Posted on 09/02/2010 10:11:49 AM PDT by 0beron
Editor: The Cardinal Newman Insitute, run by Jesuits, is seeking donors and hope for financial support from conservatives who believe they're running a conservative locale. You might think this is a cause for rejoicing, but we'd encourage you to be cautious. Don't be fooled.
This weekend, after hundreds of years, a Catholic University will open its doors in Sweden. The "Newman Institute" in Uppsala.
Stockholm [kath.net/KAP] This weekend after centuries a Catholic University will open its doors in Sweden. The "Newman Institute" in Uppsala will, according to the school authorities, be the first Catholic educational establishment since the Protestant Revolt in the 16th Century, which has the authority, to issue academic degrees. In 1477 Pope Sixtus IV. had founded the last university in Uppsala, till now. The Jesuit directed University celebrates its opening on Sunday afternoon with three lectures, which will each explore Christendom of the past.
The English Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-1890), who gives his name to the new institute, belongs to one of the most amazing figures in the Church History of the 19th Century. When he turned 44, the Anglican theological became a Catholic. In 1847 he was ordained a priest, and was named Cardinal by Leo XIII in 1879. The beatification of Newman on the 19th of September in Birmingham is a highpoint and completion of the Holy Father's trip to the United Kingdom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newman_Institute_%28Uppsala%29
http://www.newman.se/about.htm
(Excerpt) Read more at eponymousflower.blogspot.com ...
I see, they are all flaming modernists except for the Opus Dei guy.
How many Opus Dei folks are permitted to teach at flamingly liberal Jesuit universities elsewhere?
I thought so.
0
nada
none
But you already know what you are going to know about this. You knew the answer even before you investigated. No matter that the evidence clouds matters, you know the answer.
Enjoy your little box. It’s a lot easier when you know the answers before you even ask questions.
Sorry, bud. The burden of evidence is on Oberon. And his blogging bud over at Eppppydom doesn’t provide evidence, only innuendo.
Uh, your’ Swedish informant for most of his or her comment describes things in general in the Swedish Catholic church, which, even if accurate (might be a tad exaggerated, perhaps?—I was present for a Mass celebrated by the bishop of Stockholm a few years ago that was liturgically rather conservative, employed a good bit of Latin).
Having established that some liturgical abuses are common in Sweden (big surprise), the informant then makes a general statement about the professors without, again, a shred of evidence, or should I say, eppydence?
Nah, the Jesuits are known to be liberal. Sweden is a liberal country. The faculty certainly seems to be liberal. The burden is yours to prove otherwise.
Again, if it isn’t liberal, it would be the only Jesuit institution of higher learning in the entire world that isn’t.
Oh please, trendy 70s theology, Rahnerites, crappy faculty made up mostly of women, Merton... and new theology.
Jesuits have been destroying the Church for the better part of fifty years. It was time they were held accountable.
I think the laity is getting sick of supporting a pack of gay social workers who cynically take their money while insisting that they’re really Catholic.
You should be ashamed of yourselves.
Btw, your responses are really haughty, sounds like I hit a nerve. I wouldn’t want you teaching my kids.
How about offering some evidence? What evidence you’ve offered goes against your thesis (an Opus Dei member, a pro-life fundraiser). The rest is innuendo and guilt by association.
You and your buddy Tancred just throw stuff against the wall. You haven’t hit a nerve, you haven’t even managed to stick anything to the barn wall.
This is evidence? “The Jesuits are known to be liberal.” True. But some are not and the coming generation is quite different from the one dying off. What’s the age of the people who founded this institute? Where are they located in the Jesuit spectrum? You see, I know a hell of a lot of Jesuits, from all corners of the spectrum. I know where the non-liberal ones are located. I make distinctions. You brand all Jesuits with a broad brush. What you say applied 20 years ago. But things are changing.
Sweden is liberal. Yeah. So what? How does that prove squat about this institute.
Give me some real evidence. Tell me something specific about Philip Geister and how liberal he is.
The burden is yours to prove that your broad brush prejudiced statements apply to this specific instance.
No, it’s not an SSPX-approved institute, which is the only thing that probably would satisfy Oberon. But truly liberal Jesuits wouldn’t be caught dead with a known Opus Dei member on their faculty. So “the faculty seems to be liberal” simply is not true.
Call me back when you have some actual evidence.
Wild broad brush claims. You aren’t just haughty, you are breathlessly hyperbolic.
I must have hit a nerve.
No, you call me back when you have some evidence. Remember, if it is orthodox, then it is the only Jesuit institute of higher learning ON EARTH that is orthodox. Thus, the burden is ENTIRELY yours.
To say “But things are changing” is nothing but fluff at this point. The faculty appears liberal. Check them out yourself. I looked at a few. Let’s just say that their orthodoxy is not exactly ringing forth. The fact that most don’t even appear to be Catholic is helping either.
