P
piouswoman
Guest
How does your post qualify as Catholic?
- Status
P
patrick457
Guest
Now, now, be nice, don’t generalize and don’t make the assumption that the Pope is Christ. He is the Vicar, the Representative of the Lord (an inherited position), but that does make Him Christ Jesus in the flesh.
Piouswoman, just because Pope Benedict was a ‘liberal’ back during the Conciliar Period (I frankly don’t know if they used the word ‘liberal’ in Church circles back then to mean the same as we use it now) does not make him so at the present; a human can switch sides during his lifetime, why can’t the Pope be any different?
And also, the Pope seems to not have considered himself to have ‘made a turn’ to conservatism as he once said in 1993, during an interview with TIME:
If we accept the Pope’s views here, then it was actually the ‘liberals’ who changed quickly while it was the Pope who evolved gradually (apparently ‘liberal’ views and ideas changed rather fast as the years went by).
Here’s another quote from the article:
J
JReducation
Guest
The fact that Joseph Ratzinger was a theological consultant during Vatican II does not make him a liberal. The fact that as Pope Benedict XVI he has reinstated the Tridentine Mass doesn’t make him a conservative. These terms are better left to analyzing politicians rather than popes.
Let’s ask ourselves some questions:
- Was Vatican II a sin? If not, what is wrong with having been a theological consultant at Vatican II?
- Has Pope Benedict taught anything contrary to the faith, either as Cardinal Ratzinger or pope?
- Is he a liberal because he will not concede power and autonomy to SSPX? SSPX is a public society of the clergy. There are no priestly societies or religious order or religious congregations that are autonomous from the Pope. Ultimately, he is the Superior General of every society, order and congregation in the Church. They are bound to him by obedience. In fact, he has the authority to disband any institute according to Canon Law. He has not disbanded the SSPX. This shows that he is not only a man of faith, but also a man of hope. This characterization is neither liberal nor conservative, it is Christian.
- Aren’t liberal and conservative relative terms? To the SSPX he may be liberal because he pushes for ecumenism. To many women his is conservative because he condemns abortion and artificial birth control. Therefore, do these terms really define the man?
- Someone mentioned that they saw a picture of him and Karl Rahner wearing a shirt and tie. Does anyone remember that he is a German theologian and that in Germany and many other countries in Europe, university professors all wear shirts and ties? The shirt with the Roman Collar is an Anglican creation that American clergy adopted at the Council of Baltimore and that priests in other countries are slowly adopting. The traditional garb for a priest in Europe was either a cassock, habit or a suit. In Germany it was a shirt and tie. In Spain it was a suit with a black crew neck shirt. In the Eastern Church it’s still a black robe with hat or veil. Big deal!
- Did anything he contributed to Vatican II contradict Revelation? In fact what he contributed to the Council was the systematic organization of the theology in the documents.
- Didn’t Joseph Ratzinger get two doctorate degrees, one on Augustine and the other on Bonaventure? What is unorthodox about either of these two great minds?
- Has anyone noticed that his writings use Augustinian systematic and Bonventurian theology? What is unorthodox about Augustine and Bonaventure? Does every pope have to be a Thomist?
- Is recognizing the virtues of other faiths a sin? Is this an endorsement of other faiths? Would we want a pope who disregards the good in other faiths, just to make a point that they are not in communion with the Church? How would that make him a man of greater integrity and a true shepherd of all people? Isn’t his job to be the shepherd of all mankind, not just Catholics?
- Is he supposed to grant faculties to absolve from sin perform marriages and preach to priests who are in communion with Bishop Felley instead of the Bishop of Rome? Bishop Felley is not the Pontiff.
- Isn’t it dangerous to go to confession to a priest who has no power to absolve? What do we expect Benedict to do, to grant them this power before they comply with their promise of obedience to the Bishop of Rome? Regardless whether or not the Bishop of Rome is wrong on some things, a promise is a promise. Unless the Bishop of Rome orders you to sin, a priest has to fulfil his promise to obey. Believing that something may lead to sin is not sufficient reason to disobey. It is a choice made on speculation, not on fact. Sin is a personal choice.
