Jews and sided with the nobility against the rebellious peasantry? Yep yep, Calvin and Luther were real agents of progressive change for Europe and such a break with its intolerant medieval past... Yeah right!

12:01 PM  
Blogger Enbrethiliel said...


I'll have to check my sources again, but didn't Calvin found the first and only "Christian Police State"--the most decidedly un-Catholic a community can get without actually declaring war on civilisation?

What's next, an article in praise of Mohammed?

2:51 PM  
Blogger Enbrethiliel said...


PS -- Cavey, I don't think you had to mention Hitler, Stalin and Mao. Rousseau was pretty bad himself, though not to the point of mass murder, and it's actually ironic that the writer of the article lets them "share the blame" for the state of modern life in Europe.

2:52 PM  
Blogger chestertonian said...

Yes, Adeodatus, there were legitimate abuses and corruption by Catholic bishops that contributed to the Protestant revolt, as well as things the bishops had no control over, such as the Bubonic Plag, in which the demographic that was hardest hit was Catholic clergy, and men and women religious -- thanks to priests administering last rites to the thousands of sick, who also were cared for by monks and nuns in monasteries and convents across Europe.

And it was not enough for the rebels to simply want to correct the abuses. They attacked and denied one ancient Dogma after another. Finally, they got to Catholic teaching on the Mother of God. And that, Chesterton wrote, had a familiar sound: "a hiss out of hell."

10:40 PM  
Blogger Adeodatus49 said...

Luther and Calvin hated eachother and the protestants went after one another with about as much vehemence as they did to the Catholics.

Also, most people don't realize that Luther was devoted to the Blessed Virgin Mary. No, I'm not on old Father L's side by any means. And Copernicus ultimately got into trouble with both Protestant and Catholics PTBs over his heliocentrism. Politics, bureaucracy, and vested interests were at stake more than scientific principles, just like in the future with Galileo. Of course don't tell this to Richard Dawkins.

4:25 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home