Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arian Heresy Still Tempts, Says Cardinal Bertone (Mentions Pelagianism As Well)
Zenit ^ | 10/9/2006 | n/a

Posted on 10/11/2006 7:02:55 AM PDT by Pyro7480

Arian Heresy Still Tempts, Says Cardinal Bertone

Sees Example in "Da Vinci Code"

ROME, OCT. 9, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the new Vatican secretary of state, says that the Church continues to be tempted by the Arian heresy, the idea that Christ is not God.

In an interview with the Chilean newspaper El Mercurio, the Italian cardinal acknowledged that "one of the main problems of our time is the problem of Christology," according to which Christ is considered only as "a great man."

"If Christ's divinity is doubted," the foundation of Christianity is doubted, he said.

The Vatican official recalled the doctrine of Arius (256-336), a priest of Alexandria and later a bishop, who, beginning in 318, denied the divinity of the Word, the Second Person of the Trinity.

Symptoms of this denial of Jesus' divinity include the support received by "The Da Vinci Code," despite its "absolutely shameful fictional inventions," said Cardinal Bertone, 71.

"But we see in addition that even in the elaboration of certain theology, doubt is cast on the divinity and salvific unicity of Christ, the only Savior," he continued. "This Christological reduction betrays the faith of the nascent Church and of the great Christological councils of Nicaea, Constantinople and Chalcedon.

"It is an authentic betrayal and a denial of the faith of our fathers."

According to the cardinal, "it is necessary, therefore, to return to Christological faith, to the centrality of Christ, true God and therefore only Savior."

Pelagianism

However, according to the Vatican secretary of state, the Church not only faces the threat of Arianism, but also of a new Pelagianism, one of the worst heresies, which arose in the fifth century.

"This hinges on thinking that we can build a Church ourselves and in believing that it is possible to save ourselves, without the Lord's grace and help," he noted. "They are recurring dangers which appear successively in history."

These two challenges were addressed in the 2000 declaration "Dominus Iesus," signed by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, in their capacity as prefect and secretary, respectively, of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Current Events; General Discusssion; History; Ministry/Outreach; Orthodox Christian; Religion & Culture; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: arian; arianism; bertone; cardinal; catholic; heresy; pelagianism; pelgian
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last
Everything that is old is new again.
1 posted on 10/11/2006 7:02:56 AM PDT by Pyro7480
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Siobhan; Canticle_of_Deborah; broadsword; NYer; Salvation; sandyeggo; american colleen; ...

Catholic ping!


2 posted on 10/11/2006 7:03:22 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("Give me an army saying the Rosary and I will conquer the world." - Pope Blessed Pius IX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Interesting that he should bring up Arianism ... at its core, mohammedanism is the Arian heresy ... hopped up on steroids, crack, and PCP.
3 posted on 10/11/2006 7:10:54 AM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
"This hinges on thinking that we can build a Church ourselves and in believing that it is possible to save ourselves, without the Lord's grace and help," he noted. "They are recurring dangers which appear successively in history."

Basically Communism at its core, which someone had described as immanentizing the eschaton.
4 posted on 10/11/2006 7:13:14 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
mohammedanism is the Arian heresy ... hopped up on steroids, crack, and PCP.

Now that was funny.

5 posted on 10/11/2006 7:20:19 AM PDT by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

Note the critique of the new Pelagianism.


6 posted on 10/11/2006 7:56:48 AM PDT by wideawake ("The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I figure Liberalism is the Gnostic Heresy redividus.

After reviewing Hillary Care, it reminded me of nought so much as the various emanations and demiurges that supposedly separated a good G-d from an evil matter.


7 posted on 10/11/2006 8:09:02 AM PDT by donmeaker (If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy!" then my ex wife is out of town.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard; Pyro7480

I´m glad to see some Vatican attention being given to this, because I think it´s a much greater problem than anybody admits. Islam is a syncretist cult, the Christian part of which comes through the Arian heresy. The problem is that there are many people - certain entire Protestant groups and a number of individual Catholics - who are fundamentally Arians and are very convinced when Muslims cheerfully tell them (these are the Muslims who are not cutting off heads but are the kinder, gentler type...) that their view of Jesus is exactly the same as the Muslim view. Sadly enough, it probably is - Jesus is just a particularly convincing prophet, to Arian Christians.

Furthermore, the part of orthodox Christianity that isn´t done in by Arianism is destroyed by Pelagianism. Very, very serious threats, especially in our confrontation with Islam.


