Errors of JPII

[vern_humphrey]

Magicsilence:

Um, OUCH. Please, for goodness sake, read what ive written before judging me.

No one is judging you. We have read what you wrote, and looked at your cites.

We gently point out that the site is bogus, a mish-mash of anti-Pope nonsense all strung together – a common anti-Catholic tactic.

We also remind you, as it is our duty to do, that you have no authority to judge or criticize the Pope on religious grounds.

John Paul the Great was our teacher. If you do not understand him, study and prayer is indicated – not attacks on his Papacy.

Magicsilence:

I think i have contributed twice with actual information.? I do not wish to sow discord in the Church, if i came to do such a thing please provide evidence of me doing so. I am simply searching for the Truth. I am sorry that makes you so angry.

If you do not wish to sow discord in the Church, cease attempting to show the Pope was in error. Instead, study and pray for understanding.

Magicsilence:

Please, if you are going to attack me, READ THE WHOLE THREAD, I have already stated that i think the sedevacantist position is pure insanity.

Yet you come very close to it, parroting this mish-mash of attacks on John Paul the Great.

Magicsilence:

I am simply trying to understand how people view the pope,

We view him as the Pope, the Vicar of Christ on Earth, our teacher and spiritual guide.

Magicsilence:

maybe I am wrong, if that is the case, it is your job to show me the light, HELP me. However, I can not say that at this moment in time anything said on this thread has been of much help ( Church Militant, I loved the letter, awesome inspiration). Yes I believe we should rally round our pope, but when he is promoting such things as calls to interfaith prayer, Im not sure how to respond.

Jesus help me.

Andre.

Let those last three words be your guide. Accept the teachings of the Magisterium and pray for Jesus’ aid.

 

[mercygate]

Jaypeeto3:

I don’t what to make of all the pope-bashing, either, but Pope Benedict XVI seems to re-define Original Sin in a way never before held by the church. The below is a huge quote from Joseph Ratzinger (not out of context) on the issue of Original Sin. In it, he does not uphold the classical Catholic view that O.S. is passed on from our First Parents TO US by GENERATION, which is defined catholic dogma. If anyone knows of a quote from the current Holy Father where he DOES uphold the defined description of Original Sin, I would very much like to be directed to it, because I certainly don’t want to think ill of him. He seems such a gentle and kind man.
Love, Jaypeeto3

Here is the long quotation:

“In the Genesis story . . . . . . It must once again be stressed that no human being is closed in upon himself or herself and that no one can live of or for himself or herself alone. We receive our life not only at the moment of birth but every day from without–from others who are not ourselves but who nonetheless somehow pertain to us. . . . Sin is a rejection of relationality because it wants to make the human being a god. . . . Consequently sin is always an offense that touches others, that alters the world and damages it. To the extent that this is true, when the network of human relationships is damaged from the very beginning, then every human being enters into a world that is marked by relational damage. At the very moment that a person begins human existence, which is a good, he or she is confronted by a sin-damaged world. Each of us enters into a situation in which relationality has been hurt. Consequently each person is, from the very start, damaged in relationships and does not engage in them as he or she ought. Sin pursues the human being, and he or she capitulates to it.”

–Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, ‘In the Beginning…’, pp. 71-73

I do not see that this 10-year-old statement contradicts the teaching of the Church that we receive sin at conception. It is a more relational way of expressing an old truth than we are accustomed to. It rather sums up the inseparability of the two great commandments to love God and to love one’s neighbor.

Even if it did contradict accepted dogma, it would not be a papal error because he wrote it 10 years before he ascended to the Chair of Peter.

 

[Steven_Merten]

JKirkLVNV:

From the Catechism:

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272 819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

And further, from the Catechism:

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist."324

Hello Jkirk,

Your hyper links 818 and 838 do not work for me. Can you give me any help to get to the web page you are linking?

Thanks,

 

[vern_humphrey]

Steven Merten:

Hello Jkirk,

Your hyper links 818 and 838 do not work for me. Can you give me any help to get to the web page you are linking?

