Posted on 04/05/2005 7:44:40 AM PDT by Thorin
When the catholic church elected this man pope it was the equivalenbt of Reagan saying "tear down this wall." I remember a book review that described the story of the meeting in the Kremlin where the leaders of the USSR thought this might be a death knell for communism.
I knew you were serious.
I was trying to show how silly you are.
Do facts matter at all to you?
I guess because I pointed out the reality instead of imbibing in the fun feelings-fest going on, that makes me silly.
I don't know if you're Catholic or not but if you are, it is imperative and obligatory for you to find out the truth of what this Pope taught doctrinally by word or action and compare that with the constant teaching of the Catholic Church.
If you're not Catholic, then I suggest you read the Catechism of the Council of Trent and become one.
Ah, a follower of Marcel Le Frog and 19th Century Ultramontanism speaks...
I absolutely am Catholic. A real live committed Roman Catholic.
YOU tell ME what this Pope taught wrong doctrinally by word or action.
Can't wait to hear your answer to this one.
Go read Mortalium Animos by Pope Pius XI.
Also Read Vatican I Pastor Aeternus.
Then read Ut Unum Sint by JPII. He directly imbibes in the false opinion mentioned by Pius XI.
Then he sets out at the end of the encyclical to "undefine" the papacy against Vatican I.
Unless you can tell me exactly what JPII means when he says He's "open to a new situation." regarding the Petrine Primacy, you are going to have to admit that it goes head to head against Vatican I.
If you really are a live committed Catholic then you'll be willing to go where you don't want to go and you'll carefully read those documents.
As Pat Buchanan said on television tonight, "We'd better put a hold on that title, "The Great." for a while.
This is what We exceedingly long for and in suppliant prayer earnestly beg of the Giver of celestial gifts, namely, that the ardent desire of all good men be at last fulfilled, that all may be one[41] and all return to the unity of the fold, to be fed by a single Shepherd.[42] (Pius XII, Ecclesiae Fastos §37)
Is that the "false opinion"?
Unless you can tell me exactly what JPII means when he says He's "open to a new situation." regarding the Petrine Primacy, you are going to have to admit that it goes head to head against Vatican I.
JP II explicitly says that universal jurisdiction and infallibility are essential and can't be changed, and that all that could be changed is practice. How does that go head-to-head with Vatican I?
With the power and the authority without which such an office would be illusory, the Bishop of Rome must ensure the communion of all the Churches. For this reason, he is the first servant of unity. This primacy is exercised on various levels, including vigilance over the handing down of the Word, the celebration of the Liturgy and the Sacraments, the Church's mission, discipline and the Christian life. It is the responsibility of the Successor of Peter to recall the requirements of the common good of the Church, should anyone be tempted to overlook it in the pursuit of personal interests. He has the duty to admonish, to caution and to declare at times that this or that opinion being circulated is irreconcilable with the unity of faith. When circumstances require it, he speaks in the name of all the Pastors in communion with him. He can also—under very specific conditions clearly laid down by the First Vatican Council— declare ex cathedra that a certain doctrine belongs to the deposit of faith.152 By thus bearing witness to the truth, he serves unity.All this however must always be done in communion. When the Catholic Church affirms that the office of the Bishop of Rome corresponds to the will of Christ, she does not separate this office from the mission entrusted to the whole body of Bishops, who are also "vicars and ambassadors of Christ".153 The Bishop of Rome is a member of the "College", and the Bishops are his brothers in the ministry.
Whatever relates to the unity of all Christian communities clearly forms part of the concerns of the primacy. As Bishop of Rome I am fully aware, as I have reaffirmed in the present Encyclical Letter, that Christ ardently desires the full and visible communion of all those Communities in which, by virtue of God's faithfulness, his Spirit dwells. I am convinced that I have a particular responsibility in this regard, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and in heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation. For a whole millennium Christians were united in "a brotherly fraternal communion of faith and sacramental life ... If disagreements in belief and discipline arose among them, the Roman See acted by common consent as moderator".154 (Ut Unum Sint §94-95)
What specifically is the "new situation" he is referring to?
Very well put, Pat. Thanks!
No.
What do you think they mean?
Want to explain where in UUS he embraces the "false opinion"? Actually he specifically condemns it in 11-13, and Card. Kasper references that part of UUS to show that Jesus' prayer for unity really did work.
Let's see what you've said previously on this subject:
Just as his false opinion that Christ's prayer was not fulfilled is prevalent throughout the encyclical.
What does JP II actually say?
Jesus himself, at the hour of his Passion, prayed "that they may all be one" (Jn 17:21). This unity, which the Lord has bestowed on his Church and in which he wishes to embrace all people, is not something added on, but stands at the very heart of Christ's mission. Nor is it some secondary attribute of the community of his disciples. Rather, it belongs to the very essence of this community. God wills the Church, because he wills unity, and unity is an expression of the whole depth of his agape. (UUS 9)
No, no, no.