8 posted on 10/11/2006 8:21:50 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Your point in telling me this is what?


9 posted on 10/11/2006 11:05:15 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
I had thought that you also were a critic of Pelagianism.

If I am mistaken, I apologize.

10 posted on 10/11/2006 11:10:30 AM PDT by wideawake ("The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: livius
"... muslims cheerfully tell them..that their view of Jesus is exactly the same as the Muslim view."- would this be the time to show an "individual Catholic", John Paul II kissing the Koran? Yeah, I guess you could say it is a much greater problem than anybody admits!
11 posted on 10/11/2006 11:10:33 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Ah, yes, well of course. Pelagianism is, after all, inconsistent with scriptures, as is easily observed in Romans 3:23. No, I think that there are essentially 3 choices on who Jesus was. I think they are flippantly referred to as "3 L's": Lord, liar or lunatic. Thank you for the notice.


12 posted on 10/11/2006 11:15:53 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge; sitetest; BlackElk; wideawake; don-o; sandyeggo
"... muslims cheerfully tell them..that their view of Jesus is exactly the same as the Muslim view."- would this be the time to show an "individual Catholic", John Paul II kissing the Koran?

*No, sister. That would be a nasty non sequitur.

Unlike the Muslim telling the Christian they both have the same view of Jesus, the photo of the Pope expressing an Eastern gesture of thanks, the kiss, upon receipt of the gift, the Koran, in no way approximates the prior action.

That is, it does not unless one thinks the Pope kised the Koran for some other reason. Perhaps you can tell us the reason the Pope kissed the koran.

A picture is worth a thousand words. In this instance, the millions of words spoken and written by this Pope, the Vicar of Christ, are all, I guess, dissolved into nothingess by his one gesture of gratitude.

Jesus was betrayed by a kiss. It somehow seems fitting others betray the truth about the Pope due to a kiss.

13 posted on 10/11/2006 1:26:39 PM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic

Once again, you all are incapable of acknowledging that this was wrong. It was wrong for any Christian to treat the koran as something worthy of respect. It is not. The Bishop of Rome did something that, whatever his motives, was wrong. The best thing to do about errors and mistakes is to admit them and not to endlessly try to defend that which is indefensible. It would go along way to simply say so. Just" he should not have done that" . Not a long, convoluted, nuanced excuse. Just, "it was wrong".


14 posted on 10/11/2006 5:49:47 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Once again, you all are incapable of acknowledging that this was wrong. It was wrong for any Christian to treat the koran as something worthy of respect. It is not. The Bishop of Rome did something that, whatever his motives, was wrong.

Equally, it is wrong for you to say "YOU ALL are incapable of acknowledging this was wrong."

I know many, many Catholics who have openly stated their displeasure in him doing this. I have been one of them and have stated it before on FR.

Let me state it again. It was wrong and he should have never done that.

15 posted on 10/11/2006 6:27:54 PM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FJ290

Sorry, you are absolutely right.I should not have painted with so broad a brush. The thing that stuck in my craw about the post I responded to is this idiot correlation ascribed by some Roman Catholics to "Protestants" and Islam. This theory was popularized by Belloc and although it makes some of the smug set feel ever so superior, it is perhaps time to revisit the actual real world evidence that there are some commonalities of significance. This thesis may titillate the arch Catholics, but the actuality of what we face in what is left of Christendom today vis a vis Islam is not something from which we can blink. It is time for all Christians to pull together, drop the nonsense, and destroy the enemy, ' cause it is not Jerry Falwell, James Dobson or for those in my camp, Pope Benedict who stands opposite with SWORDS drawn!


16 posted on 10/11/2006 6:59:07 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Your personal opinions about the Pope's act of thanksgiving is not normative. You appear incapable of understanding his actions in a defensibly light even when it is explained to you.

A Christian is supposed to attribute to others positive motives whenever possible, right?

17 posted on 10/12/2006 6:52:32 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic

Where is that written?


18 posted on 10/12/2006 10:07:35 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

We don't need that picture again, but yes, I agree that it was horrible. I think JPII was well-meaning but totally clueless on the "ecumenical" front. You probably haven't seen the pictures of him at some of the bizarro syncretist masses his liturgist designed, and we don't need to see those again, either.

