D
dyspepsic
Guest
You are putting words into his mouth, and motivations into his thoughts. He never said it was necessary to change (read: weaken Papal Infallibility), and he never implied that there was a change necessary in Leo XIII’s statement on Anglican Orders.As Cardinal Kasper said, " It is beyond the scope of our **present **context to discuss a re-evaluation of Apostolicae curiae"
Just a matter of time my friend.
You need to re-read Cardinal Kasper
" the historical conditionality of the dogma of the First Vatican Council (1869/70), which must be distinguished from its remaining obligatory content, has become clear. This historical development did not come to an end with the two Vatican Councils, but goes on, and so also in the future the Petrine ministry has to be exercised in line with the changing needs of the Church. **
These insights have led to a re-interpretation of the dogma of the Roman primacy. This does not at all mean that there are still not enormous problems in terms of what such a ministry of unity should look like, how it should be administered, whether and to what degree it should have jurisdiction and whether under certain circumstances it could make infallible statements in order to guarantee the unity of the Church and at the same time the legitimate plurality of local churches. …, I envision communion as participation in the same faith, and participation in the same sacraments, especially sharing at the same table of the Lord; and I envision it also through the mutual recognition of the ministry of episcope in apostolic succession and in communion with the Petrine ministry, the dogmatic understanding and practice of which is re-interpreted and re-received in the light of the whole tradition of the Church and with regard to the current needs of the Church. In this way the churches remain churches in legitimate diversity and retain the best of their traditions while yet becoming one Church, which praises God with one voice and gives unanimous witness to the world for justice, reconciliation and peace.
Ecumenism is not countersigned by loss but by mutual enrichment, the authentic understanding of which is not that we convert to the other Church **but that all convert to Christ; and in him, who is our unity and our peace, we shall truly be one. Thus we do not advocate an ecumenism of return. Ecumenism is not a way back; it is a way ahead in the future."
“Present” doesn’t mean he will in the future. As a matter of fact, has it done it since then???
BTW any Anglicans who ever cared had themselves ordained by Polish Catholic bishops, or joined the Catholic Church to be re-ordained.
You failed to make your case against Cardinal Kasper. He never said what you have accused him of.
That is all you got? - is that your best shot?
Traditionalists live in fear that the Church is going to change. But like the diaper of a newborn baby change is always necessary, although the baby remains the same. Feeney and Lefebreve live on in your fears. Time to put them to rest, ‘requiescant in pace’.
I now see Traditionalists in a truer light - a fearful group who is afraid of losing a Church they think exists.
It is necessary to fulfill the prayer of Jesus, that they all may be one. It is an obligation we must work to fulfill. We wont get there without accepting the working of the Spirit.