FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Jan 21 Bp Williamson column
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
(01-25-2012, 03:41 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:25 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories...606816.htm

Looks like the pope prayed with muslims  ???
He prayed inside a mosque, which is something completely different.

Pope prays inside mosque.  All's well there.
(01-25-2012, 03:38 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:22 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:20 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:10 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:04 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]1) Pope Benedict XVI still has not celebrated the TLM in public
2)Pope Benedict XVI renewed the scandal of Assisi with Assisi 3 which which was in itself a scandalous event
3)Pope Benedict XVI has approved the neocats
4)Pope Benedict XVI has not removed the liberal bishops appointed over the last 40 years
5)Pope Benedict XVI has not created a single traditionalist bishop or cardinal
6)Pope Benedict has prayed with infidels and engaged in active participation with heretics and schismatics vis a vis the eastern orthodox churches and the anglican church
Everything except number 6) is true.
But you can't show me any document from the magisterium, any writing of any saint, or anything similar that says that in such a case it is fine and dandy not to submit to the pope.

Actually 6 is true vis a vis the visit to turkey and later London.

Your latter point =  :deadhorse:

If you honestly believe that we have to obey  the pope even when he is endangering the salvation of souls or the faith not only do you contradict several of the most learned theolgians of the Church, St Robert Bellarmine and Bl Cardinal Newman you also do not understand the Catholic Faith properly.
I don't know what happened in London, but in Turkey the pope did not pray with Muslims.

Can you please quote St. Robert Bellarmine or Bl. Cardinal Newman to me in this regard? I don't think you can.

Since you asked  :)
[...]

Your quote has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand. Cardinal Newman is talking about an order by the pope that would be sinful to obey (as he would be forced to break his vow to the queen that he has made as a soldier in his example). Of course obedience *except in sin* has always been a sound Catholic principle. You are arguing for obedience *except if the pope is a sinner*, which smacks of Donatism or Jansenism.

I would possibly go even further than Newman, in that I would possibly also disobey if the pope ordered me to rope-skip at 3am, which would not be sinful, but nonsensical.
However, Bishop Williamson is not arguing about obedience to worldly orders, but about ecclesiastical submission.

This has to be the best example of forcing a text to bear another meaning than the one it has I've seen for quite some time. The quote is absolutely relevant for the following reasons:
1)It upholds the fact that we do not owe an absolute obedience to the Holy Father, that in fact he cannot ask for such a thing
2)That if a Pope commands anything against holy scripture, the articles of faith or the truth of sacraments or assaults souls or strove to destroy the church we do not have to obey him but can even resist him and seek to hinder his will
3)That situations may arise where the impossible may happen and a person may be forced to disobey the Pope, this is related to the argument which people make of their being a 'state of necessity', in that Bl Cardinal Newman agrees situations may arise where it is possible for the normal rules and regulations of the church to be unable to fulfill their purpose.

(01-25-2012, 03:41 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:25 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories...606816.htm

Looks like the pope prayed with muslims  ???
He prayed inside a mosque, which is something completely different.
He offended a lot of Muslims with that, just as you are offended if Muslims pray in a Cathedral.

Is your mind warped? Have you lost all common sense? Have you gone mad?  ???

'In sign of respect to Muslims, pope prays in Istanbul's Blue Mosque

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

ISTANBUL, Turkey (CNS) -- In a gesture of respect to Muslims in Turkey and around the world, Pope Benedict XVI prayed in Istanbul's famed Blue Mosque, his first papal visit to an Islamic place of worship.

As the pope walked with Mustafa Cagrici, the grand mufti of Istanbul, to the "mihrab" niche that points the way toward Mecca, the mufti said he was going to pray.

The pope stood alongside him, bowed his head and moved his lips in silence for about a minute.

The Nov. 30 encounter was warm and cordial and contrasted sharply with recent controversies and tensions between the pope and the Muslim world. The 20-minute stop was a last-minute addition to the papal program.

The pope accepted the gift of a ceramic tile inscribed with the word "Allah" in the form of a dove.

Placing his hand on the tile, the pope said: "Thank you for this gift. Let us pray for brotherhood and for all humanity."


"Your Holiness, please remember us," the mufti replied.

