Pope Benedict XVI 'to resign'

  • Thread starter Thread starter kelvinf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dale_M said:
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor is 80 years old, and thus ineligible to participate in the papal conclave.

Theoretically his successor as archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, could have been named a cardinal. When he was passed over, it raised a few eyebrows. As Santi2 mentioned, England does not have a vote in this conclave.
Click to expand...
Gottcha! Thanks, Santi2! I need to do some homework, but one name on the list jumped out at me which raised my eyebrows!
 
masondoggy said:
If your wife committed adultery twice, there is a very good chance that she went in the marriage with no intention of being faithful and your marriage would be invalid.
Click to expand...
:hmmm: so what are the other sins, that if committed more than once, are grounds for an annulment?

No wonder the extraordinary number of annulments in certain parts of the world. 😉
 
kelvinf said:
:hmmm: so what are the other sins, that if committed more than once, are grounds for an annulment?

No wonder the extraordinary number of annulments in certain parts of the world. 😉
Click to expand...
Committing the sins in and of themselves are not grounds for annulment. They simply signify that grounds for annulment may be present (i.e. going into a marriage with no intent to be faithful is an impediment to contracting a valid marriage).
 
The Holy See from what I understand is very sick and I also understand the demands of his duties are exhausting. Plus being 85 years old can also be a factor. I will miss him and wish him a lovely and sacred life. God Bless you forever Pope Benedict XVl. :hug1:
 
Particularly great is this statement:
Today we can no longer be Christians as a simple consequence of the fact that we live in a society that has Christian roots: even those born to a Christian family and formed in the faith must, each and every day, renew the choice to be a Christian, to give God first place, before the temptations continuously suggested by a secularized culture, before the criticism of many of our contemporaries.
Click to expand...
The tests which modern society subjects Christians to, in fact, are many, and affect the personal and social life. It is not easy to be faithful to Christian marriage, practice mercy in everyday life, leave space for prayer and inner silence, it is not easy to publicly oppose choices that many take for granted, such as abortion in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, euthanasia in case of serious illness, or the selection of embryos to prevent hereditary diseases. The temptation to set aside one’s faith is always present and conversion becomes a response to God which must be confirmed several times throughout one’s life.
Click to expand...
 
muffindell said:
I ‘met’ him at the Church of Rome a few days after he became Pope. He then said mass and I was able to receive Holy Communion, I was so ‘made up’ it’s difficult to describe. Those days have now long gone and now I’m divorced (my wife was adulterous for the second time) I cannot receive communion, the RC church has turned it’s back on me. I just hope that the new pope is able to ‘adjust’ things to take care of the this situation which sadly affects so many catholics through no fault of their own.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, Cardinal Schonborn made comments about cases like yours.

He says that the Church could reconsider cases where the divorced and remarried spouse who isn’t at fault might receive. I’m trying to find a video of it, it was in this same interview here en.gloria.tv/?media=294536 but I can’t find the segment relevant to you. Maybe if you try Googling it too you might have better luck finding the clip.

I empathise with you. My father was adulterous (in fact that’s how I was born). We have a lot of womanisers in my gross family, which is funny because I’m not that way myself.
 
randirhoades said:
The Holy See from what I understand is very sick and I also understand the demands of his duties are exhausting. Plus being 85 years old can also be a factor. I will miss him and wish him a lovely and sacred life. God Bless you forever Pope Benedict XVl. :hug1:
Click to expand...
You know, I get the feeling that the Holy See Press Office isn’t giving us the truth – I think he really is sick with something specific.

I don’t mean to point fingers – it’s just that I studied the modern papacy and frankly the Vatican had been dishonest (or at least withheld information) before.

As you remember, the Parkinson’s wasn’t admitted until John Paul II was dead. The circumstances surrounding John Paul I’s dead weren’t suspicious, yet the Vatican lied about it too (they didn’t admit that a nun found his body and they didn’t admit that the he was reading work papers and said he was reading the Imitation of Christ).

There was another pope where they were mad when a newspaper implied that the Pope had a cold – then the Pope was dead less than a day later (I forget which one, it was either Pius XII or Paul VI).

There’s a saying, “The Pope isn’t sick until he’s dead.”

The Holy Father began getting thin last year and I was shocked to see how quickly he became so gaunt. I’ve been worrying about him; first thing I did when the news broke on Monday was have a Mass offered for him. I really think his health is in dire risk.

Imagine, his resignation was so abrupt that he didn’t even get to release his last encyclical.
 
Joe_5859 said:
Committing the sins in and of themselves are not grounds for annulment. They simply signify that grounds for annulment may be present (i.e. going into a marriage with no intent to be faithful is an impediment to contracting a valid marriage).
Click to expand...
Exactly…and also going into the marriage with a mindset that “I’ll just get divorced if it doesn’t work out” is also grounds for an annulment. The intention of permenance and faithfulness MUST be present by BOTH parties at the time the vowels are exchanged. Otherwise a valid marriage can never take place.

I would bet $$ that somebody who cheated TWICE did not intend to be faithful when they exchanged vowels. Cheating once may just be a result of human weakness, which we are all suseptible to…Cheating twice is usually the result of somebody thinking there is nothing wrong with it. And that person cannot enter into a valid marriage according to the Church.
 
