Skip to comments.Why the Holy Father chose the name "Benedict"...?
Posted on 04/19/2005 11:56:55 AM PDT by MadIvan
Cardinal Ratzinger on the Banishment of God From Public Life
Receives St. Benedict Award for Promotion of Life and Family
SUBIACO, Italy, APRIL 12, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger says that believers are faced with the tendency to banish God from public life and confine him to the "subjective realm of past residual cultures."
On April 1, when receiving the St. Benedict Award for the Promotion of Life and the Family in Europe, conferred by the Subiaco Foundation for Life and the Family, the dean of the College of Cardinals delivered an address on the present crisis of culture and identity, especially in the Old World.
After stating that "moral force has not grown apace with the development of science but, on the contrary, has diminished," Cardinal Ratzinger explained that "the most serious danger at this time is precisely the imbalance between technical possibilities and moral energy."
He gave two examples: the threat of terrorism and the possibility to manipulate the origin of human life.
The then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faithalmost all heads of Vatican dicasteries lost their posts when John Paul II died pointed out that "Europe has developed a culture that, in a way previously unknown to humanity, excludes God from the public consciousness, either by denying him altogether or by judging that his existence cannot be demonstrated, is uncertain and, therefore, somewhat irrelevant to public life."
An attempt is being made "to build the human community absolutely without God," the cardinal stressed.
"The rejection of reference to God is not an expression of tolerance which wishes to protect non-theist religions and the dignity of atheists and agnostics, but rather an expression of the desire to see God banished definitively from humanity's public life, and driven into the subjective realm of residual cultures of the past," he warned.
For the cardinal, the starting point of this view is "relativism," which has become "a dogmatism that believes it is in possession of the definitive knowledge of reason, and with the right to regard all the rest as a stage of humanity, which has basically been surpassed, and which can be suitably relativized."
At this rate, Cardinal Ratzinger added, we will no longer "be able to affirm that homosexuality, as the Catholic Church teaches, is an objective disorder of the structure of human existence."
"The fact that the Church is convinced of not having the right to confer priestly ordination on women, is now considered by some as irreconcilable with the European Constitution," he added.
In the final part of his address, Cardinal Ratzinger explained that "we need roots to survive and we must not lose them from sight if we do not want human dignity to disappear."
"Only creative reason, which has been manifested in the crucified God as love, can really show us the way," he said. "We need men who will keep their sight on God, learning there" what "true humanity" is, as "only through men touched by God, can God again be close to men." ZE05041102
I'm not sure if it's something I should mention in confession or not ... please don't forget to pray for all these modernists. While they still breathe, there's still time for them to repent.
Thank GOD that we have a strong and unwavering moralist as the new Pope!
We need a decade from him. With a decade, most of the remaining liberals will be too old to contend for the Papacy. I also think he can continue in the line of John Paul the Great in standing up for doctrine.
Just today, I've seen several disgruntled Anglicans on this forum start talking about swimming the Tiber.
Anyone who was part of our New Pope's fan club may now start selling on E-Bay.
Service Temporarily Unavailable
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
Apache/1.3.31 Server at www.ratzingerfanclub.com Port 80
Thank you for that correction.
So did Pope Peter change his name? /sarcasm off.
>> Just today, I've seen several disgruntled Anglicans on this forum start talking about swimming the Tiber.<<
Praying for conversions!
It's a tradition for the Papacy that evolved over time. And your problem with it is...?
The libs hold deeds to the actual church properties. If they go they will take the buildings with them. That's my concern.
Even if conservative Catholics choose Rome over AmChurch they won't have anywhere to attend Mass. My sense, especially from reading modern American Catholics on the net, is that most of them will be clueless and follow the diocesan churches.
But should not our spirit (soul) prevail over our passions since our soul is in God's image?
Is he a Benedictine?
Jesus changed it for him. You'll find it in Matthew, Chapter 16.
Some people are already coming unglued"He who brings trouble on his family will inherit only wind, and the fool will be servant to the wise." (Proverbs 11:29)
"So did Pope Peter change his name?"
