Who’s teachings? The pope? The traditionalists don’t have everything they want now. So there really is no difference at the moment. I only wanted to know what others thought IF the pope was a traditional one like the ones of the past.Ok, I answered that I would accept, but is the discussion to be a monologue? I haven’t seen your answer, other than to say he must be “respected.”
Would you accept his teachings if they did NOT give traditionalists all their desires? The thread is slanted to one side.
Yes, he certainly is.Benedict is a traditional Pope! Read his books.
Exactly. I would love to live in the Church described, but don’t think it would be prudent to try to force the whole thing back within the span of a single papacy.Things are drifting in that direction already,because of the younger,serious,traditional-minded Catholics. But the Pope cannot just bring back the old traditions all at once;that would cause further confusion,because the old traditions have become unfamiliar and remote to Catholics in the meantime. Few people can understand or have any desire to learn Latin. People have to be gradually weaned off of what they are used to,and be gradually weaned on to what is foreign to them.
Oddly, his published writings - from decades back until now - are not useful to those who would label Benedict “traditional”. On the contrary, they supply much information for those who think he is not traditional.Benedict is a traditional Pope! Read his books.
Could you give us some examples?Oddly, his published writings - from decades back until now - are not useful to those who would label Benedict “traditional”. On the contrary, they supply much information for those who think he is not traditional.
Like you, I would also prefer that the Church was returned to it’s traditions. Unfortunately, modernism has taken hold of the Church and it’s going to be a Battle wresting the power away. I believe that if this Pope was traditional, in the vein of Pius X, he would not be alive for long.I only wanted to know what others thought IF the pope was a traditional one like the ones of the past.
Kind of like we were “gradually weaned” off of the TLM to the NOM?People have to be gradually weaned off of what they are used to,and be gradually weaned on to what is foreign to them.
Benedict is NOT a traditional Pope. Read his books. I agree that in most instances he is extremely orthodox and is a brilliant theologian. However, when it comes to ecumenism, especially with regard to the Eastern Orthodox, he is way off base. He does not believe that the EOs should have to accept any post schim doctrines. Here is extremely wrong and maybe even liberal. This is a Pope who allowed the arch-heretic Gregory Palamas to be put on the Eastern Catholic Calander as a saint!Benedict is a traditional Pope! Read his books.
He was most certainly a liberal during his days as a peritus to the Council, and I must admit I’ve never understood where he was coming from with that quote amounting to letting 14 ecumenical councils and any ex cathedra statements slide, but if we had to place his thought and action as a whole on today’s spectrum he wouldn’t get any more liberal than centrist. So even if one disagrees with him on particular points, he’s a far more traditional pope than a good number of papabile.Benedict is NOT a traditional Pope. Read his books. I agree that in most instances he is extremely orthodox and is a brilliant theologian. However, when it comes to ecumenism, especially with regard to the Eastern Orthodox, he is way off base. He does not believe that the EOs should have to accept any post schim doctrines. Here is extremely wrong and maybe even liberal. This is a Pope who allowed the arch-heretic Gregory Palamas to be put on the Eastern Catholic Calander as a saint!
Don’t get me wrong. I love BXVI. He is a breath of fresh air. But with regard to some matters he is a liberal. I think on the spectrum going from traditional to modernist, he is a moderate.
Toward the top of the list, he would roll back the changes in the organization the Curia and the structure of power in day-to-day operations of the Church.[If Benedict XVI became a traditional pope like Pius X,] what changes do you think he would make?
I do read his books! When it comes to ecumenism,he is cautiousBenedict is NOT a traditional Pope. Read his books. I agree that in most instances he is extremely orthodox and is a brilliant theologian. However, when it comes to ecumenism, especially with regard to the Eastern Orthodox, he is way off base. He does not believe that the EOs should have to accept any post schim doctrines. Here is extremely wrong and maybe even liberal. This is a Pope who allowed the arch-heretic Gregory Palamas to be put on the Eastern Catholic Calander as a saint!
Don’t get me wrong. I love BXVI. He is a breath of fresh air. But with regard to some matters he is a liberal. I think on the spectrum going from traditional to modernist, he is a moderate.
Could you please translate that into normal english?From “The Thought of Benedict XVI” by Aidan Nichols: "What,according to the mature Ratzinger,is the ultimate aim of Catholic ecumenical endevour? It is the transformation of the separated confessional churches as currently existing into authentic ‘particular’ churches,eachof which would be a concrete embodiment of the single Catholica."
Don’t know if we can make that assumption. It is true that the Holy Week was changed during Pius XII’s reign and there were mumblings of a council going on, but then even Pope John XXIII’s agenda going into the council was vastly different than the agenda put together by its attendees.What Angelo Roncalli did as John XXIII was to give birth to Pius XII’s ideas and call the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council.
