The head of the Chaldean Catholic Church has reprimanded priests and religious who have left Iraq in recent months without the permission of their bishop or religious superior. Priests …
Where is Patriarch Louis Raphaël I Sako living ?
I believe His Beatitude has lived in Baghdad since his election by the holy synod.
In other words, he’s out of harms way, but telling the clergy who fled for their lives with their flocks they had to stay and be slaughtered ?
I wouldn’t say “out of harms way”. Sure, Baghdad is not under ISIS control (thank God), but Christian churches have been targeted by terrorist attacks in recent years.
Perhaps a Chaldean Catholic could join the discussion and elaborate, but perhaps this is more targeted towards priests who fled to protect their own skin while leaving their flocks back in Iraq.
Where he lives doesn’t actually matter.
I think it does when he’s telling priest who fled Mosul and other parts where ISIS attacked, that they had to stay unless given permission by him to leave, and of course they would have be martyred.
So the geographic location of a clergy’s superior determines if said clergy must adhere to his vows/oaths of obedience?
It does when the clergy are serving in an area where their being murdered is going to take place and they flee for their lives and the Bishop out of harms way tells them that they were not given permission from him to leave.
No one can order another person to become a martyr.
Please provide your evidence that the geographic location of a clergy’s superior has some sort of impact on the morality of said superior’s orders to said clergy.
Cripes, just read the article in the OP.
You mean this- "The head of the Chaldean Catholic Church has reprimanded priests and religious who have left Iraq in recent months without the permission of their bishop or religious superior.
Priests and religious may not decide “where to serve, how to serve, and [whom] to serve,” said Patriarch Louis Raphaël I Sako, according to a Fides report. “We have to live and die in the place where God calls us.”
Priests and religious who do not return to Iraq within a month, the patriarch added, will face disciplinary measures."
Yeah, I already read it. Funny thing, I didn’t see anything in there about the Patriarch wanting the priests and religious to stay in Iraq in order to make them Martyrs and I didn’t see anything in there about how the morality of an order given by one’s religious superior is somehow based on where they are or how the act instead of the universal and unchanging moral system established by God.
The morality of the Patriarch’s comments and orders to his clergy doesn’t change if he is living in France or if he is living in Baghdad. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that the Patriarch doesn’t live in Iraq and is doing a “do as I say, not as I do” thing. If the “do as I say” part is moral, his orders are valid. The “not as I do” part doesn’t matter in this regard.
You have to read the full story which was linked in the article.
Now, after the tragic events that in northern Iraq have involved tens of thousands of Christians forced to flee their homes before the advance of the jihadists of the Islamic State (IS), Patriarch Louis Raphael I recalls all the Chaldean priests and religious who left Iraq and moved to the Chaldean diaspora communities around the world, to return to their country and put themselves at the service of those who are most in need. fides.org/en/news/36393-ASIA_IRAQ_The_Chaldean_Patriarch_to_priests_and_religious_who_emigrated_without_permission_come_back_to_serve_those_most_in_need#.VCspnxZ0Z9U
Ok, I read the second article. No mention of wanting them to become Martyrs and nothing supporting your idea that the geographic location of a priest’s or religious’s superior has any impact on the morality of said superior’s orders.
Telling them that they did not have permission to leave, despite the fact that the area they were in, had they stayed they most certainly would have been martyred is the reality of the situation.
Also, the priest and clergy fled with their flocks and were living in the exile camps, serving the people there.
So in other words, where a priest’s or religious’s superior is geographically at doesn’t matter; what matters is the morality of what they are ordering the priest or religious to do. Um……isn’t that my argument?:shrug:
The superior’s geographic location is relevant in relation to him being out of harms way, while where telling his subordinates they must stay where they will be martyred.
Ok, let’s assume your argument is correct. We now have the Patriarch engaging in immoral behavior if he isn’t actually in Iraq because he is ordering his clergy and religious to stay and become martyrs (your claim that staying will surely led to their deaths) and the Patriarch engaging in immoral behavior if he is in Iraq because he is ordering his clergy and religious to stay and become martyrs along with himself (once again your claim that they will surely die if they stay). Ok, where does one have to geographically be in order for those logical conclusions of your argument to not be an unjust and immoral comment on the Patriarch’s statement and actions?
I never mentioned the Patriarch engaging in immoral behavior,
Also, you’re making assumptions, not me.
The Patriarch is in Bagdhad, or at least that’s what was told to me when asked.
The priests and monks who fled, according to the report, were part of the diaspora, i.e, fled the persecution by ISIS.
The Patriarch is making a decision based on canon law in where he is the superior over the priests and religious and is making the statement that they can only leave with permission from him.
If my understanding of the events are correct, his statement is flawed in that he has no right to order priests and religious to make themselves martyrs.
You on the other hand are saying he has every right to demand that the priests and religious must stay put where they were assigned and be martyred.
Here, I’ll make it easy for you. Please link or quote where the Patriarch stated he wanted the priests and religious to return in order for them to be martyred. Or, if you can’t do that, how about a link or quote in which the Patriarch states he is staying in Iraq in order to be martyred. No need to discuss how Canon Law actually isn’t something that one can ignore when it is inconvenient, especially when one has taken religious vows. No need even to discuss how your new argument of it being immoral of him to make them martyrs means him being in Iraq or on the moon has no bearing on his statement. Nope, just provide us with where the Patriarch came out and said he wanted all those priests and religious back because he wanted them to be martyred.