I believe that Simon's name was changed by Jesus to Peter;
"Thou art Peter (rock) and upon this rock I shall build My Church"
I just finished a period of FIVE YEARS ASSISTing at Mass in a middle school cafeteria, because my Parish is brand new. DON'T give me any BS about having 'nowhere' to ASSIST at Mass. There's always a place.
Ever heard of a 'Mass Rock'?
I'm with ValenB4. Without the evil Wilson's interference, the war probably would have ended either with a German/Austrian outright victory or a negotiated settlement prior to November 1918 as desired by Pope Benedict XV. Instead, American involvement (which revived the embattled Allied cause) resulted in the tragic destruction of the last remnants of Christendom, the ancient German and Austro-Hungarian monarchies, a calamity which paved the way for Hitler and Stalin and from which Europe has still not recovered.
The first three years of the war were indeed nonideological. But with the fall of the Russian monarchy and the entry of the US in 1917, the character of the war was transformed into a very ideological conflict between the forces of "Progress" & "Democracy" (the Allies) and Tradition & Monarchy (the Central Powers), a conflict in which as a monarchist I stand firmly with the latter, as do all true conservatives.
The US has waged many unjustified wars since 1898, but World War I was the worst. I hope Wilson is burning in Hell.
In many places they would be able to turn to the FSSP, the ICK, the SSPX, or independent traditional chapels.
An open AmChurch schism could be good for the traditionalist movement, couldn't it?
Thank you. I appreciate it.
"So such a Pope's name recognizes the current global war on terror, America's role, and what part the Church should play.
Re your post on the choice of Benedict: I saw other symbolism in his choice of that particular name. Benedict XV came after Pius X, a major traditionalist whose papacy was long and distinguished. I looked at the choice of the name as wanting to tell the Church that he's not a JPII clone (not choosing to be JPIII) and as saying he'll want his papacy to be known for peacemaking efforts. Or at least I'm trying to think positive about this...
Only the Left, which seeks to make man's lusts and passions "God", does not want God. They just got informed (again) that God is here anyway.
Most excellent observations, friend.
Well, they knew that the pro-liberal malcontents were not the Church anymore, they rarely attend, attack it every chance, and they are essentially CINO (Catholic In Name Only--I know I'm wearing out the xINOs, but this definitely applies), so they made the decision based on the holy spirit, although I'm sure that they had in mind someone that truly represents the flock, the loyal Catholics...
O.S.B. = Order of St. Benedict...
yup sounds like a Benedictine to me...
I think it would. The danger is the number of American Catholics who have already lost the Faith. The numbers are significant. They would go with a schism and we would see a full counter church almost instantly. The wheat and the tares would be exposed.
The SSPX and independents are already used to Mass in exile. I suspect(hope) if that happened, and probably before, Ratzinger would unite the trad factions in a second. Along with FSSP and ICK we could pick up numbers given a higher visibility. The Catholic clergy left in Rome know who is loyal and who is not, despite their disagreements.
Ratzinger will have to choose. There can no longer be a middle ground.
I agree...and I'm not Catholic but I still rejoice at the selection of the new Pope. May God guide him in being the voice that may save ALL Christian churches.
Ratzinger is a Benedictine???!! How did we miss this??
Why not apply evolution to the Papacy.
Everyone should know what the rock is. It isn't Peter.
You're not making any sense. This is a happy occasion, so I'll ignore your obvious weirdness.
So you support monarchies over democracy.
Not to say support of democracy, but one could conclude that you would have called the founding fathers evil for fighting against "tradition and monarchy".
No he's not a Benedictine, however I was watching NBC news today, they said he spent much time in Benedictine monasteries as a priest studying and praying, and that he is very much influenced by the Benedictine order. He has also chosen the name Benedict, I think both these facts have proven the prophecy of St. Malachy is correct once again....
I'm not seeing anything on that link, lol ;-)
See post #134 above.
Is that what the church taught?
"Ratzinger is a Benedictine???!!"