The burden is ENTIRELY yours.
I gave you specific evidence—Opus Dei, pro-life fundraiser.
You cite guilt by association, “all Jesuits are evil, all Jesuit schools must a priori be liberal.”
That’s not evidence. That’s prejudice.
Goodbye.
You wrote:
“I gave you specific evidence—Opus Dei, pro-life fundraiser.”
Nope. I was the one who pointed out that the fundraiser was pro-life. And as I pointed out - and you have apparently never responded to this point (until you distort it below)- if this is an orthodox Jesuit institution it will be the only orthodox Jesuit higher learning institute in the ENTIRE WORLD. The fact that there are no others - ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD - tells us something about the chances of this one being orthodox. Quite frankly that trumps anything you have said thus far. As I have said, more than once, I hope it’s orthodox, but it is extremely doubtful at this point.
“You cite guilt by association, “all Jesuits are evil, all Jesuit schools must a priori be liberal.””
I never said any such thing. I never said the Jeuits were evil. I never said that “all Jesuit schools must a priori be liberal.” You can disagree with what I say, but I would prefer if you do not make up things I never said.
I write clearly and concisely. The meaning of my words are not difficult to ascertain.
In post #14 I wrote:
“If it is orthodox, it will be perhaps the only non-liberal Jesuit college in the entire world. I can’t think of a single one in any country that has a reputation for being orthodox or even conservative. Can you?”
In post #19 I wrote:
“But since there isn’t a single orthodox Jesuit institution of higher learning in the world today - by reputation - I see no reason to not see the evidence for what it is: too many women faculty (almost all liberals in Sweden), faculty who love the Lutheran sect of Sweden, etc.”
And in post #25 I wrote:
“Again, if it isn’t liberal, it would be the only Jesuit institution of higher learning in the entire world that isn’t.”
And in post #31 I wrote:
“Remember, if it is orthodox, then it is the only Jesuit institute of higher learning ON EARTH that is orthodox. Thus, the burden is ENTIRELY yours.”
“That’s not evidence. That’s prejudice.”
No, it’s “track record”. It’s experience. I have said from the beginning that I hope it is orthodox - and I do! But the track record of the Jesuits is simply not orthodox for almost 50 years now in the western world. Only time will tell. It is entirely possible that the institute is staffed by liberals and a few orthodox members together. It might still encourage holiness among its students. Conversions might take place. But, in any case, the burden is still yours.
“Goodbye.”
Goodbye. In the future I hope you do not resort to distorting what others post to you. I never once distorted what you wrote.
Good old Vald... he only sees what he wants to.
“He seems to forget that the road to Hell is paved with the skulls of Bishops.......
Went by Gonzaga a couple of days ago, while enroute to my new home...
The professors there still cruise the big T/A truck stop looking for someone to give a bj too... or get a real good ‘trucker beat down’... all of which they seek in the dirt parking lot behind the fuel pumps.
‘Nuff said?
I trust that not all of the professors were there. I never claimed that Gonzaga had been turned around, but that some effort had been/was being made, which would put it one notch above any other Jesuit University that I am aware of. Even if things are going well, at best you would be looking at a small minority of professors in key positions—still lots of room for bad apples.
I trust that not all of the professors were there. I never claimed that Gonzaga had been turned around, but that some effort had been/was being made, which would put it one notch above any other Jesuit University that I am aware of. Even if things are going well, at best you would be looking at a small minority of professors in key positions—still lots of room for bad apples.
You remind me of way too many Jesuits.
Just keep denying there’s a problem, eventually people are going to get sick of this and even government largesse won’t save you.
I heartily discourage people from sending their children to Jesuit schools. If you do, you’re making a huge mistake.
You remind me of a ten-year. You have no evidence for your position. I made distinctions and offered evidence, pointed out that even your own evidence supported my position. Your whole case rests on sweeping generalizations with no evidence.
So now you just take your sweeping claim and apply it to me personally.
Since all Jesuits and all Jesuit schools, evidence be damned are equally bad in your mind, not even Jesus Christ himself could reason with you. You are closed to evidence—when put in front of your face, you just deny it.
You and Tancred make a sweet pair.
Here is the evidence on the heterodoxy of Karl Rahner, implicitly denying the doctrine of original sin:
“The dogma (of the immaculate conception) does not mean in any way that the birth of a being is accompanied by something contaminating, by a stain, and that in order to avoid it Mary must have had a privilege." [...]
Cardinal Siri goes on to show the fallacy of Rahner’s teaching: “... if man at his birth” says the Cardinal, “ is not accompanied by a stain, of what stain does the Bull of Pius IX speak? How can one claim, as Rahner does, that there was not any stain to avoid and that Mary did not need a privilege?”
In short, this is nothing more than Rahner’s implicit denial of original sin. It also undermines the infallibility of Papal pronouncements, since Rahner’s words clearly contradict Pius IXs solemn definition.
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.