Pope denounces ‘restorationist’ orders, takes shot at Medjugorje

[James248]

Really ?

Explain the stoning of St Stephen.

Jim

Pilate probably gave Caiaphas free reign to do his worst as long as it was off his hands.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Pilate probably gave Caiaphas free reign to do his worst as long as it was off his hands.

So the Pharisees could’ve stoned the woman caught in adultery, had Jesus not stopped them.

This was in fact allowed under Roman’s.

In the case of Jesus, the Sanhedrin were playing a game of politics with the people and the Romans.

Had they killed Jesus, the crowds who supported Jesus would’ve turned against them and rioted. The Romans would’ve blamed them for the riots and acted with a heavy hand against them.

So, they sought to have Pilate condemn Jesus, this way the blame would be placed on him, not them.

In the case of St Stephen, they would’ve argued that he was inciting a riot and they put it down, which the Romans would be pleased with.

Jim

 

[James248]

So the Pharisees could’ve stoned the woman caught in adultery, had Jesus not stopped them.

This was in fact allowed under Roman’s.

In the case of Jesus, the Sanhedrin were playing a game of politics with the people and the Romans.

Had they killed Jesus, the crowds who supported Jesus would’ve turned against them and rioted. The Romans would’ve blamed them for the riots and acted with a heavy hand against them.

So, they sought to have Pilate condemn Jesus, this way the blame would be placed on him, not them.

In the case of St Stephen, they would’ve argued that he was inciting a riot and they put it down, which the Romans would be pleased with.

Jim

“We do not have the right to excecute anyone.”

 

[JimR-OCDS]

“We do not have the right to excecute anyone.”

You’re digressing from my previous point, i.e. the woman caught in adultery, who was brought to Jesus by the Pharisees and asked what to do.

In their rigidity, they had no mercy and compassion. Just the law.

Its the type of rigidity Pope Francis denounces in the OP article.

Jim

 

[James248]

You’re digressing from my previous point, i.e. the woman caught in adultery, who was brought to Jesus by the Pharisees and asked what to do.

In their rigidity, they had no mercy and compassion. Just the law.

Its the type of rigidity Pope Francis denounces in the OP article.

Jim

You see “lack of mercy.”

I see Pharisees seeking to justify themselves and discredit or unjustly arrest Jesus.

Brendan said it best:
As noted above, they could not actually stone her without Roman permission.
As such, they had a trap for*Him.

1. He coulddeny the Mosaic law and state that sheshould not be stoned. If so, they had a chargeagainstHim to bring before*a tribunal.

or

1. He could state that she could be stoned, in which case, they had a charge they could bring before the Roman court, in that He sought to defy Roman law.

Christ did neither. He did not deny the Roman law,and used the principlesof the Pharisees against them. The Pharisees viewed sin in light of the Mosaic law. If you did not break the precepts of the law, you were*literally sinless.

So Christ, in effect, told the Pharisees to go ahead and stone her, but in away that could not be brought before a Roman court. Hencewhy the first Pharisees to leave were the elders, the onewho saw that they had no case againstChrist either way.

And, of course, they could not actually stone her, as they would have been arrested by the Romans themselves.

 

[otjm]

You mean these Carmelite monks building a monastery in Wyoming? The purveyors of Mystic Monk Coffee? I’m thrilled. Contemplative orders are like spiritual bunkers behind enemy lines. carmelitemonks.org/

I, too, purchase their coffee. However, having seen some renditions of what they appear to intend to build, I am certainly not thrilled. I have a special place in my heart and in my prayers for the Trappists. The abbey in Oregon has aged tremendously in the last 50 years I avhe known them; and while they are not now in danger of “going out of existence”, they most definitely need more new blood.

And the Abbey of Our Lady of the Holy Trinity is closing down; I think they are down to 10 monks, at least half of whom are in serious health. Their land and buildings are either sold, or in the process of being sold.

I don’t have a problem with an order which has a charism of a more traditionalist direction, but frankly, with the contacts I have had with contemplative orders, their plans appear to me to be grandiose in the least. One does not need Gothic or Romanesque architecture in order to be contemplative; in fact, most contemplatives I have met seem moved far more to the side of beauty in simplicity. Those plans don’t strike me as such.

Just MHO, but I will continue to support them through the coffee I drink.

