FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The pope must heal this wound
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
The pope must heal this wound
For SSPX, suspicion of the Jews remains a collective commitment rather than the rantings of a rogue individual
Comments (6)

Quote:Francis Davis
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 February 2009 17.00 GMT
Article history
The Pope has today ordered the ultra-conservative "Bishop" Williamson of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX), to publicly recant his holocaust denials.

However, the questions now raised over the pope's own views and authenticity are so intense that such an act will not be adequate. For the Society of St Pius X, from which Williamson comes, suspicion of the Jews remains a collective commitment rather than the rantings of a rogue individual.

The pope "acted alone" in rehabilitation SSPX, said one of his top cardinals. The "Vatican bureaucracy is not up to the job" said another. The German Catholic bishops, who often do not see eye to eye, were scandalised. Globally, some bishops' conferences have twisted, turned and trimmed to defend his stand but in private there has been a furious flurry of complaints running back to Rome.

If the pope did not, as his spokesman has said, know that these issues were still outstanding, then there should not be a problem with him issuing a full condemnation, not only of holocaust denial but also of all varieties of Catholicism which continue to give succour to antisemitic principles and movements. In this sense, the debate is not simply about whether SSPX accepts the Second Vatican Council – I'm too young to even worry about that one – but whether a pope who has brought Catholic tensions to the surface with such style is now willing to affirm that the spectre of racism is a sin to be routed out wherever it is found.

A pilgrimage of penance, arm in arm with "Bishop" Williamson and his brother "bishops" would be in order – perhaps to Jerusalem, which all the great faiths judge to be holy. Maybe then a pastoral visit to the US where many legitimate pro-life concerns have been turned by some Catholics into a muted code for abhorrence of the idea of a black president. Then, perhaps, a journey to Herzegovina to finally bring to account the rogue province of Franciscans that peddle an extremist nationalism as spirituality.

Lastly, Benedict XVI should take steps towards his homeland. In a nation that has now outlawed denial of the Shoah he should walk with a Muslim, an African and a Jew to the steps of a great monument. There he should set forth clearly his abhorrence of the evil with which he and his office are now being associated.

To send the appropriate message of renewed reconciliation it can only be on German soil that the Bavarian pope might convince his detractors that he really does walk in the footsteps of his predecessor. Additionally, if it would help to avoid further scandal, a reversal of his recent decision would for many be a sacrament of hope in our times.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/...tisemitism
Who is the idiot who penned this twaddle?[Image: hoppingmad.gif]
Telemaque Wrote:A pilgrimage of penance, arm in arm with "Bishop" Williamson and his brother "bishops" would be in order – perhaps to Jerusalem
Oh  yeah. That would go over big. :)
What an idiot. He's so blinded by the religion of secular humanism and liberalism that he has no clue as to the Catholic religion or what Catholicism truly means. These non-Catholic libs would do well to stay out on internal Church matters which they do not understand.
StevusMagnus Wrote:What an idiot. He's so blinded by the religion of secular humanism and liberalism that he has no clue as to the Catholic religion or what Catholicism truly means. These non-Catholic libs would do well to stay out on internal Church matters which they do not understand.

I agree, Stevus. But they won't unless they're forced to.
Satan's sheep keep screaming and raging against God and His Church. What an amazing turmoil did a single bishop achieve with a simple interview! Judeo-Masonry knows what is at stake here!

Pray for His Excellency, pray for the Society, pray for the Church and pray for the His Holiness the Pope. The wolves of Beelzebub are howling louder each day and openly gathering to destroy the Immaculate Spouse of Christ.

Bonifacio Wrote:Satan's sheep keep screaming and raging against God and His Church.

Satan's followers are wolves, not sheep.  We are the sheep and Christ is our shepherd.

Quote:The wolves of Beelzebub are howling louder each day and openly gathering to destroy the Immaculate Spouse of Christ.


Now you have the wolves instead of sheep right but the demon wrong.  Beelzebub is lord of the flies (flying things), not wolves.

Let them howl.  They will fail.
Quote:Satan's followers are wolves, not sheep.  We are the sheep and Christ is our shepherd.

I thought Satan was a wolf in sheep's clothing who leads some of the sheep astray (to eat them later) if they do not stay sufficiently loyal to the shepherd.
QuisUtDeus Wrote:
Bonifacio Wrote:Satan's sheep keep screaming and raging against God and His Church.
Satan's followers are wolves, not sheep.  We are the sheep and Christ is our shepherd.

It's semantics.

As far as I can see, Satan's disciples can be described as "sheep", "wolves", "dogs", "vultures", etc., whatever you want to call them since those images convey the idea of a flock that - consciously or not - follows the father of lies. Even if, as you correctly pointed out, "sheep" have been used as an image for the flock of Christ, I used it here as an image for the flock of Satan. I don't see where's the problem.

Quote:
Quote:The wolves of Beelzebub are howling louder each day and openly gathering to destroy the Immaculate Spouse of Christ.

Now you have the wolves instead of sheep right but the demon wrong.  Beelzebub is lord of the flies (flying things), not wolves.

Beelzebub is another legitimate name for Lucifer. I don't see your point.
Bonifacio Wrote:
QuisUtDeus Wrote:
Bonifacio Wrote:Satan's sheep keep screaming and raging against God and His Church.
Satan's followers are wolves, not sheep.  We are the sheep and Christ is our shepherd.

It's semantics.

As far as I can see, Satan's disciples can be described as "sheep", "wolves", "dogs", "vultures", etc., whatever you want to call them since those images convey the idea of a flock that - consciously or not - follows the father of lies. Even if, as you correctly pointed out, "sheep" have been used as an image for the flock of Christ, I used it here as an image for the flock of Satan. I don't see where's the problem.

Quote:
Quote:The wolves of Beelzebub are howling louder each day and openly gathering to destroy the Immaculate Spouse of Christ.

Now you have the wolves instead of sheep right but the demon wrong.  Beelzebub is lord of the flies (flying things), not wolves.

Beelzebub is another legitimate name for Lucifer. I don't see your point.


Sheep are used specifically for the followers of Christ because they are innocent and defenseless against the wolves of Satan without their shepherd.  Blessed are the weak.  The metaphor imparts a theological truth.

Your metaphor imparts a theological lie - that there is innocence in what these predators do.

It's not necessarily another name for Lucifer, but that's irrelevant.

If you're going to engage in hyperbole, rhetoric, etc., you should at least use proper theological metaphors.  If you want to jump down Satori's throat over the meaning of the word "satori" then I don't see why you don't get it if someone jumps down your throat for getting theological metaphors all messed up.

And that's the point.  You need to calm down your condemnation of all things under the sun, and especially of other forum members.
Pages: 1 2