Thanks,

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm will bring you to the CCC on line.

Select Table of Contents with Paragraph NumbersCatechism of the Catholic Church if you know the number of the paragraph you are looking for.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Steven Merten:

Hello Jkirk,

Your hyper links 818 and 838 do not work for me. Can you give me any help to get to the web page you are linking?

Thanks,

No problem. scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[Church_Militant]

Magicsilence:

What do i have to GAIN from saying the pope did such and such?

If anything, i would like more than anything for the popes to be staunch traditionalists, but, they are not. Anything but.

You gain nothing either way MS…nothing at all. But in alleging these errant things you do harm to the body of Christ. I disagree that we need “staunch traditionalists” as popes. I believe that JP the Great and the VII popes were as good as any out there and a sight better than some.

Magicsilence:

So called ecumenism is nothing more than downplaying the ultimate importance of converting to the Catholic faith. It is a plan by the freemasons that has successfully infiltrated the church. Just LOOK at some of the pictures from WYD, are they Catholic?

I’ve heard this before from my RT friend. It’s bunk and I think that you and most other faithful Catholics on here know it full well.

There is no “downplaying” of the need for others to be converted, but there is the recognition that there is indeed a faith in Christ, and a trinitarian baptism. I think most Catholics on here know full well that we want the unity of all being one in the church that Christ Himself founded, and that regardless of the charity with which we dialog with non-Catholics, that “ecumenism” per se is a dead letter that is going nowhere fast. A simple glance through the rhetoric here on this forum will make that abundantly clear.

I don’t care what the RTs assert about the pope and other religions, I think the fact that he’s standing there at all is a witness loud and clear of the differences that exist between our respective faiths and that no matter how nice we are about it, the fullness of truth is still calling them to conversion.

Did you read and study Ut Unum Sint yet? It doesn’t sound like it, and I think you should instead of believing what an agenda driven website tells you. As I said before I have caught these sites in all kinds of undocumented allegations MANY times…that’s why I put no faith in them
Cont’d.

 

[Church_Militant]

The Church has always taught that outside the Catholic faith there IS NO SALVATION. Therefore, explain to me, the strange revert on this position SINCE Vatican II. Can you?

Can you tell me that this is not clearly stated here in the CCC?

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

Mission - a requirement of the Church’s catholicity

849 The missionary mandate. “Having been divinely sent to the nations that she might be ‘the universal sacrament of salvation,’ the Church, in obedience to the command of her founder and because it is demanded by her own essential universality, strives to preach the Gospel to all men”:339 "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and Lo, I am with you always, until the close of the age."340

850 The origin and purpose of mission. The Lord’s missionary mandate is ultimately grounded in the eternal love of the Most Holy Trinity: "The Church on earth is by her nature missionary since, according to the plan of the Father, she has as her origin the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit."341 The ultimate purpose of mission is none other than to make men share in the communion between the Father and the Son in their Spirit of love.342

851 Missionary motivation. It is from God’s love for all men that the Church in every age receives both the obligation and the vigor of her missionary dynamism, "for the love of Christ urges us on."343 Indeed, God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth”;344 that is, God wills the salvation of everyone through the knowledge of the truth. Salvation is found in the truth. Those who obey the prompting of the Spirit of truth are already on the way of salvation. But the Church, to whom this truth has been entrusted, must go out to meet their desire, so as to bring them the truth. Because she believes in God’s universal plan of salvation, the Church must be missionary.

