FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Rome’s exorcist finding Bl. John Paul II effective against Satan.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
(05-18-2011, 02:22 AM)Unum Sint Wrote: [ -> ]I think most people here would agree that JPII should not be canonized however i do believe the man to have died a Saint. That is not to say that I agree with everything he did in his life however I have to at least observed how he died and to me he died a Martyrs death.

For those that just dont care about what I said above look at least he he wasn't Paul VI.

My friend, the darkest day of the Church was when Paul VI discarded the Tiara. That, imo, was a glorious battle won for Satan.

When I think of that day, I think of Pilate.
(05-18-2011, 01:29 AM)Dominus est Wrote: [ -> ]Fr Amorth was very outspoken in his displeasure of the new rite of exorcism. He said it was basically useless.
http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...c=664607.0

How he's worked around it, I dunno. But I find it hard to believe Fr Amorth would say this about JPII  if he didn't truly believe it.  Exorcism is serious stuff.

We can say souls were lost because of some of the things JPII did and said, and all the usual things mentioned upset me as much as anyone. But I feel that God would never damn a soul for being mislead by the Bishop of Rome. Listening to the pope is a traditional thing to do. Just because the average Catholic may not see the contradiction between Doctrine and Assisi, the Catholic who buys it out of ignorance has done nothing wrong. He/she hasn't sinned for believing a pope.

He "has worked around it" because the Church still allows the old rite to be used.
Amorth said in his first book that an exorcist acquires power over the demon and can compel them under obedience to speak the truth.

C.
To me, there's no contradiction between these two statements:

1)  Blessed John Paul II is in heaven and can be a powerful intercessor for exorcists as well as others.

2) He should not be canonized because of faults in his papacy which can't be parsed out of the historical record and ignored.

Really, is it any surprise to think he'd be in heaven?  Presumably he had Last Rites and the opportunity for any number of plenary indulgences.  Regardless of how much of the abuse scandal, apostasy in the hierarchy, or the spread of ecumenical heresy people want to lay at his door, if he went to his death with final impenitence and the proper rites, he should have had all temporal punishment wiped away and sailed right into heaven.  That's how it's supposed to work; we're all given the same promise.  If a pope, knowing that death is approaching, surrounded by priests and with millions of people praying for him daily, can't make that system work for himself, something is seriously wrong.

But we don't canonize people because there's evidence they're in heaven -- at least that's not the only requirement.
In the book The Rite, that priest also likes to call on Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa during exorcisms.  (He seems to be kind of a hip, modern priest, but with enough appreciation for orthodoxy and tradition to learn to be an exorcist.  An unusual combination.)  This was well before he was beatified, and maybe before she was; I'm not sure about the latter.

What I found interesting about that is that, as I understand it, much of the efficacy of exorcism comes from the authority of the Church.  That's why it's so important for the exorcist to have the permission of the local ordinary.  Exorcists say that if the local bishop hasn't given permission, the demons know that and will throw it back at the exorcist, saying that he has no power over them.  Apparently it's still possible for the exorcism to work, but much more difficult.

Which made me wonder: if it's about the authority of the Church, then wouldn't it be better to call on saints who have been canonized through the authority of the Church?  Otherwise, it seems like the demons could say (even if it's a lie), "Ha, that's not gonna do you any good; that one can't help you from where he is."  It seems like it'd be harder for them to say that about a canonized saint, since that's backed up by the authority that thwarts them.

Just a thought.  As I said, apparently exorcisms can still work without that authority -- even non-Catholics may be able to do them occasionally in very mild cases if their faith is very strong -- but I wonder if an exorcist's job wouldn't be easier if he restricted himself to saints whose status is officially backed up by the full authority of the Church.  On the other hand, if the exorcist's faith in the aid of a particular intercessor is very strong, maybe that's more useful than calling on a 1000-year-old saint to whom he feels no particular connection.  I dunno.
Interesting to drive a parallel between the liturgical reform that led to the NO mass (and to the abusive banning of the latin mass) and the reform of the Old Rite of Exorcism leading to a new rite which almost all the TRUE exorcists (those who believe in Satan and are often practising exorcisms) deemed as ineffective.
Fortunately, some influent exorcists like Fr Amorth could ultimately drag from the Pope the permission to use the Old Rite.
This leads to some questions:
1/ Which were the true intents of the one(s) who deemed necessary to reform the Rite. Because they wished to enhance its effectiveness? Hmmm...
2/ Who were the men the Pope appointed to that duty and producing such a flawed result?
3/ Are there in the world any official exorcists using the new rite?
(05-18-2011, 06:55 AM)Mhoram Wrote: [ -> ]To me, there's no contradiction between these two statements:

1)  Blessed John Paul II is in heaven and can be a powerful intercessor for exorcists as well as others.

