C
chicago
Guest
We’ve had some pretty messed up popes in the past and the kind of nepotism which would put Illinois politicans to shame.
- Status
F
frommi
Guest
Not to mention the Pope appointed a lot the bishops that Jerry-Jet is complaining about…I guess the Holy Spirit gave bad advice.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
The Catholic Church has never maintained that any pope is infallible in all that he does–it has always maintained that he is incapable of teaching error regarding the deposit of the faith.
The Catholic Church has also never maintained that the Holy Spirit prevents any pope from making infallible choices concerning the appointment of bishops.
That does not mean that whatever choices he makes should not be respected or that they’re valid.
Having said that does not mean in anyway that a Catholic could not say that bishops who believe certain things should not be appointed.
Say you lived during the period of time where nearly 3/4 of Catholic bishops subscribed to the arian heresy.
If you were in favor of the 1/4 of bishops who did not hold to that heresy and stated that any pope should not appoint such people–such a pronouncement would not be sinful.
As a layman it wouldn’t be your job to pronounce eccleastical judgement on bishops that taught such a heresy–that would be for the pope to decide.
And saying that you didn’t think such bishops should be appointed in the future does not mean in any way that you considered their appointments by any popes in the past to be invalid.
and saying that would not mean that you didn’t think that any pope wouldn’t have the power to choose whoever he wanted to
nor would it mean that you were saying that the pope wasn’t capable of error in appointing them.
It would be calling a spade a spade and saying that anyone who supported the arian viewpoint shouldn’t be appointed would be the right thing to say!
Similiariily saying that liberal bishops should not be appointed is also the right thing to say
even if that offends other Catholics who agree with their viewpoints
and even if some of those bishops who were pushing those viewpoints didn’t like it!
The Catholic Church is not a democracy by any means but always remember this: the magisterium is not always and eternally deaf to the sensus fidelium of its members.
The pope isn’t deaf either.
And while sometimes it does take centuries the Holy Spirit is ultimately listened to and does guide the Catholic Church.
If the Catholic Church could survive the arian heresy–liberal bishops are no big deal.
They will be defeated just like the Arians were.
But even then there will always be people in the Catholic Church causing trouble. It’s alway been that way and will remain hat way until Jesus comes back and the Church triumphantly will rule at last led by Jesus!
The Catholic Church has also never maintained that the Holy Spirit prevents any pope from making infallible choices concerning the appointment of bishops.
That does not mean that whatever choices he makes should not be respected or that they’re valid.
Having said that does not mean in anyway that a Catholic could not say that bishops who believe certain things should not be appointed.
Say you lived during the period of time where nearly 3/4 of Catholic bishops subscribed to the arian heresy.
If you were in favor of the 1/4 of bishops who did not hold to that heresy and stated that any pope should not appoint such people–such a pronouncement would not be sinful.
As a layman it wouldn’t be your job to pronounce eccleastical judgement on bishops that taught such a heresy–that would be for the pope to decide.
And saying that you didn’t think such bishops should be appointed in the future does not mean in any way that you considered their appointments by any popes in the past to be invalid.
and saying that would not mean that you didn’t think that any pope wouldn’t have the power to choose whoever he wanted to
nor would it mean that you were saying that the pope wasn’t capable of error in appointing them.
It would be calling a spade a spade and saying that anyone who supported the arian viewpoint shouldn’t be appointed would be the right thing to say!
Similiariily saying that liberal bishops should not be appointed is also the right thing to say
even if that offends other Catholics who agree with their viewpoints
and even if some of those bishops who were pushing those viewpoints didn’t like it!
The Catholic Church is not a democracy by any means but always remember this: the magisterium is not always and eternally deaf to the sensus fidelium of its members.
The pope isn’t deaf either.
And while sometimes it does take centuries the Holy Spirit is ultimately listened to and does guide the Catholic Church.
If the Catholic Church could survive the arian heresy–liberal bishops are no big deal.
They will be defeated just like the Arians were.
But even then there will always be people in the Catholic Church causing trouble. It’s alway been that way and will remain hat way until Jesus comes back and the Church triumphantly will rule at last led by Jesus!