Not that I know of. However, I am convinced that the reason he has taken the name Benedict is that St. Benedict is the patron saint of Europe and JPII was consistently invoking him for the re-evangelisation of Europe.
I'm sure this will be at the heart of Ratzinger's agenda. Time to clean out the filth!
Everyone should know what the rock is. It isn't Peter.I'm sure you've seen this post before, but evidently it needs repeating...
Grammatically speaking, petra in Mt16:18 cannot refer to anything but petros. (Citations used below are from the following reference works: (1) A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, DeBrunner (tr. Funk), University of Chicago Press (Grammar); (2) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Arndt & Gingrich, University of Chicago Press (Lexicon))1. petros"Hellenization of Semitic personal names.... By translation." Cf. Jn1:42 you will be called Kephas, which means Peter. (Grammar, 53(2e)). The name Peter is a Hellenization by translation of Kephas.2. kai
The use of the article with personal names is varied; as a general rule ... the absence of the article merely names him. (Lexicon, o, h, to, II.b.) Note that there is no article before petros in Mt16:18. In this part of the verse, Jesus is merely giving Peter his new name.Epexegetical kai ... Emphatic with demonstrative ... (Grammar 442/9.) Note the demonstrative adjective tauth, a contraction for th auth. So the sentence that follows kai is epexegetical of You are Peter. This epexegetical use of kai is reinforced by the following: Kai with the future ... is used to denote a further result (Grammar, 442(3)). Note the use of the future: I will build my church. The building of the church is a further result of the name change. (See also, Lexicon, kai, 3 ("Other explicative uses are kai tauto ... ").)3. tauth.o auto: An idiom composed of two words with one meaning: same. This word modifies petra. What same rock? There is only one other word in the verse with the base petr-, and that is petros. (Note: A Greek noun comprises two parts: a base that indicates basic meaning, and an ending that indicates grammatical gender (among other things). Although there is not necessarily a correspondence between a noun's grammatical gender and a thing's actual sex (e.g., petra is feminine gender, even though a rock is sexless), the gender of a personal name virtually always corresponds with the persons sex (e.g., petros is masculine gender, just as Peter is a man).)4. th:"In its individualizing use it focuses attention on a single thing or concept as already known or more definitely limited: things and persons that are unique in kind. " (Lexicon, o, ei, to, II.a.) Thus, petra is preceded by the article th to indicate it is already known (compare with petros, above, which is not preceded by a definite article). Moreover, when combined with the demonstrative adjective tauth (same), the definite article becomes emphatic (the very same rock).Summary: We know that petra refers to petros because (1) the demonstrative adjective and definite article that modify petra indicate that the identity of the rock is known; (2) petra and petros share the same base and thus the same basic meaning; and (3) the sentence following kai is epexegetical of the sentence that precedes kai, the further result being that Jesus will build his church on the very same rock.
I hope this means that we will not be seeing him kiss the Koran in the future.
"It isn't Peter."
I belive you are incorrect. It IS Peter. In Psalms, the only ONE referred to as "rock" was God. By changing Simon's name to Peter, Jesus was saying, "from now on Simon, you are me", meaning that Simon Peter had authority and that the Church was established by Christ but rested and was built on the authority of Peter.
He got an awrd from them but is not one of them. You are reaching to force that fulfillment!
has been very busy...prayer ping for (now double his birth weight) Malachi.
I was intending to paraphrase Scott Hahn but I stand very impressed with your post!
Sure seems like this type of info would have come out when everyone was investigating the top contenders.
Then those "true conservatives" were true to tyranny, I'd rather be a patriotic conservative, then be thought a traitor to the country for the love of the crown.
Conservatives should never support crowns, the founding fathers were the founders of the right wing of this country today, and for that I'm greatfull.
Its a shame this country has not done enough to get rid of monarchies the world over, the founding fathers would no doubt be displeased.
Thanks. I did the research several years ago to refute the repeated assertion that Peter is not "the rock" of Mt16:18. What better day to trot it out again than the election-day of Peter's successor, Benedict XVI!
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.