I don't think he meant to give his stamp of approval to Islam, but I do think he didn't fully weigh his gestures at times and was so focused on the media moment that he ignored the doctrinal implications (which, after all, were supposed to be his job).


19 posted on 10/12/2006 12:49:16 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: murphE; ArrogantBustard
mohammedanism is the Arian heresy ... hopped up on steroids, crack, and PCP.

Now that was funny.

And it has the added benefit of being an accurate description.  In fact it's some of the best imagery on the subject I've ever come across. 

Years ago I drove an ambulance in the NY city area and had to deal with a slew of angel dust users, a couple of them iron pumpers, so I wouldn't be surprised if they had been using steroids.  They were always a handful, and this was in the days before tasers.  Fortunately for me crack didn't coame around as a big thing until a few years later.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/cartoon-protest6.jpg

20 posted on 10/12/2006 2:17:02 PM PDT by Phsstpok (Often wrong, but never in doubt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: livius

Livius, I appreciate your serious tone and willingness to call a spade a spade.
I agree that JPII was not ill intentionned. I think that the entire generation leading up to 9/11 was gulled into missing the "distinctives" that make Islam a death cult, not one of the three "Great Religions of the Book".

I too, thank God that it appears that the leadership of all the branches of Christianity seem to finally "get it"!


21 posted on 10/12/2006 2:24:43 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge; FJ290; sandyeggo; BlackElk; sitetest; don-o
1 Corinth 13: Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;

*I have given an explanation in defense of Pope John Paul II. My defense/explanation is his actions represent a gesture of Eastern gratitude/thankfulness. My defense/explanation is obviously not outside the realm of possibility. We are putative Christians. Ought we not give Pope John Paul II the benefit of the doubt?

The other thing, I guess, is we Christians can conclude the kiss indicates his entire life was a fraud and he really did think there was no difference twizt Jesus and Mohammed nor was there a difference twixt Bible and Koran.

You know, in Acts 17:28, we read

For in him we live and move and are: as some also of your own poets said: For we are also his offspring.

The poets/poems referenced are Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus and the Phaenomena of Aratus. Cleanthes and Aratus were pagans.

Maybe we should dig-up St. Paul and put him on trial for writing words susceptible to misjudgement.

All poor Pope John Paul did was to kiss a gift. Sure, the gift was a Koran. But the Koran DOES contain some truths.

We Christians long ago did somthing MUCH WORSE than what Pope John Paul II did. And I have never heard a SINGLE Christian object, even though they, presumably, have read Acts repeatedly.

St. Paul praised truth apprehended by pagans. And we Christian Catholics decided that would be part of the Canon of Scripture.

Yep. We Christians praise pagans. Burn your Bibles !!!!

Maybe we Christians can't be trusted at all. Maybe such lines ought be stricken from the Bible. After all, such lines are susceptible to misjudements on the part of others.

22 posted on 10/13/2006 12:18:54 PM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: livius; BlackElk; sitetest; sandyeggo; don-o
I think JPII was well-meaning but totally clueless on the "ecumenical" front

*Yes, true. But, you have to cut him some slack. After all, he only had a Doctorate in Theology and a Doctorate in Philosophy and more than two score years of Orthodox Christian Orthopraxis as Priest, Bishop, and Pope, and wrote a succesful play, and several books, and developed a Theology of the Body, and taught millions around the world, and brought Jesus to hundreds of millions around the world,and was the soucre of innumerable conversions, and was the catalyst in deconstructing the evil empire and the source of countless vocations and was one of the greatest evangelical Popes in history and is acclaimed as Johannes Paulus Magnus, but really, the poor man was absolutely clueless, wasn't he?

Whereas you are...um, I forget...

> Anyways, I think this new age in Chrtstianity is absolutely wonderful and exciting. I remember back in the bad old days prior to 1960 when a Christian would not think of publicly attacking either his own Father or the Holy Father. Thank God we Christians are grown-up and we can judge and publicly denounce the Vicar of Christ as though he were just any old dufus. I think we have really come of age....

23 posted on 10/13/2006 12:32:45 PM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
Well, you really are wound up about this.
I think that your hyperbole is overwrought.
I said that JPII should not have kissed the Koran.
Period. It does no good to speculate on his motives. Most of your post is just silly, you know perfectly well that I would never say any of the frankly stupid things that you did.
I understand about Paul, and Mars Hill and the Christian belief that pagans can know truth. I would direct your attention to the scripture verse found in 2 Corinthians that says that we are to take every thought captive to Christ. I cannot see how embracing the object that contains the teachings of a false prophet can do any good. The reality is that it just confused people, Christians, Muslims and just about everyone else. It did nothing to advance that cause of Jesus as we can see that Islam has become more virulent, and is metastasizing, and the actions of the last pontiff certainly did not buy Christendom any good will!
24 posted on 10/13/2006 12:44:45 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Well, you really are wound up about this.