PazzoGrande said:
The Holy Father began getting thin last year and I was shocked to see how quickly he became so gaunt. I’ve been worrying about him; first thing I did when the news broke on Monday was have a Mass offered for him. I really think his health is in dire risk.
Click to expand...
I see some of this and I think things like celebrating a Mass at 8:00 PM on a Sunday night in Brazil and the normal workload of the Pope might be taxing on the health of many people actually.
 
It’s important to point out that the personality of the Pope is that of an EXTREME introvert. They need quiet, solitude, alone time, to re-charge their energy, their physicality.

Unlike JPII who was just the opposite. He was an EXTREME extrovert. They need to be around people to re-charge their strength and physicality.

Being a modern day Pope with all of it’s demands of “being out there” would be very tough on the kind of introvert that Benedict is.

I bet, barring any real significant medical problems, the Holy Father will feel much better, energy wise, after he has time to just be quiet…just be alone…just be solitary.

Any introvert is better when they have the time to be alone and just be, it recharges them.
 
Joe_5859 said:
I think we need to be careful about jumping to such conclusions.
Click to expand...
We should not jump at all. It is only our misguided American sense of free press that believes the “public has a right to know.” Whether the Vatican left out critical information that might prove entertaining to today’s generation or not is irrelevant. This accusation of lying is uncalled for. The accusation of omitted facts is irrelevant. His health is a concern only between him, his doctors, and God.
 
pnewton said:
We should not jump at all. It is only our misguided American sense of free press that believes the “public has a right to know.” Whether the Vatican left out critical information that might prove entertaining to today’s generation or not is irrelevant. This accusation of lying is uncalled for. The accusation of omitted facts is irrelevant. His health is a concern only between him, his doctors, and God.
Click to expand...
I said “I get the feeling.” That is different from an accusation.

I don’t disagree that the Vatican has their reasons for keeping things private, but that doesn’t stop people from thinking with question marks.

I’m sure even Cardinals are wondering the same thing.
 
PazzoGrande said:
I said “I get the feeling.” That is different from an accusation.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you also said,:

I get the feeling that the Holy See Press Office* isn’t giving us the truth** – I think he really is sick with something specific.*

…and frankly the Vatican had been dishonest (or at least withheld information) before.

…, yet the Vatican lied about it too

Feelings and conjectures are fine, but you can’t be accusing others of lying. Witholding information is not lying. Even if the information withheld misleads the thoughts of others, it is not lying if the other person has no right to that information. But I think at this point we are getting into ethics.
 
pnewton said:
Yes, but you also said,:

I get the feeling that the Holy See Press Office* isn’t giving us the truth*** – I think he really is sick with something specific.

…and frankly the Vatican had been dishonest (or at least withheld information) before.

…, yet the Vatican lied about it too

Feelings and conjectures are fine, but you can’t be accusing others of lying. Witholding information is not lying. Even if the information withheld misleads the thoughts of others, it is not lying if the other person has no right to that information. But I think at this point we are getting into ethics.
Click to expand...
One could argue about that is a sin of omission; if it’s not the “whole truth” then it is dishonest.

It’s a matter of established fact that they weren’t honest in the past in the cases I mentioned earlier. It is not a baseless accusation but indisputable history. Look into it yourself. I studied Conclaves for my thesis in 2007 – I have the sources to back it up.

I did not say that they are witholding information this time, only that I suspect that they are, particularly given the past. I did not accuse anyone of dishonesty in cases where we really just don’t know. I did label it dishonest in cases when it’s already a matter of fact.
 
Now it’s time to give back to Benedict XVI for all he gave to us during the last 8 years.
A wonderful and brand new way to do so is BeneGrazie.com! I totally recommend it!
 
PazzoGrande said:
One could argue about that is a sin of omission; if it’s not the “whole truth” then it is dishonest.

It’s a matter of established fact that they weren’t honest in the past in the cases I mentioned earlier. It is not a baseless accusation but indisputable history. Look into it yourself. I studied Conclaves for my thesis in 2007 – I have the sources to back it up.

I did not say that they are witholding information this time, only that I suspect that they are, particularly given the past. I did not accuse anyone of dishonesty in cases where we really just don’t know. I did label it dishonest in cases when it’s already a matter of fact.
Click to expand...
I don’t say this with certainty but if one watches EWTN or listens to some Catholic Radio, one may be bound to hear “there may be more to this than we know”, I haven’t recorded it or taken note but I have tried to find out what Catholic Talking Heads are saying… surely, just speculating on this is not tantamount to casting dispersions on what we are being told and a sin in itself.
 
BroomWagon said:
I don’t say this with certainty but if one watches EWTN or listens to some Catholic Radio, one may be bound to hear “there may be more to this than we know”, I haven’t recorded it or taken note but I have tried to find out what Catholic Talking Heads are saying… surely, just speculating on this is not tantamount to casting dispersions on what we are being told and a sin in itself.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was Raymond Arroyo.

Though to be fair, he said so before the Father Lombardi said that the Pope isn’t specifically ill with someone. I didn’t hear him speculate about it afterward. Incidentally the episode is replaying on TV right now, it just started two minutes ago.

I could add, my mom is an RN and we were just watching the Ash Wednesday Mass from the Vatican and she says that the Pope’s eyes show he’s dehydrated.
 
I admit i was sort of shocked myself but i can understand his reasons but i wonder if there is more to this.
 
I’m home sick today from work, watched a bit of the Ash Wednesday Mass from the Vatican on EWTN and the Holy Father didn’t look well at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top