The Queen and the Pope on the Plane

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
twf said:
I’m Canadian. Our elected politicians won’t ever mention the G word (God) let alone the C word (Christ)… so it always warms my heart when our Chief of State, the Queen, mentions Christ in her annual Christmas address.
Click to expand...
I’m also Catholic and Canadian; the Queen is one classy lady, I think she’s great. At 95 I’ll likely be pushing daisies no doubt, while Her Majesty continues to ably oversee her realm, and leads a busy public life.

Colour me a proud monarchist. And I’m a Quebecer of francophone origins. I think there are three of us in the entire province 🤣
 
Good. But, class and Holiness are two different things. Outside of Catholicism, her chances of aspiring to true Holiness are less.
 
Disagree completely. I’ve seen lots of very unholy Catholics, and very holy Protestants.

Holiness is a personal quality, not a privilege of membership. Many people misuse their membership in the Church, many others make the best of their imperfect communion using imperfect tools. God is not bound by our human pettiness.

Think of it this way: as Catholics we’ve been given a perfect set of tools. Some, the saints, use them right to plow a road to eternal life. Others, misuse the tools to build roads that lead nowhere.

Protestants are given an imperfect set of tools. Some, somehow, manage to make the best of them and build the road to heaven.

As a Catholic I fear God might be less merciful to me if I misuse the perfect tools he gave me, than to a Protestant who did his or her best with flawed tools. To whom much is given, much is expected.
 
@GiftofMercy

“Quiet[ing]” “unacceptable” comments allowed the scandal to grow unimpeded until someone was willing to “criticiz[e] their peers and leaders.”
 
Bon_Croix said:
This was verification from Heaven that the Pope, the bishops, and the Holy Spirit were on the same page when it came to the newly defined doctrine. 150+ years later, people still visit the place in France where these visions occurred. People are still miraculously healed there. Many of the medical miracles are documented with medical evidence and expert opinion.

Yet, the English Monarchy still hasn’t converted. Stubborn?
Click to expand...
Even Catholics are not required to accept Bernadette’s visions—I’d have been surprised if the English monarchs did.
 
Annie said:
40.png
GiftofMercy:
This only serves to promote the division now ongoing in the Church.
Click to expand...
OraLabora said:
It only serves to stir up more division,
Click to expand...
Funny how it’s those with whom we disagree who are the ones stirring up division.
Click to expand...
Criticizing the Pope at every turn is a pretty fair definition of sowing discord.
 
Criticism can go either way: sometimes it is divisive, sometimes it is even sinful.

However, sometimes criticism is necessary and good.

To make all-encompassing statements that all criticism of members of the Church hierarchy is wrong, to say all such criticism is divisive, allows the hierarchy to act unimpeded in a way which can become very destructive.

Sometimes it is not the criticism which is divisive but that which is being criticized.
 
From the OP’s link:

Let’s say he is asked about the Vatican finances. Instead of lots of words about reform he could mention briefly the efforts that are being made, but segue into a discussion about greed, mortal sin and the need for all to repent and turn to Christ in order to find true fulfillment and an abundant life.

No, that wouldn’t be a good idea at all. He would be evading the issue. In the next day’s papers we would read, “Pope dodges embarrassing question about Vatican finances, waffles about sin and repentance.”
 
Rats. I thought his was going to be a joke.

“The Queen and the Pope were on a plane…”
 
OraLabora said:
40.png
twf:
I’m Canadian. Our elected politicians won’t ever mention the G word (God) let alone the C word (Christ)… so it always warms my heart when our Chief of State, the Queen, mentions Christ in her annual Christmas address.
Click to expand...
I’m also Catholic and Canadian; the Queen is one classy lady, I think she’s great. At 95 I’ll likely be pushing daisies no doubt, while Her Majesty continues to ably oversee her realm, and leads a busy public life.

Colour me a proud monarchist. And I’m a Quebecer of francophone origins. I think there are three of us in the entire province 🤣
Click to expand...
You’re definitely few and far between. I, too, am fond of Her Majesty, but I’m definitely not a monarchist. I had once considered joining the Reserves but once I realized I’d have to take the Oath of Allegiance I simply, in good conscience, couldn’t.
 
Last edited:
You would be taking an oath of allegiance to the Queen of Canada, a symbol of Canada…and the obedience due to that allegiance would ultimately be owed to her elected ministers in Canada.

Personally, I find the idea of a republic very difficult to reconcile with traditional Catholic thought. It’s a vulgar, secular, humanist notion… ;).
 
Last edited:
I like the stability and the checks-and-balances of a constitutional monarchy; they include some of the most stable countries in the world… although Brexit has sorely put that to the test.

There is a line in the sand that neither the Sovereign nor the elected government can cross without causing a constitutional crisis. Protocol and tradition rule. In theory the Sovereign can intervene. But it would take the direst of crises for her to do so. Still, that reserve power is a sobering brake on the worst excesses of the elected parliament.

It seems far more effective at providing stability and good government than the current circuses in some unnamed republics…
 
Elaborating on the idea of stability…the government cannot be indefinitely stalled. The sovereign or viceroy’s authority to dissolve parliament and call a general election ensures that government shutdowns, as occasionally seen in the US, simply can’t happen.

The equivalent to this whole impeachment / trial in the senate process we are currently seeing in the US is also a lot simpler…all it takes is a vote of no confidence in the House and the Prime Minister is done.
 
Last edited:
twf said:
Personally, I find the idea of a republic very difficult to reconcile with traditional Catholic thought. It’s a vulgar, secular, humanist notion… ;).
Click to expand...
As a U.S. citizen with only a rudimentary knowledge of how our more civilized neighbors north of the border are governed, I understand that I may be missing something here. But I have to ask…is this a joke? Your …;)… leads me to believe that it might be, and my ignorance is prevent me from “getting it.” On the other hand, if you’re serious, what form of government would you prefer? A theocracy?
 
I’m partial to constitutional monarchies myself, of which my country, Canada, is one.
 
twf said:
The equivalent to this whole impeachment / trial in the senate process we are currently seeing in the US is also a lot simpler…all it takes is a vote of no confidence in the House and the Prime Minister is done.
Click to expand...
The US impeachment process is drawn directly from the British process in which Commons impeaches a King’s minister who is tried (literally, by his peers) in Lords . . .

The only significant difference is that we narrowed the grounds a bit to just treason, briery, and High Crimes and Misdemeanors (deliberately leaving out misfeasanc, malfeasance, and annoying Parliament Congress).

Even the procedure is pretty much borrowed–the precedents in the current kerflufle about not transmitting the articles to the Senate are British, not English . . .

A parliamentary vote of no confidence is parallel to a motion to vacate the speakership in our House of Representatives, not impeachment.
 
I meant the vote of no confidence is essentially all it takes to remove the head of government…I realize the process itself is not a direct parallel.
 
I was speaking tongue-in-cheek, yes. Republics lack the Biblical symbolism of a monarchy, hence my use of the term “vulgar”. I’m partial to constitutional monarchy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top