*Whenever I see a dead man unfairly attacked, I think it a charitable act of chivalry to mount a defense

I think that your hyperbole is overwrought.

*Yes. I can read that you do.

I said that JPII should not have kissed the Koran. Period.

*LOL well that setles it then

It does no good to speculate on his motives.

*Sure it does. Folks seldom read a defense of his actions. Even when some do, like yourself, it makes no impression upon them.

Most of your post is just silly, you know perfectly well that I would never say any of the frankly stupid things that you did. I understand about Paul, and Mars Hill and the Christian belief that pagans can know truth. I would direct your attention to the scripture verse found in 2 Corinthians that says that we are to take every thought captive to Christ. I cannot see how embracing the object that contains the teachings of a false prophet can do any good.

*He kissed the gift.

The reality is that it just confused people, Christians, Muslims and just about everyone else.

*Many of Jesus' actions confused folks. Their reactions revealed the truth in their hearts.Your attacks on his defensible actions could call into question your motives. This is not a one-way street

It did nothing to advance that cause of Jesus as we can see that Islam has become more virulent, and is metastasizing, and the actions of the last pontiff certainly did not buy Christendom any good will!

*Really? Sadly, you are woefully ignorant about that. The Vatican and Islam have cooperated repeatedly in the United Nations on the matter of Life/anti-abortion. There are other examples. However, you appear to be unwilling to admit YOU might have erred in misjudging the Pope

25 posted on 10/13/2006 1:01:36 PM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic; Bainbridge

Both of you - return to the issues and stop making it - or taking it - personal.


26 posted on 10/13/2006 1:06:17 PM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic

When I sit here and read these post about Pope John Paul 2 I too wonder why he kissed the Koran. I remember thinking how so many Catholics are confused as to what their faith even is anymore. Since Vatican 2 many things have been done in the spirit of Vatican 2 but were never intended. All of that and the sexual abuse that when on has done so much damage to the church.In other words the Holy Father kissing the Koran only confused people all the more. I have a rosary that was blessed by Pope John Paul 2 and cherish it. But I believe in the love of my faith to question why he did some things that appeared to be confusing to the faithful.We need strong and steadfast leadership now more than ever and I am thankful for Pope Benedict. Right now we have too many priests and Bishops that bringing evil into the church and we all know who they are. We need the light of truth to expel the darkness that these people bring into the church. There are so many Catholic who fall prey to these liberal priests and Bishops and need to go.


27 posted on 10/14/2006 10:27:11 AM PDT by red irish (Gods Children in the womb are to be loved too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: red irish
When I sit here and read these post about Pope John Paul 2 I too wonder why he kissed the Koran. I remember thinking how so many Catholics are confused as to what their faith even is anymore. Since Vatican 2 many things have been done in the spirit of Vatican 2 but were never intended. All of that and the sexual abuse that when on has done so much damage to the church.In other words the Holy Father kissing the Koran only confused people all the more. I have a rosary that was blessed by Pope John Paul 2 and cherish it. But I believe in the love of my faith to question why he did some things that appeared to be confusing to the faithful.We need strong and steadfast leadership now more than ever and I am thankful for Pope Benedict. Right now we have too many priests and Bishops that bringing evil into the church and we all know who they are. We need the light of truth to expel the darkness that these people bring into the church. There are so many Catholic who fall prey to these liberal priests and Bishops and need to go.

Well put. Thanks for saying this.

28 posted on 10/14/2006 11:46:55 AM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: red irish; sitetest; BlackElk; Mrs. Don-o; sandyeggo
The Pope kissed the gift of the Koran as a sign of gratitude. In Eastern Cultures, that is the norm. When in Rome do as the Romans also, conversely, applies when the Roman Pontiff travels outside of Rome

Since Vatican 2 many things have been done in the spirit of Vatican 2 but were never intended. All of that and the sexual abuse that when on has done so much damage to the church.

*Homosexual abuse was even more rampant in the early 11th Century. What Ecumenical Council and which Pope was to blame when priests then living were acting perversely?