You implied that Pope Paul II did not teach truth doctrinally by word or action. It is up to you to tell me what, exactly, he taught that was against Church doctrine.
I'm waiting.
Prior to JPII The Holy See always was a top down management. V2 introduced collegiality - a horizontal 'we are all equal' disastrous and dangerous management concept leaving everyone in charge and no one in charge. The reason why nothing has been done to clean up American seminaries, among other challenges to the stability of the Roman Rite Catholic Church.
The next pope had better come in the ring a warrior, less we witness the last breath of this Holy Body as controlled by pretenders dressed as shepards.
I'm still waiting...
We all have a god shaped hole in our heart. What he preached was how to fill that hole, and no matter how archaic it might have seemed, he was right and it worked.
Hey wait a minute- drunk the Kool-Aid? Has Pat been reading FR?? **waves** Hi Pat! :)
I see you haven't answered my question.
If you really are a live committed Catholic then you'll be willing to go where you don't want to go and you'll see that Pope John Paul II was a good pope whom the Holy Spirit inspired.
...And I doubt that even you will find fault with the Holy Spirit.
I actually don't owe you any sort of lesson on this. I told you where to find the answers. You can wallow in ignorance or you can go and read it. It's not my responsibility to force feed it to you.
But here's a morsel to keep you busy.
UUS: When circumstances require it, he speaks in the name of all the Pastors in communion with him. He can also-under very specific conditions clearly laid down by the First Vatican Council- declare that a certain doctrine belongs to the deposit of faith.[152] By thus bearing witness to the truth, he serves unity.
95. All this however must always be done in communion. When the Catholic Church affirms that the office of the Bishop of Rome corresponds to the will of Christ, she does not separate this office from the mission entrusted to the whole body of Bishops, who are also "vicars and ambassadors of Christ".[153] The Bishop of Rome is a member of the "College", and the Bishops are his brothers in the ministry.
Vatican I: And it was to Peter alone that Jesus,after his resurrection, confided the jurisdiction of supreme pastor and ruler of his whole fold, saying:Feed my lambs, feed my sheep [44] . To this absolutely manifest teaching of the sacred scriptures, as it has always been understood by the catholic church, are clearly opposed the distorted opinions of those who misrepresent the form of government which Christ the lord established in his church and deny that Peter, in preference to the rest of the apostles, taken singly or collectively, was endowed by Christ with a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction. The same may be said of those who assert that this primacy was not conferred immediately and directly on blessed Peter himself, but rather on the church, and that it was through the church that it was transmitted to him in his capacity as her minister. Therefore,if anyone says that blessed Peter the apostle was not appointed by Christ the lord as prince of all the apostles and visible head of the whole church militant; or that it was a primacy of honour only and not one of true and proper jurisdiction that he directly and immediately received from our lord Jesus Christ himself: let him be anathema.
JPII is trying to turn the papacy on it's head. Instead of believing as the Church does, that he's infallible and his bishops must agree with him. He thinks he's not infallible unless he agrees with all of his bishops. He doesn't speak in their name. They speak in his.
And nowhere is Church history is there a "college of bishops" that is an entirely new concept out of Vatican II. It was formerly condemned as Gallicanism.
UUS: Christ's words "that they may be one" are thus his prayer to the Father that the Father's plan may be fully accomplished, in such a way that everyone may clearly see "what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things" ( 3:9). To believe in Christ means to desire unity; to desire unity means to desire the Church; to desire the Church means to desire the communion of grace which corresponds to the Father's plan from all eternity. Such is the meaning of Christ's prayer: "Ut unum sint".
UUS: The prayer of Christ, our one Lord, Redeemer and Master, speaks to everyone in the same way, both in the East and in the West. That prayer becomes an imperative to leave behind our divisions in order to seek and re-establish unity, as a result also of the bitter experiences of division itself.
MA: For they are of the opinion that the unity of faith and government, which is a note of the one true Church of Christ, has hardly up to the present time existed, and does not to-day exist. They consider that this unity may indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it can only be regarded as mere ideal.
A basic understanding of the encyclical tells one easily that JPII does not hold that the prayer of the Lord was not fulfilled in the unity of the Catholic Church. Actually, he says he does then decides that that is not what the prayer of Our Lord refers to. This is more of JPII's effort to find a way to prove universal salvation. Plus, he has the most basic non sequitur in his "Belief in Christ means to desire unity.." Unity with whom? each other? based on what? How about Belief in Christ means to desire unity with Christ, but that is not the meaning of Christ's prayer. Christ's prayer is that they The Apostles would unite and therefore form the Catholic Church. It is insulting to think that Christ's prayers are not answered.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.