Built by Sultan Ahmet I in the early 1600s, the Blue Mosque, with six minarets and cascading domes, is one of the most famous religious buildings in the world.

The pope entered its carpeted prayer hall after taking off his shoes and donned a pair of white slippers, listening carefully as his guides explained the architectural history of the mosque and the religious significance of its spaces.

He looked up to admire the arabesque designs of the domes and the intricate blue tiles that give the mosque its name and its distinctive atmosphere.

Then, as they drew close to the carved marble "mihrab," the grand mufti told the pontiff: "In this space everyone stops to pray for 30 seconds, to gain serenity."

The mufti told the pope he was going to pray. The pope, his arms folded over his pectoral cross, stood next to the mufti and moved his lips, a moment shown in close-up on Turkish TV.

When they turned away, according to a reporter on the scene, the pope told the mufti, "Thank you for this moment of prayer."

Asked to elaborate afterward, the Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, said: "The pope paused in meditation, and certainly he turned his thoughts to God."

This could be called a moment of personal prayer, the spokesman said, but did not include any of the exterior signs of Christian prayer. In this way, he said, the pope underlined what unites Christians and Muslims, rather than any differences.


"In this sense it was a personal, intimate prayer to God," Father Lombardi said, which "can easily be expressed with his mind and with his thoughts also in a mosque, where many people cultivate the same spiritual attitude."

Later, the pope presented the mufti with a framed mosaic of doves.

"This picture is a message of brotherhood in the memory of a visit that I will surely never forget," Pope Benedict said.

The pope smiled and looked relaxed throughout the visit, which was conducted with the aid of a young Turkish interpreter. It was the second time a pope had entered a Muslim place of worship; Pope John Paul II visited a mosque in Damascus, Syria, in 2001.

Moments before entering the Blue Mosque, Pope Benedict visited the Hagia Sophia Museum, an architectural masterpiece once regarded as the finest church of the Christian Byzantine Empire.

The two stops in the Sultanahmet district of old Istanbul touched on Turkey's rich cultural heritage and its troubled history as a crossroads of East and West.

The Hagia Sophia, originally the Church of Holy Wisdom, was converted to a mosque in the 15th century after the conquest of Constantinople by the Islamic-dominated Ottoman Empire. It was turned into a museum in the 1930s, after Turkey became a secular state.

A week before the pope arrived, police detained 39 Muslim fundamentalists who entered the Hagia Sophia and shouted slogans against the papal visit. Some Muslims feared the pope wanted to reclaim the monument as a church by praying there.

Protesters were kept far away from the site during the pope's visit, although three demonstrators were dragged from the Hagia Sophia a few hours before the pontiff arrived. Heavily armed police officers ringed the area around the museum and shut down all traffic in the neighborhood.

When he made his 25-minute stop in the Hagia Sophia, the pope was following in the footsteps of his predecessor, Pope John Paul, who visited the site in 1979.

Escorted by the museum president, the pope walked beneath the massive dome of the sixth-century building, pausing to look up at Byzantine mosaics of Christ, Mary and Byzantine emperors and, next to them, the characteristic wooden ceiling medallions with the calligraphic names of Allah and Mohammed.

When his guide explained that the dome was 184 feet tall and 102 feet wide, the pope asked if it was bigger than that of St. Peter's Basilica. St. Peter's was bigger, he was told.

The pope asked a few questions but mostly listened during his tour. He was surrounded by a phalanx of Vatican aides and security personnel.

Before leaving, he stopped to write in the museum's guest book.

"In our diversity, we find ourselves before faith in the one God. May God enlighten us and help us find the path of love and peace," he wrote.
'

(01-25-2012, 03:47 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]This has to be the best example of forcing a text to bear another meaning than the one it has I've seen for quite some time. The quote is absolutely relevant for the following reasons:
1)It upholds the fact that we do not owe an absolute obedience to the Holy Father, that in fact he cannot ask for such a thing
2)That if a Pope commands anything against holy scripture, the articles of faith or the truth of sacraments or assaults souls or strove to destroy the church we do not have to obey him but can even resist him and seek to hinder his will
3)That situations may arise where the impossible may happen and a person may be forced to disobey the Pope, this is related to the argument which people make of their being a 'state of necessity', in that Bl Cardinal Newman agrees situations may arise where it is possible for the normal rules and regulations of the church to be unable to fulfill their purpose.