PW, we can’t just cast him aside becasue he was at the Council, no matter what we feel about the Council. That wouldn’t be fair. He is the Pope and he has done nothing wrong.
JR
I
I_Believe
Guest
What was your other user name ? The one before you were banned ?
P
piouswoman
Guest
The pope is a liberal and a progressive thinker…the evidence is there for anyone to find if they just take the time to do it. He embraces religious liberty and ecumenism, which until Vatican II have ALWAYS been condemned by the Church. Now, you can keep fooling yourself into believing otherwise, but as a Catholic I will remind you that it is your duty to reject error. And there is plenty of error being taught by the misguided church hierarchy of today. By their fruits you shall know them…the Vatican II fruits are all rotten to the core. Prove otherwise.The fact that Joseph Ratzinger was a theological consultant during Vatican II does not make him a liberal. The fact that as Pope Benedict XVI he has reinstated the Tridentine Mass doesn’t make him a conservative. These terms are better left to analyzing politicians rather than popes.
Let’s ask ourselves some questions:
These are points that Benedict sustains. None of them are either liberal or conservative. They are consistent with Catholic faith and law.
- Was Vatican II a sin? If not, what is wrong with having been a theological consultant at Vatican II?
- Has Pope Benedict taught anything contrary to the faith, either as Cardinal Ratzinger or pope?
- Is he a liberal because he will not concede power and autonomy to SSPX? SSPX is a public society of the clergy. There are no priestly societies or religious order or religious congregations that are autonomous from the Pope. Ultimately, he is the Superior General of every society, order and congregation in the Church. They are bound to him by obedience. In fact, he has the authority to disband any institute according to Canon Law. He has not disbanded the SSPX. This shows that he is not only a man of faith, but also a man of hope. This characterization is neither liberal nor conservative, it is Christian.
- Aren’t liberal and conservative relative terms? To the SSPX he may be liberal because he pushes for ecumenism. To many women his is conservative because he condemns abortion and artificial birth control. Therefore, do these terms really define the man?
- Someone mentioned that they saw a picture of him and Karl Rahner wearing a shirt and tie. Does anyone remember that he is a German theologian and that in Germany and many other countries in Europe, university professors all wear shirts and ties? The shirt with the Roman Collar is an Anglican creation that American clergy adopted at the Council of Baltimore and that priests in other countries are slowly adopting. The traditional garb for a priest in Europe was either a cassock, habit or a suit. In Germany it was a shirt and tie. In Spain it was a suit with a black crew neck shirt. In the Eastern Church it’s still a black robe with hat or veil. Big deal!
- Did anything he contributed to Vatican II contradict Revelation? In fact what he contributed to the Council was the systematic organization of the theology in the documents.
- Didn’t Joseph Ratzinger get two doctorate degrees, one on Augustine and the other on Bonaventure? What is unorthodox about either of these two great minds?
- Has anyone noticed that his writings use Augustinian systematic and Bonventurian theology? What is unorthodox about Augustine and Bonaventure? Does every pope have to be a Thomist?
- Is recognizing the virtues of other faiths a sin? Is this an endorsement of other faiths? Would we want a pope who disregards the good in other faiths, just to make a point that they are not in communion with the Church? How would that make him a man of greater integrity and a true shepherd of all people? Isn’t his job to be the shepherd of all mankind, not just Catholics?
- Is he supposed to grant faculties to absolve from sin perform marriages and preach to priests who are in communion with Bishop Felley instead of the Bishop of Rome? Bishop Felley is not the Pontiff.
