Posted on 08/12/2006 10:16:49 AM PDT by Blake#1
And your point is what? Where has any Catholic ever said that the Popes are not without sin? You don't seem to understand infallibility. They are only considered infallible when teaching on faith and morals.
Will you answer a question I posed to you earlier? Are you for this church which is ruled by the Communist party or are you for the Catholic Church which says that Communists can't be ordained Bishops and that the Communist party can not control the Catholic Church. I suggest you really take into serious consideration what you are supporting.
You force me to answer with a subject you do not want to face. IMHO China is not practicing communism. That said, China does not want a Church that "tolerates" homosexuality amongst its priesthood. That is the issue between China and the Vatican.
ROFLMHO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't see any Chinese bishops' names.
communists=communists
"They are only considered infallible when teaching on faith and morals."
Which is what? 99.9 percent of their job right.
Do not lump me in with Anti-Vatican Groups. I believe that all Catholics will reunite in the future. If by some circumstances the Vatican ceased to exist all Christianity would suffer. I come from a Protestant culture and believe that if the Christian Haters "get" Rome then that would be the end of my Church. Divided we cannot stand.
The thread is about the Chinese bishops.
China following England's example? Lol.
Your anti-Catholic bias is showing through, for you still smart that your King Henry VIII just HAD to have a son and God's Church on earth (in Rome) and his Vicar, the Pope, be damned. Divorced, beheaded, died, divorced, beheaded, survived. He caused so much death and destruction because of his arrogance and vanity. He can't begin to be compared to China....much as you may like it to be. Too bad he didn't know that the MALE delivers the X or Y chromosome for baby's gender.
China's agenda for appointing its own "catholic bishops" is to have those communist "bishops" under the communist thumb. They can control those Chinese Catholics with their bishop pawns. It ISN'T about ONE man's arrogance and ego. It's about China continuing to control its population.
"For centuries the Anglicns have had to endure the Roman charge that "divorce" and not nationalism began the English Catholic Church."
Get over it, already !
Fine. The thread is about Communist chinese bishops.
Who are not in communion with Rome. In effect, are schismatic.
Right. And in dispute is whether it is because they are communists as some in this thread claim or because they were not ordained by the pope himself.
The issue in China is that the Pope desires that the Church be autonomous, not shackled to the Chinese Communist state. In other words, religious freedom. And the issue for China is that it doesn't want double allegiances for its citizens. Really, the main issue is religious freedom, is it not? Whether it's achieved in our lifetime is another matter.
FWIW, it's not entirely clear whether the Vatican excommunicated these bishops or not. The Pope was very concerned that they were coerced into doing the illicit ordinations. So even though the report says that they were excommunicated, Navarro-Valls left some wiggle room. To complicate matters, the Chinese government subsequently condemned the Patriotic Association for the illicit ordinations. Is the PA being used as a scapegoat? Who's really controlling the PA? Does the Chinese government really want normative relations with the Vatican.
A delegation was just in China in the last month, but the Vatican is mum on what was discussed.
Yet the corrupt American bishops continue in their luxurious abodes. Curious.
Canterbury may well be in China to spread druidism. Well, you asked. Also, as Leo XIII definitively declared, that "nationalist" church of yours lacks apostolic succession and therefore legitimate Mass and sacraments. Way back in the 3rd or 4th century, Tertullian observed that the hallmarks of orthodoxy were antiquity, universality and consensus. It seems unlikely that "nationalism" would be part of a universal church unless the UN has become dangerously more powerful than most of us imagine.
So you won't agree. So what????
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.