OK, I see that you do not even want to address my point. It doesn't make any sense to argue then.
(01-25-2012, 04:00 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:47 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]This has to be the best example of forcing a text to bear another meaning than the one it has I've seen for quite some time. The quote is absolutely relevant for the following reasons:
1)It upholds the fact that we do not owe an absolute obedience to the Holy Father, that in fact he cannot ask for such a thing
2)That if a Pope commands anything against holy scripture, the articles of faith or the truth of sacraments or assaults souls or strove to destroy the church we do not have to obey him but can even resist him and seek to hinder his will
3)That situations may arise where the impossible may happen and a person may be forced to disobey the Pope, this is related to the argument which people make of their being a 'state of necessity', in that Bl Cardinal Newman agrees situations may arise where it is possible for the normal rules and regulations of the church to be unable to fulfill their purpose.

OK, I see that you do not even want to address my point. It doesn't make any sense to argue then.

???

No I see that your argument consists of 'look at proof... " thats not proof it actually means (say exact opposite of what it means)"  >:(
(01-25-2012, 04:01 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 04:00 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:47 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]This has to be the best example of forcing a text to bear another meaning than the one it has I've seen for quite some time. The quote is absolutely relevant for the following reasons:
1)It upholds the fact that we do not owe an absolute obedience to the Holy Father, that in fact he cannot ask for such a thing
2)That if a Pope commands anything against holy scripture, the articles of faith or the truth of sacraments or assaults souls or strove to destroy the church we do not have to obey him but can even resist him and seek to hinder his will
3)That situations may arise where the impossible may happen and a person may be forced to disobey the Pope, this is related to the argument which people make of their being a 'state of necessity', in that Bl Cardinal Newman agrees situations may arise where it is possible for the normal rules and regulations of the church to be unable to fulfill their purpose.

OK, I see that you do not even want to address my point. It doesn't make any sense to argue then.

???

No I see that your argument consists of 'look at proof... " thats not proof it actually means (say exact opposite of what it means)"  >:(
I write a post in which I explicitly state that there are situations in which I would disobey the pope, to which you answer that there are situations in which one should disobey the pope. But you don't address anything else I said.
You know, I never thought I could convince you. I'm just writing for the people who are reading, and they understand quite well what I'm talking about.

(01-25-2012, 04:35 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 04:01 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 04:00 PM)Freudentaumel Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-25-2012, 03:47 PM)TrentCath Wrote: [ -> ]This has to be the best example of forcing a text to bear another meaning than the one it has I've seen for quite some time. The quote is absolutely relevant for the following reasons:
1)It upholds the fact that we do not owe an absolute obedience to the Holy Father, that in fact he cannot ask for such a thing
2)That if a Pope commands anything against holy scripture, the articles of faith or the truth of sacraments or assaults souls or strove to destroy the church we do not have to obey him but can even resist him and seek to hinder his will
3)That situations may arise where the impossible may happen and a person may be forced to disobey the Pope, this is related to the argument which people make of their being a 'state of necessity', in that Bl Cardinal Newman agrees situations may arise where it is possible for the normal rules and regulations of the church to be unable to fulfill their purpose.

OK, I see that you do not even want to address my point. It doesn't make any sense to argue then.

???

No I see that your argument consists of 'look at proof... " thats not proof it actually means (say exact opposite of what it means)"  >:(
I write a post in which I explicitly state that there are situations in which I would disobey the pope, to which you answer that there are situations in which one should disobey the pope. But you don't address anything else I said.
You know, I never thought I could convince you. I'm just writing for the people who are reading, and they understand quite well what I'm talking about.

It's odd thats just what I was going to say about you  :P

But really you did just point blank brush what I said under the carpet by saying 'You don't get it.. theres no point discussing it' rather than dealing with the issues at hand.

This idea of sspx'ers saying 'except if the pope is a sinner' is likewise  :deadhorse:

The point is not that the pope is a sinner but that his actions demonstrate an underlying heterodoxy which he seeks to enforce onto others and promote. This is a very different question from say 'the pope is an adulterer' or the pope is 'a sodomite' (as was said of some of the popes during the renaissance)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12