- Isn’t it dangerous to go to confession to a priest who has no power to absolve? What do we expect Benedict to do, to grant them this power before they comply with their promise of obedience to the Bishop of Rome? Regardless whether or not the Bishop of Rome is wrong on some things, a promise is a promise. Unless the Bishop of Rome orders you to sin, a priest has to fulfil his promise to obey. Believing that something may lead to sin is not sufficient reason to disobey. It is a choice made on speculation, not on fact. Sin is a personal choice.
PW, we can’t just cast him aside becasue he was at the Council, no matter what we feel about the Council. That wouldn’t be fair. He is the Pope and he has done nothing wrong.
JR
P
piouswoman
Guest
And to answer further questions from JR:
sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q9_jurisdiction.htm
sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q9_jurisdiction.htm
P
piouswoman
Guest
JR asked:
9. Is recognizing the virtues of other faiths a sin? Is this an endorsement of other faiths? Would we want a pope who disregards the good in other faiths, just to make a point that they are not in communion with the Church? How would that make him a man of greater integrity and a true shepherd of all people? Isn’t his job to be the shepherd of all mankind, not just Catholics?
Yes, recognizing the “virtues” (of which there are none) of other faiths is a total denial of Christ and His dying on the wood of the Holy Cross for the salvation of all mankind. Why did Our Lord suffer and die for us? So that we can also recognize and see the good in false religions? That is ludicrous and anti-Catholic to even suggest. There is no good in false religions, to pretend that there is for the sake of human respect is a grave error, a grave sin, and an assault on Our Lord and His Church.
9. Is recognizing the virtues of other faiths a sin? Is this an endorsement of other faiths? Would we want a pope who disregards the good in other faiths, just to make a point that they are not in communion with the Church? How would that make him a man of greater integrity and a true shepherd of all people? Isn’t his job to be the shepherd of all mankind, not just Catholics?
Yes, recognizing the “virtues” (of which there are none) of other faiths is a total denial of Christ and His dying on the wood of the Holy Cross for the salvation of all mankind. Why did Our Lord suffer and die for us? So that we can also recognize and see the good in false religions? That is ludicrous and anti-Catholic to even suggest. There is no good in false religions, to pretend that there is for the sake of human respect is a grave error, a grave sin, and an assault on Our Lord and His Church.
J
JReducation
Guest
So if a Jew or a Protestant kneels in prayer, we must ignore it and pretend that it’sn ot happening or worse, we must condemn the fact that they are trying to speak to God?
But when a Catholic goes to confession to an SSPX priest who cannot absolve their sins, we have to say this is OK?
It seems we have some things inverted here.
JR
P
piouswoman
Guest
JR stated:
PW, we can’t just cast him aside becasue he was at the Council, no matter what we feel about the Council. That wouldn’t be fair. He is the Pope and he has done nothing wrong.
He has not done what is right. We don’t have to cast him aside, but be don’t have to trip down the path of error with him either…many prayers for the pope and for the Church are in order until the false and erroneous teachings are finally recognized for what they are, and cast once and for all into the dust bin of history where they belong. A full return to tradition and the true doctrines of our faith is what we should be praying for, many souls are at stake.
PW, we can’t just cast him aside becasue he was at the Council, no matter what we feel about the Council. That wouldn’t be fair. He is the Pope and he has done nothing wrong.
He has not done what is right. We don’t have to cast him aside, but be don’t have to trip down the path of error with him either…many prayers for the pope and for the Church are in order until the false and erroneous teachings are finally recognized for what they are, and cast once and for all into the dust bin of history where they belong. A full return to tradition and the true doctrines of our faith is what we should be praying for, many souls are at stake.
J
JReducation
Guest
Especially the souls of people who knowingly confess their sins to priests who do not have faculties to absolve them. Not only is it an outright defiance of the Church’s law, but an abuse of the Sacrament of Penance.
JR
P
piouswoman
Guest
Jews and Protestants are in error and should be told that no one will be saved outside of the Catholic Church. They are false religions, they deny Christ and His Church, so how can we possibly see good in their false religion? Out of charity and a desire to see all men convert to the one true faith, the Church of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church, for the salvation of their souls, it would be a grave sin to “see” good in their false religions.So if a Jew or a Protestant kneels in prayer, we must ignore it and pretend that it’sn ot happening or worse, we must condemn the fact that they are trying to speak to God?