In other words the Holy Father kissing the Koran only confused people all the more.

*His action was the occasion for many to reveal what was already in their hearts - the weakness of their Faith - and it showed the whole world the timidity and fear of the Church Militant. All the laity anxious to condemn the Pope for what is clearly an innocent act are never called to account for their own moral failings in not defending their Holy Father.

I have a rosary that was blessed by Pope John Paul 2 and cherish it. But I believe in the love of my faith to question why he did some things that appeared to be confusing to the faithful.We need strong and steadfast leadership now more than ever and I am thankful for Pope Benedict.

* I think Pope John Paul's leadership is right near the top of any Pope who has or ever will live. It is not his fault he was elected to the Papacy during a time when Christian men had become kittens.

Right now we have too many priests and Bishops that bringing evil into the church and we all know who they are. We need the light of truth to expel the darkness that these people bring into the church. There are so many Catholic who fall prey to these liberal priests and Bishops and need to go.

* The Earth is a place of spiritual battle and often that batle is right in the heart of the Church. There has never been a time when the church has not had kooks, perverts, sickos, weirdoes etc amongst her members. However, laymen vastly outnumber clerics, prelates and Popes. That they do not act like men is the reason our Church is in such poor shape. However, it is always easier to blame others.

In responding to the London Times editorial asking, "What is wrong with the world," G.K. Chesterton wrote in the shortest and most apt response, "I am."

In our time of confusion, if the "London Times" still existed and asked the question, "What is wrong with the Catholic Church?" I have no doubt many would write and list the Living Magisterium as the source of evil in the Church.

And some folks say Satan ain't winning.... He sure as Hell IS winning when the Church Militant can be suckered into publicly attacking the Vicar of Christ.

29 posted on 10/14/2006 1:39:05 PM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Bainbridge, I get your point and I appreciate it.

I felt a sinking in my stomach when I saw that picture of good John Paul kissing the Koran. If it had been me, I wouldn't have done it; and if I'd been there, I swear I would have yelled, "Stop! Don't do it!"

Nevertheless, this was a guy who kissed every gift he was ever given: guitars, sombreros, soccer team jerseys, CD's, flags, calendars and medals. He kissed the ground when he got off an airplane; he kissed the man he forgave--- the man who tried to murder him.

For him it meant courtesy, and acknowledgement to fellow men as gift-givers, and to God who is all-bounteous.

John Paul the Great he was not an infallible diplomat. But, goshdarn it, as a man, Karol Wojtyla was a mensch.

30 posted on 10/14/2006 2:40:00 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("I am the Way, the Truth and the Life" - Jesus Christ Our Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
And some folks say Satan ain't winning.... He sure as Hell IS winning when the Church Militant can be suckered into publicly attacking the Vicar of Christ.

You could say he's winning when the Church Militant doesn't have the guts to denounce him kissing the Quaran. You don't have to defend the personal actions of the Pope or come into agreement with them. Popes can commit sins you know and they also go to Confession.

Infallibility does not mean impeccability. The pope can commit sins during his life just like any human being walking on earth. He is obliged to go to confession and repent of his sins as we all are required to do. Infallibility simply means that God, the Holy Spirit, prevents the pope, when he is speaking officially (ex cathedra) about faith or morals, from making a mistake. Jesus promised that "the jaws of death" would not prevail against the Catholic Church (Matthew 28:20) , and that the Holy Spirit would always guide and protect the Church (John 16:12). Papal infallibility is part of the gift of infallibility that Christ gave to His Church. It should not be confused with papal primacy nor with inspiration or revelation.

Dioese of Lincoln Nebraska

31 posted on 10/14/2006 2:45:19 PM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Thank you for your honest words.
I am sure that the man who was very admirable in so many ways did not mean to confuse or mislead. I do think that your take on it is fair.

I do not retract anything that I have said here.
I am taking a break as I object to the fact that I was wrongly chastised; I find the "everybody play nice" bunk of a piece with liberalism and as this is supposed to be a philosophically conservative place, one that does not abide such nonsense, I am sorry to see that attitude taken.


32 posted on 10/14/2006 2:48:02 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

See post #31.


33 posted on 10/14/2006 2:51:37 PM PDT by Pyro7480 ("Give me an army saying the Rosary and I will conquer the world." - Pope Blessed Pius IX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; FJ290; Mrs. Don-o
Thank you all for your candor.
As you know I am not a Roman Catholic and do occasionally spar here. However, we are on the same team generally speaking( the absurd opinion held by some that contends that Protestants and Muslims are somehow similar not withstanding.)