C
chicago
Guest
F
frommi
Guest
OK…now I’ve seen it all…apparently liberal bishops are the modern day equivalenty of aryans. That’s news to me…
Seriously…
Seriously…
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
No actually modern day liberal bishops are worse than the arians.
The arians had the fundamental nature of Christ wrong.
They didn’t sit by and passively by ommission sanction the murder of millions of unborn babies.
They didn’t allow the Eucharist to be sacriledged.
And they also didn’t pretend to not be doing something when they were doing something.
No liberal bishops are much more insidious.
Satan does his best work in an insidious way when people do not recognize what he is doing.
An example of such work is the inclusive language that is fought tooth and nail over against the wishes of the Holy See.
If it were up to the liberals we would have women priests and homosexual priests.
The same people who vote for candidates in favor of gay marriage are the same people that favor such priests
I just wish such people would come out and say that is what they really desire instead of lying about it!.
The arians had the fundamental nature of Christ wrong.
They didn’t sit by and passively by ommission sanction the murder of millions of unborn babies.
They didn’t allow the Eucharist to be sacriledged.
And they also didn’t pretend to not be doing something when they were doing something.
No liberal bishops are much more insidious.
Satan does his best work in an insidious way when people do not recognize what he is doing.
An example of such work is the inclusive language that is fought tooth and nail over against the wishes of the Holy See.
If it were up to the liberals we would have women priests and homosexual priests.
The same people who vote for candidates in favor of gay marriage are the same people that favor such priests
I just wish such people would come out and say that is what they really desire instead of lying about it!.
C
chicago
Guest
Were they allowing other Arian believers to receive?
I’m not a big fan of inclusive language, but…
We ALREADY have homosexual priests. Probably long have. And we have priests who abuse children. And priests who get their girlfriends pregnant.
You might be surprized at which Catholics actually LOVE their priest who happens to be gay (perhaps even without their knowledge).
I don’t know that the majority of bishops who would be seen as “liberal” are quite so insidious.
C
chicago
Guest
oops, double post
J
jknobl1932
Guest
You are not wrong Cactus!!
I attend Mass several times a week, and have yet to hear any ‘in persona Christi’ leadership in any homily in two years in our parish. After listening to these Dr. Phils in chasubles, I go home, and turn to EWTN’s Mass. Why? Because the homilies are not patterned after fourth grade Vacation Bible Classes. I have been discussing this with many other of our parishioners, and the majority are thirsting for learning applications of the scriptures to their complex lives in this secular society. The Church needs many more Father Corapi(s), O’Shaunesey(s) and Groschels. Maybe if in the Birmingham diocese (I’m in Huntsville) a bishop was elevated from among the priests of the Society of St. Peter, there may be a strong possibility of a truly complimentary and supplementary relationship between the Bishop/EWTN that would be a model for the entire Catholic Church. There is no doubt about it, we will need bishops throughout the Church; let’s pray fervently that those chosen will have a true and traditional Catholic formation.
I attend Mass several times a week, and have yet to hear any ‘in persona Christi’ leadership in any homily in two years in our parish. After listening to these Dr. Phils in chasubles, I go home, and turn to EWTN’s Mass. Why? Because the homilies are not patterned after fourth grade Vacation Bible Classes. I have been discussing this with many other of our parishioners, and the majority are thirsting for learning applications of the scriptures to their complex lives in this secular society. The Church needs many more Father Corapi(s), O’Shaunesey(s) and Groschels. Maybe if in the Birmingham diocese (I’m in Huntsville) a bishop was elevated from among the priests of the Society of St. Peter, there may be a strong possibility of a truly complimentary and supplementary relationship between the Bishop/EWTN that would be a model for the entire Catholic Church. There is no doubt about it, we will need bishops throughout the Church; let’s pray fervently that those chosen will have a true and traditional Catholic formation.
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
The problem I see with the Pope placing more conservative priests as bishops is How is he going to find or hear about them? We all want new Bishops “now” but unless PAPA sends some of his trusted advisers to the USA and other places to speak privately (with no knowledge of the present Bishops) PAPA won’t know who is Traditional or not.
- Status