But when a Catholic goes to confession to an SSPX priest who cannot absolve their sins, we have to say this is OK?
It seems we have some things inverted here.
JR
And I provided the link explaining jurisdiction. Just go ahead and ignore it if you want to and if it makes you feel superior to think you know better than the good priests and bishops (well grounded in theology) of the SSPX.
J
JReducation
Guest
How about something from when St. Paul was addressing the philosphers in Rome, he used their own philosphies, the truths found in them to point them to Christ. Remember this? The unknown god?
JR
P
piouswoman
Guest
I would be more worried about the Novus Ordo priests that you would confess to, and their possibly “doubtful” ordination. There is a valid question and concern as to the new rite of ordination.Especially the souls of people who knowingly confess their sins to priests who do not have faculties to absolve them. Not only is it an outright defiance of the Church’s law, but an abuse of the Sacrament of Penance.
JR
sspxasia.com/Newsletters/1998/December/Priestly-Ordinations-New-Vs-Old-Rite.htm
P
piouswoman
Guest
Remember…all Protestant religions are sects that have broken away from the Catholic Church because they denied a Catholic Doctrine or Doctrines. Jews deny Our Lord all together.How about something from when St. Paul was addressing the philosphers in Rome, he used their own philosphies, the truths found in them to point them to Christ. Remember this? The unknown god?
JR
P
PKinsale
Guest
Please don’t lump TIA in with SSPX. It does a great disservice to the latter.
P
PKinsale
Guest
This believe about ordination rites has been disputed elsewhere. It is hard to believe the Holy Spirit would allow one of the Sacraments to be systematically invalidated.
D
Dauphin
Guest
I know for a fact that Bishop Fellay disagrees with this. He affirmed, in an adress available on YouTube, that false religions have elements of truth. He also clarified that this does nothing for them if they remain outside the Catholic Church, using the analogy of airplanes with parts missing and trains that head in the wrong direction. In the end, the false religion doesn’t get you to heaven.
The answer you provided really is ludicrous, in calling it a denial of Christ to recognize elements of truth outside the Church. We can start with these commonalities in order to convert others from these false religions. The Church has done it since its foundation, and it most certainly is not repugnant to the Catholic faith.
U
una_ecclesia
Guest
Actually i think it was in Athens where he mentioned the unknown god (check Acts ch 17: 16-34 )
NOnetheless it does not diminish your point
That being said, Piouswoman, how is recognizing the virtues seen in other religions a total denial of Christ? Just because these religions are lacking in the fullness of the truth, it doesn’t mean they don’t have anything right. In fact, the parts that are correct can be used as hooks for evangelization (as seen with St. Paul and the Athenians)!
Sorry for interrupting this discussion…
God bless you all
D
Dauphin
Guest
The Bishop would have to have the intention not to ordain a priest in order for the ordination to be invalid.
The exact same reality applies to the old rite. Only a contrary intention invalidates the sacrament. I can’t imagine that any Bishop would deliberately manifest such an intention. The problem is not with the rite, which has correct form, but with the intention of the Bishop which is untouched by the rite.
Simply because the new rite tragically omits mention of the power to forgive sin, the ordination is still perfectly valid if there is proper matter, form, and intent. I have no doubt whatsoever that the priests I confess are validly ordained.
J
JReducation
Guest
The only ones with questions about the ordination using the EF is the SSPX.
However, even the SSPX, cannot deny that they can’t hear confessions without faculties.
They claim to be in union with Rome and they claim to follow canon law.
So they can’t hear confessions, absolve sins or perform marriages, because they have no faculties according to canon law, which they claim to follow.
Isn’t canon law how they justify their disobedience?
The same law also denies them the right to absolve sins and perform marriages.
JR
- Status