I spent years in fundamentalist churches and attended a 4-year fundamentalist Bible Institute. Any fundamentalist who did not view the RCC as apostate was himself viewed as such. The penalty for a church member with an aberrant view of the RCC would undoubtedly be excommunication. A minister with these views would be ostracized and banned from fundamentalist circles.

So, that brings us to John Hagee and his new views on the RCC. After being raked over the coals of popular opinion following his endorsement of Sen. John McCain, Hagee has had a change of heart.

In a letter to William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights, Hagee wrote: “Out of a desire to advance a greater unity among Catholics and evangelicals in promoting the common good, I want to express my deep regret for any comments that Catholics have found hurtful.” The letter can be found here.

Hagee has referred to the Inquisition and the Crusades as evidence of anti-Semitism within the RCC. He believed that that RCC anti-Semitism caused Adolf Hitler’s insane quest to eradicate Jews.

His letter goes on to state: “In my zeal to oppose anti-Semitism and bigotry in all its ugly forms, I have often emphasized the darkest chapters in the history of Catholic and Protestant relations with the Jews. In the process, I may have contributed to the mistaken impression that the anti-Jewish violence of the Crusades and the Inquisition defines the Catholic Church. It most certainly does not.”

Hagee continues backpedaling on his decades of belief and commentary on the RCC by stating in another part of the letter: “In addition, I better understand that the reference to the Roman Catholic Church as the “apostate church” and the “great whore” described in the book of Revelation is a rhetorical device long employed in anti-Catholic literature and commentary.”

Where to begin? For him to say that he better understands that these are rhetorical devices used by anti-Catholic writers is absurd. Hagee is not a stupid man. He had an earned Masters degree and has undoubtedly read a book or two which referred to the RCC using these terms and then some. He knows that this view of the RCC is prevalent in the circles he has traveled in since his youth. I am curious as to whether this is a considered opinion or a political dodge.

Billy Graham went from the “great whore” view in his early life to the very inclusive view he currently holds. Graham essentially holds to a murky universalism that made me wonder what his “Crusades” were designed to accomplish. I addressed this issue some years ago in an article I wrote. I may scan it and some others and repost them another time.

The reaction of Hagee’s followers and his fellow fundamentalists will be interesting.

In excoriating the immorality of those who divorce without enriching the coffers of Rome B16 called divorce, which he lumped with abortion, ”serious offences… which violate human dignity, inflict deep injustice on human and social relations and offend God himself, guarantor of conjugal peace and origin of life.” But, for a fee, he is willing to declare that a marriage has never occured and therefore annulled.

I am a former Roman Catholic. I view many of the teachings and practices of the RCC, in my kinder moments, as being odd and antithetical to Christianity as I understand it. All of the Canon Lawyers and RCC theologians can insert their pooh, poohs and complaints here (De Catholicis, nil nisi malum). Beyond that I view many of the actions of the RCC as highly commendable. And the issue of annulment is one of the areas that I find detestable.

Some years ago this issue was in the news because of the granting of a decree of nullity to Joseph P. Kennedy II. Joe decided that since he was a good Catholic and had the coin and prestige needed to swing the deal, he would get an annulment. Along with philandering and alcohol abuse that seems to be a family tradition. Unfortunately for little Joe his wife (the first one) decided that the prospect of her children being seen as bastards in the eyes of the RCC was not a fate she wanted for them. So, given no other choices, she wrote a book.

Some time after the book was written the decision was reviewed in Rome. No doubt the bad publicity stemming from other scandals was good timing for Sheila Rauch Kennedy. But this does little for the many women and children who are branded as something as less-than-equal in the church community by the annulment of a marriage that the church blessed at its start.

If the RCC is actually that concerned with divorce I suggest it stop granting them! Whatever the name a divorce is a divorce. Families are damaged by divorce and it should be the mission of all churches to lessen the damage. The reality is that divorce is never going to go away and churches are in a unique position to help all parties to heal and move on in a healthy manner.