Calm the heck down - and READ THIS : Pope Francis MAY not be what you think...
#21
(03-13-2013, 06:06 PM)Allan Wrote: I think we may need to calm down.  There is too much unknown information and the vacuum is being filled with speculation.  Let us address some of the hyperbole out there in tradland:

He persecuted traditional orthodox priests in Argentina!
OK, like who? When? When these facts emerge, we can evaluate them.  Until then, consider this: published media reports do identify instances where he took on priests who refused to baptise babies born of unwed mothers (which is pretty screwy un-Christian behaviour, and a problem in Latin America). Now, if these are also the supposedly “orthodox” priests who got hammered, then maybe this is not such a bad thing.

SP was never implemented in Argentina and he hates the traditional liturgy!
Take a breath.  From what I have seen and read this may simply be a Bishop who – to put it bluntly – simply doesn’t care about liturgy, period.  Now, you may argue that this in and of itself is a really bad thing, etc., and you may be right – BUT not giving a fig about the liturgy is NOT at all the same thing as hating one traditional flavour of it.  Think about it.

He refused to wear the cape and stole and called himself the Bishop of Rome and he opposes the papcy and favours progressive decentralization!
Everything I have read is that this guy is described by the word “humble”.  Perhaps you could even say he takes a great deal of “pride” in his “humility”.  PERHAPS he simply dislikes “trappings of high office” and “high” liturgy and the like because he personally views it all as some kind of barrier between the people and their clergy. Maybe he uses “Bishop of Rome” because he thinks it is the least pretentious of all the titles and he by instinct always gravitates towards the title, thing, manner of dress, etc. that is perceived by him to be the least pretentious or the most humble.  If so, then this is purely an aesthetic preference.  It does NOT automatically follow therefore that he accepts the entire progressive decentralization mantra and all that would follow.  He may of course – but we don’t know that.  Yet.
.   

Here here!
Reply
#22
I have run a couple searches, and I don't see much addressing the TLM question.  There was this anonymous, unsubstantiated, comment on Fr Z's blog from a post a few days ago by somebody calling himself Ignatius:

Here in Buenos Aires, saying the OF in Latin is suicidal. The Archbishop and the “establishment” in the Archdiocese have made very clear that the ones who do this are to be considered “cryptolefebvrists”, “not ecclesially minded”, “un pastoral”, “unstable” or something like that. All these terms mean an “ecclesiastical death sentence”. Ad Orientem, in the vernacular or -worse- in Latin- is a sure sentence to ostracism. Priests who dare to do this end up immediately removed from their posts, out of “pastoral” concerns to obscure chaplaincies in the outskirts, hospitals or are denied permission to pursue higher studies. The seam if you dare to wear a cassock. The horror! Sure, there are no legal prohibitions to all this… but nonetheless…

It looks like the worst we imagined, but it's just a comment on a blog and I haven't been able to find any really reliable information.  

Even if everything bad about we hear about him is true, I will still hope in God's providence for his Church.  At 79 Pope Francis probably won't be around for terribly long, and he fought the Argentine government on gay marriage and adoption, so he's clearly not all bad.


 
Reply
#23
(03-13-2013, 07:15 PM)Johanna Wrote: I have run a couple searches, and I don't see much addressing the TLM question.  There was this anonymous, unsubstantiated, comment on Fr Z's blog from a post a few days ago by somebody calling himself Ignatius:

Here in Buenos Aires, saying the OF in Latin is suicidal. The Archbishop and the “establishment” in the Archdiocese have made very clear that the ones who do this are to be considered “cryptolefebvrists”, “not ecclesially minded”, “un pastoral”, “unstable” or something like that. All these terms mean an “ecclesiastical death sentence”. Ad Orientem, in the vernacular or -worse- in Latin- is a sure sentence to ostracism. Priests who dare to do this end up immediately removed from their posts, out of “pastoral” concerns to obscure chaplaincies in the outskirts, hospitals or are denied permission to pursue higher studies. The seam if you dare to wear a cassock. The horror! Sure, there are no legal prohibitions to all this… but nonetheless…

It looks like the worst we imagined, but it's just a comment on a blog and I haven't been able to find any really reliable information.  

Even if everything bad about we hear about him is true, I will still hope in God's providence for his Church.  At 79 Pope Francis probably won't be around for terribly long, and he fought the Argentine government on gay marriage and adoption, so he's clearly not all bad.


 
As others have pointed out, he's definitely a transitional Pope. If he does well, then I pray he gets much done in the few years he sits in St. Peter's chair. If he does not do well, he won't have all that much time to do damage.
Reply
#24
(03-13-2013, 07:20 PM)Papist Wrote: As others have pointed out, he's definitely a transitional Pope. If he does well, then I pray he gets much done in the few years he sits in St. Peter's chair. If he does not do well, he won't have all that much time to do damage.

Exactly.
Reply
#25
I found this on Wikipedia this doesn't sound bad at all, if he implements this type of thought Church wide....


"In the Aparecida Document, a joint statement of the bishops of Latin America, Cardinal Bergoglio commented on the worthiness of individuals to receive the Eucharist. The text states in paragraph 436 that, "We should commit ourselves to ‘eucharistic coherence’, that is, we should be conscious that people cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act or speak against the commandments, in particular when abortion, euthanasia, and other serious crimes against life and family are facilitated. This responsibility applies particularly to legislators, governors, and health professionals."[52][53][54]"
Reply
#26
(03-13-2013, 07:24 PM)Johanna Wrote:
(03-13-2013, 07:20 PM)Papist Wrote: As others have pointed out, he's definitely a transitional Pope. If he does well, then I pray he gets much done in the few years he sits in St. Peter's chair. If he does not do well, he won't have all that much time to do damage.

Exactly.

How long did John XXIII need?
Reply
#27
There's no such thing as a "transitional pope," or a "prisoner of the curia," etc. etc.

The pope is the pope, and his action or inaction, within the sphere of his legal authority, is his responsibility.

Reply
#28
All the claims of "removing priests from their posts" is extremely difficult to actually do. To actually remove a pastor is a huge hassle, regardless of whether he is "immovable" or "movable." The former requiring a Ecclesiastical trial, the latter allows for the pastor to complain to the Vatican.
Reply
#29
(03-13-2013, 07:55 PM)ggreg Wrote:
(03-13-2013, 07:24 PM)Johanna Wrote:
(03-13-2013, 07:20 PM)Papist Wrote: As others have pointed out, he's definitely a transitional Pope. If he does well, then I pray he gets much done in the few years he sits in St. Peter's chair. If he does not do well, he won't have all that much time to do damage.

Exactly.

How long did John XXIII need?

5 years, give or take.

I'm pretty sure they have the google, even in Britain.  Just sayin.  :tiphat:
Reply
#30
(03-13-2013, 08:33 PM)DrBombay Wrote:
(03-13-2013, 07:55 PM)ggreg Wrote:
(03-13-2013, 07:24 PM)Johanna Wrote:
(03-13-2013, 07:20 PM)Papist Wrote: As others have pointed out, he's definitely a transitional Pope. If he does well, then I pray he gets much done in the few years he sits in St. Peter's chair. If he does not do well, he won't have all that much time to do damage.

Exactly.

How long did John XXIII need?

5 years, give or take.

I'm pretty sure they have the google, even in Britain.  Just sayin.  :tiphat:

##  We do indeed have Google, even in Darkest Britain (This comes to you courtesy of Firefox Mozilla 19 BTW -we have that too).  It seems a little early to start deploring the current election - the man's been Pope for only six hours. Even J23 & JP2 needed longer than that to wreck the Church. 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)