Undermining JPII legacy

  • Thread starter Thread starter ontheway1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Undermining JPII legacy
Click to expand...
Apparently it’s an internal differendum (among clergy). The students signed a petition against changing the power structure status-quo.

Family is core-business !! If anyone ever forgets that all is lost.

Pope John Paul II, to the point of entrusting the (moral theology) chair precisely to the first president, Cardinal Carlo Caffarra
Click to expand...
Cardinal Caffarra was one of 4 who signed the dubia.

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, the institute’s grand chancellor
Click to expand...

I recommend the excerpt between minutes 8:00 and 9:20 . (I’d point out the Archbishop starts the interview mentioning ethics of Robotics, which is not core-business. Let’s face it, if half the robotics academics out there had the moral formation of a well catechised 10 year it would be a start.

Are they aiming for Vatican experts to speak at IEEE conferences? Is that the priority and the way to go? Preach to consecrated experts and muscle for a place in fields holding overlaps with ethics and morals? I guess that’s being tried in business administration, because there are symbolic struggles in those fields…)

 
Last edited:
I’m not sure why we are so concerned here. Changing and JPII in the same sentence are not necessarily an evil plot.
 
There seems to be quite a resistance from the students at this “new” iteration of the JPII Institute.

So the Institute plans on teaching morals without any actual professors who specialize in morality?

And now it is going to allow a priest who agrees with artificial contraception to teach there?

There is some more good coverage of this upsetting change here


and here

 
I gave up on the JPII institute when Pope Francis reorganized it a couple of years ago. It may have a similar name, but the old institute as it was known for many years is effectively dead. This new institution is shaping up to be just another iteration of secular colleges, with some lite Catholicism sprinkled in. As if what we needed was more watering down of the faith when the family is under more attack than ever in today’s world.

The Pontifical Academy for Life is another institution that has become a shell of its former self in the last few years. It’s hard to take an institution that is supposed to be defending life seriously when you have pro-abortion members joining it.
 
Last edited:
Stalinistic acts of intellectual brigandage against the theological and pastoral heritage of Pope St. John Paul II are being carried out by Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia …

This is a quote from the George Weigel article cited above. I highlight this particular quote to bring attention to the article which sheds so much light on what is going on in today’s Vatican.
 
This is the result of, for some reason, transitioning from a Church who teaches to a Church who “listens.” Now, if the renewed emphasis on “listening” meant that the Church was willing to more attentively hear the struggles of sinners and non-Catholics in order to teach them more effectively, so as to lead them to the Truth of Christ, that would be great.

But that’s not what this current mindset means by “listening.” Their erroneous notion of “listening” means that the Church is wrong on some issues, and must “listen” to those who hold beliefs contrary to Church teaching so the Church can adapt to modern man. Ah yes, this new JPII Institute will focus on the “science” of the family and the “anthropological” changes of humanity because well, fallen man knows better than the Church after all. This will lead to more softening of Church teaching, more relativistic morality, more of the notion that Catholic teaching is just too hard to follow, more diverting language like “accompaniment” and “pastoral approach” to basically eliminate the notion that sexual sins are serious.
 
Raymond Arroyo is discussing this in his most recent broadcast.
 
I don’t like R.Arroyo’s approach, I think he sometimes stirs polemics for his living (to an extreme that becomes unethical.) I think his presentation aims at being “gripping”…

Well, I’m divided on this. If the internal power structure was envisioned by JPII himself it should be kept (and the students position is a prime indication of what’s really happening.) OTOH, the trend in academia these past years is for power to become more centralized. (Something that having its advantages does not tend to help solve human problems.)
 
Last edited:
Arroyo’s treatment of the issue is much more reserved and certainly not “gripping” when compared to some of the other statements. (someone compared the purges of the institute with the invasion of the barbarians; others called it intellectually embarrasing) In fact, Arroyo is holding back on passing judgment on the process of destroying the institute. In view of what has transpired, I expected him to a little less circumspect.

This just appeared in the editorial of the National Catholic Register:
"If Francis sought to advance his own distinctive pastoral methodology, why didn’t he build a parallel academic program, as John Paul opted to do when he founded his pontifical institute almost 40 years ago?

The issue now is whether a demoralized and “refounded” institute will continue to present and defend a vision of human freedom in which mercy, pastoral care and absolute commandments operate together. This was John Paul’s hope when he established the institute to advance his teachings, developed within the Tradition of the Church and honed over the many decades that he accompanied his flock through the crucible of totalitarian persecution. And the notion that his blueprint for human liberation has outlived its usefulness is beyond ludicrous."
 
Last edited:
Remember that comment on “Robotics” I made earlier? Well, nothing too futuristic, but predictions are Trucks and Taxis are going to become automated. (And no, some of the “automation” hype that “everyone’s going to loose their jobs” isn’t true to that extent - because in most cases the machines would be far more expensive than human labor.)

However, these predictions imply literally tens of millions of people becoming unemployed in a very short time. (And they probably don’t have many qualifications besides a driver’s license.)

So, my guess is: Pope Francis wants to prepare so the Vatican has something to say on the subject when the time comes…(Because we are talking about tens of millions of family heads, in the developed world, that almost overnight will become poor and unemployed. If this strikes together with an international financial crisis…Imagine.)
 
Well, look who it is with Abp. Paglia.

This is all nothing less than an attempt to dismantle Pope Saint John Paul II’s legacy, most particularly Theology of the Body.

Why? Because without even directly addressing homosexual activity, TOB clarifies why homosexual intercourse is unnatural as well as evil, and always will be.
 
If you don’t mind, what does “ELA” in your username mean??
CatholicELATeacher said:
Well, look who it is with Abp. Paglia.
Click to expand...
🙂 Yeah I noticed. Fact is I don’t know anything about the priest interviewing…Except that he reputedly stirs a reaction here on the forums.
 
Last edited:
You make a good point about the need to address the economic crises, present and future. It seems that pope Francis wants to redefine the concept of the “family” in such a way as to make room in the church for the divorced, never married, same-sex, etc. Thus it is the current or future economic situation and/or societal norms, which are an excuse to redefine the magisterium. I can see that side of the argument, the need to reach out to the poor and the downtrodden, but telling them that they are OK and that the pope will change the foundations of Catholicism to accomodate their current condition? Will there be anything left after he finishes accomodating?

Brings to mind the scene where Jesus meets the Samaritan woman at the well. She is also one that has redefined the concept of marriage and family. Jesus doesn’n condemn her but tells her to sin no more, to return to the straight path.
 
English Language Arts. I also teach middle school Religion.
 
I wouldn’t take it that far.

As for now, the students stated their public preoccupation with changes being made to the curriculum and organic structure of the institution (perhaps hinting at insensitivity of the powerful).

Regarding communion for the divorced and remarried…There has been a procedure for that predates pope Francis. However, it is subtle in its application (most people reading that document would probably overlook what it really says). I can’t take the effort of explaining it again, it’s somewhere on CAF.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top