In that vein, all the popes from Pius XII have been the same as Pius XII in that they serve to implement the vision of the Council in full.
Personally I wish that he would say the Traditional Latin Mass just once during his reign as Pope. It certainly would seem that his MP would have more teeth to it if the Pope were actually seen saying the TLM himself.Benedict is NOT a traditional Pope.
It means bringing the separated churches into the Catholic fold,so that they are particular embodiments of it.Could you please translate that into normal english?
So, as I understand it, these separated churches are still to be separate, but somehow they will “embody” the Catholic faith? And what exactly is meant by “confessional churches?” Does anyone really understand this kind of talk? I think it’s just meant to sound deep and meaningful, when really it’s just nonsense.It means bringing the separated churches into the Catholic fold,so that they are particular embodiments of it.
No! They are not supposed to be separate.They are to be transformed into parts of the body of the Catholic faith. What do you think is meant by confessional churches? By confession is meant a declaration of faith;creed;sect;hence – a group of people adhering to a certain creed;church,sect,denomination (as in Eastern Orthodox). If you mistrust “this kind of talk” from the Pope,and think it is “nonsense”,why are you even Catholic?So, as I understand it, these separated churches are still to be separate, but somehow they will “embody” the Catholic faith? And what exactly is meant by “confessional churches?” Does anyone really understand this kind of talk? I think it’s just meant to sound deep and meaningful, when really it’s just nonsense.
Is it a requirement to trust every word that comes from a pope in order to be a Catholic? I’m sorry, but I find the manner of writing of the popes since the council to be very difficult to understand. I still don’t quite grasp the meaning of “parts of the body of the Catholic faith.” There is the Catholic Faith, and then there are all other religions. If he is saying that the aim of ecumemism is to convert all other religions to the Catholic Faith, then I have no problem. But I don’t think he’s saying that.No! They are not supposed to be separate.They are to be transformed into parts of the body of the Catholic faith. What do you think is meant by confessional churches? By confession is meant a declaration of faith;creed;sect;hence – a group of people adhering to a certain creed;church,sect,denomination (as in Eastern Orthodox). If you mistrust “this kind of talk” from the Pope,and think it is “nonsense”,why are you even Catholic?
Conversion comes about through teaching the truth in love,and the Catholic Church is not going to give up its teaching authority.Is it a requirement to trust every word that comes from a pope in order to be a Catholic? I’m sorry, but I find the manner of writing of the popes since the council to be very difficult to understand. I still don’t quite grasp the meaning of “parts of the body of the Catholic faith.”
From “The Essential Pope Benedict”:
“The basic idea of sacred history is that of gathering together,of uniting – uniting human beings in the one body of Christ,the union of human beings and through human beings of all creation with God. There is only one Bride,only one body of Christ,not many brides,not many bodies. The Bride is,of course,as the Fathers of the Church said,drawing on Psalm 44,“dressed in many-colored robes”;the body has many organs. But the superordinate principle is ultimately unity. That is the point here. Variety becomes richness only through the process of unification.”
The Pope is not ecumenical to the extent of compromising any of the important articles of the Catholic faith.
There is the Catholic Faith, and then there are all other religions. If he is saying that the aim of ecumemism is to convert all other religions to the Catholic Faith, then I have no problem. But I don’t think he’s saying that.
Catholic tradition of the centuries is terrifying. It’s bad enough that he is driving the Church into the mud with his conservatism. It would be even worse folly to push his agenda further. The world could use a more modern and relevant Church. The Church will be more likely to survive the coming decades if it get more realistic, and less reactionary.What changes do you think he would make? I think all the modern altars would disappear. The churches would look entirely different.
There would be no liturgical dancers, no hand clapping, and the belief in the Real Presence would be wholly back and so would calling the Mass, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Alot of things would change.I believe it would all be for the better. Latin would be back in all parishes.The return of the cassock, and head coverings for women. It would be simply amazing. But it is wishful thinking on my part.
I also think that perhaps nuns would wear the full habit like they used to. sounds like a dream to me, and a dream that will never be realized again. I love the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The Latin Mass is very reverent, and so are some NO’s, but the TLM is truly beautiful. Its incredible to say the least.
What would you feel if Benedict XVI went to being a real traditional pope? would you disagree with him or would you accept it? how would you feel? Iam only curious. that is all. I think it would be wonderful. He is a very good pope and he has an enormous responsibility.He is the Vicar of Christ and if he became a real traditional pope like Pius X I think it would greatly benefit the church the world over.