852 Missionary paths. The Holy Spirit is the protagonist, "the principal agent of the whole of the Church’s mission."345 It is he who leads the Church on her missionary paths. "This mission continues and, in the course of history, unfolds the mission of Christ, who was sent to evangelize the poor; so the Church, urged on by the Spirit of Christ, must walk the road Christ himself walked, a way of poverty and obedience, of service and self-sacrifice even to death, a death from which he emerged victorious by his resurrection."346 So it is that "the blood of martyrs is the seed of Christians."347

853 On her pilgrimage, the Church has also experienced the "discrepancy existing between the message she proclaims and the human weakness of those to whom the Gospel has been entrusted."348 Only by taking the “way of penance and renewal,” the “narrow way of the cross,” can the People of God extend Christ’s reign.349 For "just as Christ carried out the work of redemption in poverty and oppression, so the Church is called to follow the same path if she is to communicate the fruits of salvation to men."350

cont’d

 

[Richard_Hurtz]

mercygate:

Even if it did contradict accepted dogma, it would not be a papal error because he wrote it 10 years before he ascended to the Chair of Peter.

Would it be error or heresy in the case that it “contradicted accepted dogma”?

Blessings,
Richard

 

[vern_humphrey]

Richard_Hurtz:

Would it be error or heresy in the case that it “contradicted accepted dogma”?

Blessings,
Richard

The question is, who has the right to determine that?

Protestants say each of us can interpret scripture and the teachings of Christ on his own – and as a result, they have split and re-split into tens of thousads of denominations.

The Church has the teaching authority, the Magisterium. Our role as lay persons is to follow the Church, and to pray for understanding. If we THINK the Pope is wrong, the place to look is within ourselves, and ask “why don’t I understand?”

We don’t look outward and try to find flaws in the Pope’s teachings!

 

[Magicsilence]

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

I think that clearly shows possible salvation outside of the Church.? No?

 

[Magicsilence]

vern humphrey:

The question is, who has the right to determine that?

Protestants say each of us can interpret scripture and the teachings of Christ on his own – and as a result, they have split and re-split into tens of thousads of denominations.

The Church has the teaching authority, the Magisterium. Our role as lay persons is to follow the Church, and to pray for understanding. If we THINK the Pope is wrong, the place to look is within ourselves, and ask “why don’t I understand?”

We don’t look outward and try to find flaws in the Pope’s teachings!

Would you therefore have followed the arians into hell?

We should be obedient, but, not irresponsible.

In Christ.

Andre

 

[Church_Militant]

Magicsilence:

Why does the Church in general now encourage people to stay as heretics? Calling them seperated brethren does not diminish the fact that they REJECT Catholic teaching. I could go so far as to say that all those who are not Catholic have never REALLY searched for the Truth. For, if they had, and wholly submitted to God’s will, he would not have allowed them to remain in schismatic and heretical sects.

Then their deception is mitigated by the fact that others taught them wrong, is it not? No one…least of all the Holy Fathers that you seem to take issues with has ever told non-Catholics to remain in heresy.

The CCC on this: 2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

The truth of the matter, is that the fundamental basis of the Catholic faith is its exclusivity. The idea of part - truths in other religions is irrelevant. They are still wrong.

“Exclusivity” is not and never has been a part of the Catholic faith, and who ever told you that is just plain wrong. Nothing in Catholic teaching is pointed in that direction, because the church is the voice of Christ calling all to come to Himself. There is no one excluded from that calling. Not James White, Ellen G. White, Jack T. Chick, or Lorraine Boettner, or any other anti-Catholic, regardless of religious affiliation. The Catechism makes this very very clear as I’ve shown you above.

Catholic tradition has always been that outside the Church there is no salvation. How do you reconcile this belief with the Assisi interfaith call to prayer by JPII, and his lack of condemnation of the pagan and heretical faiths praying with him.

The call to prayer by His Holiness (at Fatima and/or anywhere else) is the call to seek God and one who knows Our Lord and has faith in the Holy Spirit’s capacity to carry out His mission to draw all men to Christ knows that the one who really seeks after God will surely find Him. That call at Fatima is the same, and those who can’t see that (IMO) have that problem, because they just don’t want to.

It sounds to me like you’ve been reading too many issues of “Fatima Crusader”. I used to get it but trashed it after that priest went totally off the deep end and began to sound like a TV evangelist. His remarks and allegations were some of the most radical bunk I had ever seen and again…he made them without ever offering real citations that would support them.

cont’d

 

[Richard_Hurtz]

vern humphrey:

The question is, who has the right to determine that?

