What makes you think that? That was not its intent at all. Just because his kissing the Koran and holding the Assisi inter-religious peace conferences would likely be impediments to his becoming canonized does not mean the author of that letter is an anti-Pope protestant.That is an overly long post with but one intent: to smear, insult, and mock the Venerable Pope John Paul II the Great.
Why would they be impediments (as hey should not) to his Canonization. Would you prefer that he brought back the wars of religion?What makes you think that? That was not its intent at all. Just because his kissing the Koran and holding the Assisi inter-religious peace conferences would likely be impediments to his becoming canonized does not mean the author of that letter is an anti-Pope protestant.
It is idolatry.Why would they be impediments (as hey should not) to his Canonization.
When did the wars stop? We are in a constant spiritual battle with the devil and the gods of all the other false religions:[bibledrb]Psalms 95:5[/bibledrb]Would you prefer that he brought back the wars of religion?
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you but do you think he should be a saint because of the encyclicals he wrote or because he was a saintly person?That is an overly long post with but one intent: to smear, insult, and mock the Venerable Pope John Paul II the Great.
I was looking mostly at the effect he personally had on the growth of the Church. He did not just speak his mission, he lived his mission.I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you but do you think he should be a saint because of the encyclicals he wrote or because he was a saintly person?
Idolatry? Give me a break. You are dangerously close to accusing His Holiness John Paul II of heresy, which would put you in the sedevacantist (sp?)It is idolatry.When did the wars stop? We are in a constant spiritual battle with the devil and the gods of all the other false religions:[bibledrb]Psalms 95:5[/bibledrb]
Which was? How do you asses this? You cannot play a numbers game because we are currently outnumbered by Muslims and our U.S. Catholic conversion rates are now 1/3 of what they were before Vatican II, weekly mass attendance abysmal, etc. But our strength lies in God.I was looking mostly at the effect he personally had on the growth of the Church.
Sedevacantists are schismatics who deny everyone after Pius XII or John XXIII was pope. I do not deny John Paul II was pope. He was. He can still be a saint recognized by the Church (i.e., canonized). But, like St. Peter, he was not an immaculate Mother Mary. I am pretty certain he, like most popes, is in heaven, though; so that by itself would make him a saint.Idolatry? Give me a break. You are dangerously close to accusing His Holiness John Paul II of heresy, which would put you in the sedevacantist (sp?)
This does not mean that one can taunt another with titles like GREAT, MAGNIFICENT, etc until they become official. That would be inflating one’s goodness, in my opinion. I think we all respect John Paul II for who he was, both as person and as Pope. Or Pius XII or any other Pope, for that matter. They don’t have to be saints in order to be respected. We can, however, discuss their encyclicals and what effect they may have had on the Church without harming the Pope’s reputation.On the other hand, it shouldn’t be bandied about lightly by others… CIC Can. 220 No one is permitted to harm illegitimately the good reputation which a person possesses nor to injure the right of any person to protect his or her own privacy.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PU.HTM
Well, not to defend the sedevacantists… such a dangerous position to take… so risky… but… to put these matters in context…Sedevacantists are schismatics who deny everyone after Pius XII or John XXIII was pope. I do not deny John Paul II was pope. He was. He can still be a saint recognized by the Church (i.e., canonized). But, like St. Peter, he was not an immaculate Mother Mary. I am pretty certain he, like most popes, is in heaven, though; so that by itself would make him a saint.
Look at St. Catherine of Siena criticizing Pope Gregory XI for residing in Avignon instead of Rome. She knew the pope made a prudential error but did not say, “He’s a heretic, not our pope! He’s not in Rome!” Similarly, some Catholics think Pope John Paul II made a prudential error by kissing the Koran and holding the two Assisi interfaith conferences. All I am saying is that this could be an impediment to his becoming canonized, but that is for the Church to judge.
All of them, no one really listens to the Pope any more if they can get away with ignoring him.In your opinions, what are the currently most unheeded encyclicals in the Church?
Of course. Wherever there is potential for great good there is also potential for great evil.Being Pope is such a tremendous calling. It’s the biggest responsibility on earth. The bigger the responsibility, the greater the danger of greatest punishment in the next life for any errors.
I doubt that Divine Providence does not provide popes with what they need, including strong wills to choose good. The successors of St. Peter have the power of the keys to bind and loose on earth and, correspondingly, in heaven. This is a great power.I have to wonder how many Popes will be in purgatory till the end of the world, or are in Hell forever. Wonder but who knows? God reveals some things and conceals others. It is His choice.
Actually some of this power is extended to the bishops and priests as well. But the burden on the Pope is the heaviest.Of course. Wherever there is potential for great good there is also potential for great evil.I doubt that Divine Providence does not provide popes with what they need, including strong wills to choose good. The successors of St. Peter have the power of the keys to bind and loose on earth and, correspondingly, in heaven. This is a great power.
Thank you. Interesting thread and those throw some light on the matter.Popes against modern errors : 16 papal documents
This is an excellent collection of encyclicals pertaining to Modernism.