It is unfortunate that some will defend things that only serve to hurt the church you love so dearly, and I admire you all for recognizing it and have the integrity to address it.
34 posted on 10/14/2006 3:15:46 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: FJ290; BlackElk; sitetest; sandyeggo; Mrs. Don-o
Johannes Paulus Magnus went to Confession, as I understand it, twice a week. As his kiss of the gift of the Koran was an act of gratitude it could count as a sin only in the minds of modern pharisees. And Johanes Paulus Magnus was as far from a Pharisee as could be imagined. His public accusers and detractors however...

And publicly judging innocent actions as sinful used to be matter for Confession.

Well, it used to be in Traditional Catholicism but Traditional Catholicsm now appears to have been distilled into its modern essence - bitter attacks and accusations against he who holds the Keys.

Pope Benedict has already come under attack by the Neo-Pharisees whose "traditionalism" is as vapid and hateful as the Pharisees of old.

How can one tell the difference between the public attacks against the Pope made by a So. Baptist and public attacks against the Pope made by a soi disant traditionalist?

The one wearing the scapular is the traditonalist

35 posted on 10/15/2006 11:25:26 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; sitetest; BlackElk; sandyeggo
As John Henry Cardinal Newman said:

"Our duty is -- not indeed to mix up Christ's Vicar with this or that party of men, because he in his high station is above all parties -- but to look at his formal deeds, and to follow him whither he goeth, and never to desert him, however we may be tried, but to defend him at all hazards, and against all comers, as a son would a father, and as a wife a husband, knowing that his cause is the cause of God. And so, as regards his successors, if we live to see them; it is our duty to give them in like manner our dutiful allegiance and our unfeigned service, and to follow them also whithersoever they go, having that same confidence that each in his turn and in his own day will do God's work and will, which we have felt in their predecessors, now taken away to their eternal reward."

*Well, that used to be Tradition. But, we modern Christians have completed our studies in another school. We have completed our studies in the school of politics and we treat Popes no differently than political dopes.

The worst thing about it is so many are so proud they have denounced the Pope publicly

36 posted on 10/16/2006 3:56:25 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sandyeggo; sitetest; BlackElk
Canon Law 212 §3 [Christ's faithful] have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church. They have the right also to make their views known to others of Christ’s faithful, but in doing so they must always respect the integrity of faith and morals, show due reverence to the Pastors and take into account both the common good and the dignity of individuals.

*The Pope is a dope permissible? To many, yes.

I guess it isn't enough for some to remain silent. Nope, one must, I guess, publicly deride and denounce the Vicar of Christ or, maybe, one's reputation will come under question. Maybe, if one doesn't attack the Pope when all others are, maybe one will be suspected of approving of the Pope's actions.

Imaging approving of his actions. Imagine always reflexively obeying the Pope and restraining one's self from publicly attacking and criticising him?

Nah. That is the old Tradition and the sspx defines what is and isn't the new Tradition and they, who publicly attack and deride the Mass, the Council and the modern Popes have taught us this new Tradition.

But, how does this new Tradition differ from the the old protestant Tradition of publicly criticising and attacking the Pope? How does this new tradition differ from the old Pharisaical tradition of publicly attacking and falsely accusing Jesus?

37 posted on 10/16/2006 4:39:15 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
But, doesn't the Traditional idea of obedience/support for the Pope depend upon the rightness of his actions and weren't we laymen promised special guidance from the Holy Spirt to correctly judge the Pope's intent?

I mean, isn't it obvious the Pope was scandalising the faithful at Assisi, in kissing the koran, in apologising to the Jews, in visiting a synagogue etc etc

If it wasn't in the mind of Christ to establish His Church upon the Papacy and to have the Pope's actions subject to judgement and criticism by laymen, then I must be reading my Bible wrong

38 posted on 10/16/2006 5:03:01 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: red irish

Be careful about prayinng the rosary publicly, or visiting a shrine, or kneeling in prayer before a statue of Mary. Some might get the idea you are enaged in idolatry.