Protestants say each of us can interpret scripture and the teachings of Christ on his own – and as a result, they have split and re-split into tens of thousads of denominations.

The Church has the teaching authority, the Magisterium. Our role as lay persons is to follow the Church, and to pray for understanding. If we THINK the Pope is wrong, the place to look is within ourselves, and ask “why don’t I understand?”

We don’t look outward and try to find flaws in the Pope’s teachings!

Each of us has the right and responsibility to determine that.

Each of us must apprehend what the Church is teaching. How are you supposed to recognize error otherwise?

It seems to me that what you’re saying is; don’t draw attention to teachings that sound “off”. At what level are we to stop questioning? If my priest supports same-sex marriage should I or should I not question that? If my Bishop does not correct a ‘wayward’ priest should I not question that?

No offense but after living in the Arch-diocese of Boston for most of my adult life, I’m very much of a mind to question to things. Not questioning has done more harm than good.

I believe that it is just fine to question things as long as it is done with love and respect.

Blessings,
Richard

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Magicsilence:

Crisis here. I cannot deny facts, and this web page has a 101 of them. Yes some of them are a little twisted and ambiguos, but not all.

If you think it too long then just check out number 22 and 52.

catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/vatican2/JPII.htm

Does anyone have an answer?

He’s not quoting but giving us his paraphrase. These are not facts, but poor suppositions.

 

[mercygate]

itsjustdave1988:

He’s not quoting but giving us his paraphrase. These are not facts, but poor suppositions.

I tried to look a couple of them up and couldn’t even FIND them. He’s got numbers wrong.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Magicsilence:

Would you therefore have followed the arians into hell?

No. The Church opposed arianism.

Magicsilence:

We should be obedient, but, not irresponsible.

It strikes me that is a bit ironic to say that after posting cites from a webpage that purports to show the “errors” of John Paul the Great.

 

[Magicsilence]

“Exclusivity” is not and never has been a part of the Catholic faith

I was referring to the exclusivity of salvation, which has been part and parcel of Catholic faith for all of time. All are welcome to join, but only those that do have hope of salvation.

Maybe I’m wrong, and if so, for the love of our Lord correct me, but we have never had an “if” clause about salvation before. It has always been that only Catholics may be saved. Not mostly Catholics and a few that havent heard of us may obtain salvation.

 

[Richard_Hurtz]

Church Militant:

The CCC on this: 2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

Okay - good. Now we’re getting somewhere.

So in light of the previous hypothetical: IF Cardinal Ratzinger had endorsed a belief which “contradicted accepted dogma”, that would then be error. If after being made aware of the error and having been given the oppotunity to correct it he had obstinately persisted in that error, then that would be heresy. Yes?

Thanks and blessings,
Richard

 

[mercygate]

Magicsilence:

I was referring to the exclusivity of salvation, which has been part and parcel of Catholic faith for all of time. All are welcome to join, but only those that do have hope of salvation.

Maybe I’m wrong, and if so, for the love of our Lord correct me, but we have never had an “if” clause about salvation before. It has always been that only Catholics may be saved. Not mostly Catholics and a few that havent heard of us may obtain salvation.

Where do you take your position from?

Peter Stravinskas has an excellent book on this entitled (don’t be surprised): Salvation Outside the Church?

 

[Richard_Hurtz]

vern humphrey:

It strikes me that is a bit ironic to say that after posting cites from a webpage that purports to show the “errors” of John Paul the Great.

I don’t quite see it that way. While I agree that this website in question is full of baloney. I don’t believe that it is outside of the Faith to believe that the Pope could err. My understanding is that the Pope can err in every way, shape, and form except while making an ex cathedra pronouncement.

If that’s true, then why not admit the possibility and even the certainty that John Paul II did err?

I don’t see how this position jeopardizes any aspect of the Faith.

Peace
Richard