 

[otjm]

****Yea ok… So why is he currently negotiating a reconciliation with SSPX, pray tell?

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

For the same reasons that Pope Paul 6th did all he could to prevent them from going off the rails; and the same reason that John Paul 2 tried to reconcile, and Benedict 16 tried.

And the same reason that numerous Popes have tried to reconcile with the Orthodox.

“That all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.”

 

[otjm]

What happens if the next Pope makes a definitive decree to the contrary?

I wasn’t alive during Humanae Vitae, but this seems so similar in practical ways. Everyone thought things were changing.

Pope John 23rd started aggiornamento - updating - and 4 of the last 5 Popes have continued the process )with the exception of John Paul 1 who wasn’t around long enough to speak up on the matter). The likelihood of changing that path? Nil and none.

 

[otjm]

You would think the church didn’t have theSpirit until 50 years ago. His disparaging of restorationist orders and asceticism is contrary to the whole tradition of the Church going back atleast 1700 years. St. Anthony, Pachomius, the Cappadocian fathers, St. John Cassian, St. Benedict St Gregory the great, and the other fathers including the restorationists like St Francis and St John of the cross would be surprised to see where the Church has gone.

Shall we include high button shoes with that?

 

[otjm]

You ask rhetorical questions, accuse the Pope of a double-standard, that is, being a hypocrite, then cue your own silence. That is the essence our your post.


What has happened to this place?

It has just become more subtle than 5 years ago.

 

[otjm]

It’s wrong in that it didn’t happen, per Pope Benedict XVI.

But let me ask, what part of the Novus Ordo derived from Protestant influence ?

Jim

Liturgical renewal within the Catholic Church started decades before Vatican 2 was called, let alone before the Ordinary Form was promulgated. And part of the grounding of the changes in the Mass go back to scholarship of the early Church, which was not solely the province of Catholic scholarly research.

The fact that Protestant scholars did research on the early Church does not mean that they lied, prevaricated, twisted or obfuscated what that historical research uncovered. There are, however, some who have the mindset (and this is not directed at you) that if a Protestant scholar makes any statement based on research, they are not only wrong, but heretically so. Those who are of that mindset will never be able to reconcile with reality.

A goodly amount of the changes to the Mass were based on looking back to how the early Church celebrated the sacraments - including the Mass. That such changes have not set well with some is a matter of public knowledge. My comments are neither a defense of the OF nor an indictment of it; but the chatter that goes on about the OF and how it came about are for the most part uniformed as to the actual historical process.

 

[Pulvis]

Liturgical renewal within the Catholic Church started decades before Vatican 2 was called, let alone before the Ordinary Form was promulgated. And part of the grounding of the changes in the Mass go back to scholarship of the early Church, which was not solely the province of Catholic scholarly research.

The fact that Protestant scholars did research on the early Church does not mean that they lied, prevaricated, twisted or obfuscated what that historical research uncovered. There are, however, some who have the mindset (and this is not directed at you) that if a Protestant scholar makes any statement based on research, they are not only wrong, but heretically so. Those who are of that mindset will never be able to reconcile with reality.

A goodly amount of the changes to the Mass were based on looking back to how the early Church celebrated the sacraments - including the Mass. That such changes have not set well with some is a matter of public knowledge. My comments are neither a defense of the OF nor an indictment of it; but the chatter that goes on about the OF and how it came about are for the most part uniformed as to the actual historical process.

I personally have no idea as to whether the protestant observers had any influence over the reworking of the Mass. I have read Abp.++Bugninni’s book, along with several other well documented works on the revision of the Mass. I also have eyes. Comparing the Mass of 1962 to the first US approved Missal of 1965 shows clear adherence to Sacrosanctum Concilium. The final revision published in 1969 left much on the editing room floor. But no one asked my opinion. But to believe that forces were not in play to change the Mass into something more acceptable to our separated brethren is rather disingenuous. Especially when looking at Unitatis Redintegratio and the new focus on ecumenism.
And as for looking back to the early Church, I think, in my uneducated, uninformed, not dealing with reality opinion, the reformers stopped somewhere around the Book of Common Prayer.