2) He should not be canonized because of faults in his papacy which can't be parsed out of the historical record and ignored.

Really, is it any surprise to think he'd be in heaven?  Presumably he had Last Rites and the opportunity for any number of plenary indulgences.  Regardless of how much of the abuse scandal, apostasy in the hierarchy, or the spread of ecumenical heresy people want to lay at his door, if he went to his death with final impenitence and the proper rites, he should have had all temporal punishment wiped away and sailed right into heaven.  That's how it's supposed to work; we're all given the same promise.  If a pope, knowing that death is approaching, surrounded by priests and with millions of people praying for him daily, can't make that system work for himself, something is seriously wrong.

But we don't canonize people because there's evidence they're in heaven -- at least that's not the only requirement.

Very good points.  Unless someone here has certain knowledge that the man is in hell, this is not outside the realm of possibility.  Perhaps Bl. John Paul II is interceding to fix many of the problems that were not fixed during his pontificate.  I do not believe Fr. Amorth would lie to us.
(05-18-2011, 06:55 AM)Mhoram Wrote: [ -> ]If a pope, knowing that death is approaching, surrounded by priests and with millions of people praying for him daily, can't make that system work for himself, something is seriously wrong.

That's not a given.

The "system" is not to be blamed if a person dies in impenitence. A pope has all the means at his disposal to die the death of a just man but that doesn't mean he will inevitably make use of them otherwise all popes down in history would have been saints and blessed.
(05-18-2011, 06:55 AM)Mhoram Wrote: [ -> ]To me, there's no contradiction between these two statements:

1)  Blessed John Paul II is in heaven and can be a powerful intercessor for exorcists as well as others.

2) He should not be canonized because of faults in his papacy which can't be parsed out of the historical record and ignored.

Really, is it any surprise to think he'd be in heaven?  Presumably he had Last Rites and the opportunity for any number of plenary indulgences.  Regardless of how much of the abuse scandal, apostasy in the hierarchy, or the spread of ecumenical heresy people want to lay at his door, if he went to his death with final impenitence and the proper rites, he should have had all temporal punishment wiped away and sailed right into heaven.  That's how it's supposed to work; we're all given the same promise.  If a pope, knowing that death is approaching, surrounded by priests and with millions of people praying for him daily, can't make that system work for himself, something is seriously wrong.

But we don't canonize people because there's evidence they're in heaven -- at least that's not the only requirement.

This is a helpful perspective.
(05-18-2011, 10:44 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-18-2011, 06:55 AM)Mhoram Wrote: [ -> ]If a pope, knowing that death is approaching, surrounded by priests and with millions of people praying for him daily, can't make that system work for himself, something is seriously wrong.

That's not a given.

The "system" is not to be blamed if a person dies in impenitence. A pope has all the means at his disposal to die the death of a just man but that doesn't mean he will inevitably make use of them otherwise all popes down in history would have been saints and blessed.

I don't think Mhoram was saying a pope will thus be inevitably taken directly to heaven.  A pope concerned only with temporal things, for example.  But a pope, no matter his flaws, if he can commend himself to God, confess, and receive the indulgences, is obviously in a good place to go to Heaven directly. 

No matter my disagreements or the concerns about Pope John Paul II, I don't doubt he would have commended himself to God, as I'm sure he did probably all the time throughout his life.
(05-18-2011, 10:50 AM)newyorkcatholic Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-18-2011, 10:44 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-18-2011, 06:55 AM)Mhoram Wrote: [ -> ]If a pope, knowing that death is approaching, surrounded by priests and with millions of people praying for him daily, can't make that system work for himself, something is seriously wrong.

That's not a given.

The "system" is not to be blamed if a person dies in impenitence. A pope has all the means at his disposal to die the death of a just man but that doesn't mean he will inevitably make use of them otherwise all popes down in history would have been saints and blessed.

I don't think Mhoram was saying a pope will thus be inevitably taken directly to heaven.  A pope concerned only with temporal things, for example.  But a pope, no matter his flaws, if he can commend himself to God, confess, and receive the indulgences, is obviously in a good place to go to Heaven directly. 

No matter my disagreements or the concerns about Pope John Paul II, I don't doubt he would have commended himself to God, as I'm sure he did probably all the time throughout his life.

I rather think that the way you live your life is the way you are going to die.

Deathbed repentance and conversion is very rare.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13