39 posted on 10/16/2006 5:14:41 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; Bainbridge; FJ290; red irish; sitetest; BlackElk; sandyeggo; NYer
Let's read an opinion about the Pope kissing the Korna from the Chaldean Patriarch of Irag and see whether or not laymen could possibly err re the matter

The Chaldean Patriarch of Iraq, Raphael I Bidawid is the spiritual guide of the majority of Iraq's Christians -- who still celebrate their liturgy in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. Of the 20 million Iraqi citizens, some one million are Christians. Of these, 80% are Catholics belonging to either the Chaldean or Latin Rites. This was reported by Raphael I Bidawid, Patriarch of the Chaldeans in an interview with the FIDES News Service, as follows:

“On May 14th I was received by the Pope, together with a delegation composed of the Shiite imam of Khadum mosque and the Sunni President of the council of administration of the Iraqi Islamic Bank. There was also a representative of the Iraqi ministry of religion. I renewed our invitation to the Pope because his visit would be for us a grace from heaven. It would confirm the faith of Christians and prove the Pope’s love for the whole of humanity in a country which is mainly Muslim. At the end of the audience the Pope bowed to the Muslim holy book the Koran presented to him by the delegation and he kissed it as a sign of respect. The photo of that gesture has been shown repeatedly on Iraqi television and it demonstrates that the Pope is not only aware of the suffering of the Iraqi people, he has also great respect for Islam.”

* I wonder if that information will change any hearts.

40 posted on 10/16/2006 9:02:52 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
Johannes Paulus Magnus went to Confession, as I understand it, twice a week. As his kiss of the gift of the Koran was an act of gratitude it could count as a sin only in the minds of modern pharisees. And Johanes Paulus Magnus was as far from a Pharisee as could be imagined. His public accusers and detractors however...

I know I'm a little late on response to this as I have been out of town on business. An act of gratitude? To receive a book that denies the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, His death and Resurrection? That confuses His Holy Mother with being the sister of Moses? He was grateful for THAT??

At length she brought (the babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms), They said: "O Mary! Truly a strange thing has thou brought! "O sister of Aaron, thy father was not a man of evil, nor your mother a woman unchaste!"-- Sura 19:27-28

And publicly judging innocent actions as sinful used to be matter for Confession.

This wasn't innocent. He was a highly educated man and he knew exactly what was in that book. Gee, what would I have to confess? Forgive me God, because I don't like it when the Pope presses his lips to a book that calls for killing Jews and Christians, denies your Divinity, and is highly confused about your Blessed Mother. Yeah.. I am sure that God would put one thousand black marks in the Book of Life against me for that one!

Well, it used to be in Traditional Catholicism but Traditional Catholicsm now appears to have been distilled into its modern essence - bitter attacks and accusations against he who holds the Keys.

Hmm.. I'm sitting here thinking that St. Peter, who held the Keys originally, wouldn't have put his mouth on that piece of crap. Yep..pretty darned sure he wouldn't have. I think St. Peter is probably about as Traditionalist as they come.

How can one tell the difference between the public attacks against the Pope made by a So. Baptist and public attacks against the Pope made by a soi disant traditionalist? The one wearing the scapular is the traditonalist.

ROFLOL! I would rather side with the Southern Baptists on this one than to side with error. BTW, I am a Traditionalist that is in full communion with the Church as I go to an Indult Mass approved by my Bishop in the area that I live. In post #37 you seem to lump anyone who has the courage to speak out against this as a SSPX follower.

Well, you are sadly mistaken because there are many Catholics that are in full communion with the Church who didn't like it when he did that and who have said so publicly.

Let's examine a query you made in post #37:

"How does this new tradition differ from the old Pharisaical tradition of publicly attacking and falsely accusing Jesus?"

WHO has falsely accused the Pope? Did he or did he not kiss the Koran? It is also not an "attack" to publicly announce that those actions were wrong. They were. To say otherwise, or insist that we keep silence, you might as well tell us that we should just follow blindly whatever actions the Pope makes!

Are you aware that a kiss is reserved for the books of the Gospel and on equal par with the holy kiss given to the altar? Do you see the implications in this at all?? If not, then I am wasting my breath and talking into thin air.

41 posted on 10/21/2006 5:36:50 AM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
“On May 14th I was received by the Pope, together with a delegation composed of the Shiite imam of Khadum mosque and the Sunni President of the council of administration of the Iraqi Islamic Bank. There was also a representative of the Iraqi ministry of religion. I renewed our invitation to the Pope because his visit would be for us a grace from heaven. It would confirm the faith of Christians and prove the Pope’s love for the whole of humanity in a country which is mainly Muslim. At the end of the audience the Pope bowed to the Muslim holy book the Koran presented to him by the delegation and he kissed it as a sign of respect. The photo of that gesture has been shown repeatedly on Iraqi television and it demonstrates that the Pope is not only aware of the suffering of the Iraqi people, he has also great respect for Islam.”