Pax

 

[otjm]

I personally have no idea as to whether the protestant observers had any influence over the reworking of the Mass. I have read Abp.++Bugninni’s book, along with several other well documented works on the revision of the Mass. I also have eyes. Comparing the Mass of 1962 to the first US approved Missal of 1965 shows clear adherence to Sacrosanctum Concilium. The final revision published in 1969 left much on the editing room floor. But no one asked my opinion. But to believe that forces were not in play to change the Mass into something more acceptable to our separated brethren is rather disingenuous. Especially when looking at Unitatis Redintegratio and the new focus on ecumenism.
And as for looking back to the early Church, I think, in my uneducated, uninformed, not dealing with reality opinion, the reformers stopped somewhere around the Book of Common Prayer.

Pax

If some of the “high church” Protestants like the OF better than the EF, so what? And some of them may have liked it less - again, so what?

I have had people in these forae state that they can’t follow the OF because it is so radically changed. My answer is unprintable due to forum decorum; but that is an outright lie. I was born in 1946, so it is not like I have had no experience of the EF; but the form overall is the same. The Liturgy of the Word is still the Liturgy of the Word - so what if initial prayers at the foot of the altar were eliminated?

And the Liturgy of the Eucharist is still the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and so what if some of the prayers were changed? That has happened in the past. The comments are nothing more than emotional tantrum throwing.

As to which form I prefer, that is largely irrelevant. As to the intent of the individuals who were part of the changes to the Liturgy, that work started decades before there were any Protestant “observers” and the OF came out of that research, not out of comments by the observers. It is far past time we get out of the conspiracy attitude and move forward. Let’s move on to conspiracies to prevent the population from knowing that aliens have snatched people.

 

[pakengkeng]

Medjugorje is for real.there have been hundreds of miracles that have occured there and these people are still alive .many of them are americans e.g. Mrs collen willard.even her pastor from chicago testified that jesus told him in front of the blessed sacrament,that she needs to go there,as she will her inoperable tumor will be healed there.i myself know a story from a friend who has a friend,who was healed there completely of her crippling artritis.i read a story of a hearing impaied italian man,whose hearing aids were depleted of battery and couldnt hear during mass and was just reading the lips of the priest during mass.his hearing was restored and does not use aids anymore ,which he had used for decades.even a muslim man was healed of his debilitating disease.some people didnt even go there.they were just cured by jesus ,thru olom and this was featured on " unsolved mysteries" before.i just wish that the apparition will be approved soon,as shes still appearing there even during these times,as reported by even non catholic reporters.

 

[James248]

Medjugorje is for real.there have been hundreds of miracles that have occured there and these people are still alive .many of them are americans e.g. Mrs collen willard.even her pastor from chicago testified that jesus told him in front of the blessed sacrament,that she needs to go there,as she will her inoperable tumor will be healed there.i myself know a story from a friend who has a friend,who was healed there completely of her crippling artritis.i read a story of a hearing impaied italian man,whose hearing aids were depleted of battery and couldnt hear during mass and was just reading the lips of the priest during mass.his hearing was restored and does not use aids anymore ,which he had used for decades.even a muslim man was healed of his debilitating disease.some people didnt even go there.they were just cured by jesus ,thru olom and this was featured on " unsolved mysteries" before.i just wish that the apparition will be approved soon,as shes still appearing there even during these times,as reported by even non catholic reporters.

And your proof for this?

 

[Cid]

One issue I have with these groups is the money some of them spend on new monasteries and physical structures. Millions if I think of one group of men in the West that restrict everything to the EF. Building an opulent enclosure seems to me a waste of money that could be spent on the poor.

Sorry friend but that sounds like the sort of thing Judas would say if he were back on earth John 12:5.

Building such expensive church buildings is a great act of faith on the part of the religious orders and their supporters. The Church buildings are meant to serve for hundreds of years long after this generation is dead.

If anyone takes aim at Medjugorje he better watch out because he could be fighting with that Mother’s Son .

 

[PPeterson]

Interesting to see people going bananas over the word rigid. Does it maybe help you empathize even a tiny bit with people who’ve stuck with the church despite being called cafeteria Catholics, dissenters, and being belittled for having gray hair for the last 30 years?

 

[Mongo]

Interesting to see people going bananas over the word rigid. Does it maybe help you empathize even a tiny bit with people who’ve stuck with the church despite being called cafeteria Catholics, dissenters, and being belittled for having gray hair for the last 30 years?

The difference is that those he is calling ‘rigid’ are those who are doing what they can to uphold the tradition that was handed on. Now the pope declares tradition to be rigid and the traditional are supposed to have sympathy for those who have no concern for the faith that has been handed on?