I wonder if that information will change any hearts.

No, it won't change mine. I've seen it a thousand times by apologists who attempt to defend this.

Why should we have great "respect for Islam?" It's a heresy! It's a blasphemy against God, IMO. Denigrating our Lord, putting Him beneath that false prophet Mohammed. As if our Lord Jesus would be the Messenger of the coming of a sexual pervert like Mohammed who married a nine year old child! Who dreamed up sexual orgies being promised in "heaven" to those who followed his demonic sect.

Pope John Paul II did many wonderful things, but this wasn't a bright spot in his papacy.

42 posted on 10/21/2006 5:40:48 AM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: FJ290
Are you aware that a kiss is reserved for the books of the Gospel and on equal par with the holy kiss given to the altar?

*The planes carrying the Pope to foreign countries were landing on Gospels and Altars, I guess, because Johannes Paulus Magnus always kissed the runway.

43 posted on 10/21/2006 10:06:58 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: FJ290
I know I'm a little late on response to this as I have been out of town on business.

* Being a traditionalist measn is is Never too late to hate

44 posted on 10/21/2006 10:08:15 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic; Religion Moderator
Me:I know I'm a little late on response to this as I have been out of town on business.

Bornacatholic's response:

Being a traditionalist measn is is Never too late to hate.

Per the Religion Moderator's rules:

Always argue the issues – theology, philosophy, history, etc. – and never make it personal.

I've simply run out of patience, Bornacatholic. I hate to rat on people, but your name calling was bad enough when you started private e-mailing me calling me names in language you wouldn't dare get by with on the board. As a result of those I didn't respond to your last private e-mail to me as I didn't even read it, I deleted it.

You have falsely accused me of hatred of a Catholic Pope. I don't believe attributing motives to individual posters or reading their minds is permissable either.

The issue here isn't my personality, whether I am a Traditionalist, a banker, a baker, or a candlestick maker. The issue here is whether it was right or wrong for the Pope to kiss the Koran. It's really that simple.

45 posted on 10/21/2006 3:12:13 PM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
The planes carrying the Pope to foreign countries were landing on Gospels and Altars, I guess, because Johannes Paulus Magnus always kissed the runway.

Runways don't have the corrupt texts of the unholy Koran printed on them either.

46 posted on 10/21/2006 3:13:23 PM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: FJ290
Here is your statement. Are you aware that a kiss is reserved for the books of the Gospel and on equal par with the holy kiss given to the altar?

*You made a error. Just admit it.

47 posted on 10/22/2006 4:54:26 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
You made a error. Just admit it.

ROFLOL! I made an error? Baloney! You, as a Catholic, ought to know that a holy kiss is given to the Gospels and to the altar.

From the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops:

This is particularly true of the Book of the Gospels which is venerated above all the books of readings by Churches of both East and West. So clearly is the Book of the Gospels a sign of Christ present in the liturgy, that it is revered with the same holy kiss given to the altar.

For this reason it is desirable that "cathedrals and at least the larger, more populous parishes and the churches with a larger attendance possess a beautifully designed Book of the Gospels, separate from any other book of readings."

Book of the Gospels

The point I was trying to make is that Catholics who know this might get confused or highly offended when the Pope kissed the Koran since the only HOLY book in the Church that deserves that kind of sign of respect and reverence is the Book of the Gospels.

48 posted on 10/22/2006 11:46:51 AM PDT by FJ290
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; kosta50; maryz; HarleyD; MarkBsnr; Kolokotronis

Arian Ping...


49 posted on 12/25/2008 12:33:42 AM PST by Cronos (Ceterum censeo, Mecca et Medina delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cronos; Forest Keeper; kosta50; maryz; HarleyD; MarkBsnr; Kolokotronis
I see this thread took off in the spirit of Christmas...good will to all men, etc./s/

Perhaps the recurrence of these heresies is not so much the fault of man's fallen nature and its inclination to deny God as it is the failure of the Church to prove her case convincingly whether in theory or in practice.

50 posted on 12/25/2008 6:30:52 AM PST by kosta50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson