Jan 21 Bp Williamson column
(01-25-2012, 03:13 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-25-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-25-2012, 02:48 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-25-2012, 07:32 AM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 11:56 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-24-2012, 11:53 PM)Gerard Wrote: The bad bishops and bad Cardinals were appointed by the Popes.  When it was manifest that they were genuinely bad, the Popes did nothing to correct the issue. 

This is more true of JPII than of B16.

No, please use facts and not opinion or preconceived ideas. This is JUST as true of JpII as Benedict XVI who has approved the Neocats, blessed the loony charasmatics, made dodgy bishops cardinal and not got rid of bad bishops. Again please lets deal with issues as they are not how you want them to be.

I did not say that B16 was perfect in this regard, so coming up with some examples of his mistakes does not refute my assertion.  You need to show that he made just as many bad appointments as JPII did.  B16 obviously has not had time to do so, even if he were as lacking gifts in this area as JPII.  I suspect if we were to come up with some sort of bad appointment per year measurement, we would see a difference.  Are you aware some objective measurement of this or are you just countering my opinion with your opinion?

So then Benedict XVI is merely a small improvement on JPII who is in himself only a small improvement on Pope Paul VI?

I don't need to show anything, the evidence speaks for itself.

You need to present the evidence in order for it to speak. Of course you need to show something and not just make assertions. 

(01-25-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Why have these bishops not been sent off in exile or forbidden to exercise their duties as bishop? Pope Benedict XVI is just as responsible as Pope John Paul II (who was a good friend of his and whom he undoubtedly advised) for failing to get rid of these bishops or discipline them properly as Pope John Paul II is in creating them.

Lets deal with some facts:

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

The list goes on  >:(

Your list goes well beyond the scope of discussing appointments and removals of bishops, which is the question at hand.  Removing bishops is quite difficult and only gets done in extreme cases.  I think that appointments are a better indicator of a pope's policies.

Rubbish. Popes can act decisively when they want to, if he can't be bothered to get rid of the bad bishops who are endangering souls he is failing in his duty as the good sheperd and that is very serious.
Reply
(01-25-2012, 03:08 PM)Tapatio Wrote: May I add to that, the "Summorum Pontificum" issued Motu Proprio.  For what it´s worth
I say this in that fashion, because I haven't seen a rise in the Dioceasn TLM´s. Nor new TLM anywhere due to that decree.

There are in my diocese.  Also there are diocesan priests learning to celebrate the TLM.
Reply
As regards material heretics, it is true this is an individual thing but nevertheless it is fair to presume that most people born into heresy are material and not formal heretics, if people want I can cite several references for this.
Reply
(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.
Reply
(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  :)

'Again, were I actually a soldier or sailor in her Majesty's {242} service, and sent to take part in a war which I could not in my conscience see to be unjust, and should the Pope suddenly bid all Catholic soldiers and sailors to retire from the service, here again, taking the advice of others, as best I could, I should not obey him.

What is the use of forming impossible cases? One can find plenty of them in books of casuistry, with the answers attached in respect to them. In an actual case, a Catholic would, of course, not act simply on his own judgment; at the same time, there are supposable cases in which he would be obliged to go by it solely—viz., when his conscience could not be reconciled to any of the courses of action proposed to him by others.

In support of what I have been saying, I refer to one or two weighty authorities:—

Cardinal Turrecremata says, "Although it clearly follows from the circumstance that the Pope can err at times, and command things which must not be done, that we are not to be simply obedient to him in all things, that does not show that he must not be obeyed by all when his commands are good. To know in what cases he is to be obeyed and in what not ... it is said in the Acts of the Apostles, 'One ought to obey God rather than man:' therefore, were the Pope to command anything against Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the truth of the Sacraments, or the commands of the natural or divine law, he ought not to be obeyed, but in such commands is to be passed over (despiciendus)."—Summ. de Eccl., pp. 47, 48.

Bellarmine, speaking of resisting the Pope, says, {243} "In order to resist and defend oneself no authority is required ... Therefore, as it is lawful to resist the Pope, if he assaulted a man's person, so it is lawful to resist him, if he assaulted souls, or troubled the state (turbanti rempublicam), and much more if he strove to destroy the Church. It is lawful, I say, to resist him, by not doing what he commands, and hindering the execution of his will."—De Rom. Pont., ii. 29.

Archbishop Kenrick says, "His power was given for edification, not for destruction. If he uses it from the love of domination (quod absit) scarcely will he meet with obedient populations."—Theolog. Moral., t. i. p. 158.

When, then, Mr. Gladstone asks Catholics how they can obey the Queen and yet obey the Pope, since it may happen that the commands of the two authorities may clash, I answer, that it is my rule, both to obey the one and to obey the other, but that there is no rule in this world without exceptions, and if either the Pope or the Queen demanded of me an "Absolute Obedience," he or she would be transgressing the laws of human society. I give an absolute obedience to neither. Further, if ever this double allegiance pulled me in contrary ways, which in this age of the world I think it never will, then I should decide according to the particular case, which is beyond all rule, and must be decided on its own merits. I should look to see what theologians could do for me, what the Bishops and clergy around me, what my confessor; what friends whom I revered: and if, after all, I could not take their view of {244} the matter, then I must rule myself by my own judgment and my own conscience. But all this is hypothetical and unreal.

Here, of course, it will be objected to me, that I am, after all, having recourse to the Protestant doctrine of Private Judgment; not so; it is the Protestant doctrine that Private Judgment is our ordinary guide in religious matters, but I use it, in the case in question, in very extraordinary and rare, nay, impossible emergencies. Do not the highest Tories thus defend the substitution of William for James II.? It is a great mistake to suppose our state in the Catholic Church is so entirely subjected to rule and system, that we are never thrown upon what is called by divines "the Providence of God." The teaching and assistance of the Church does not supply all conceivable needs, but those which are ordinary; thus, for instance, the sacraments are necessary for dying in the grace of God and hope of heaven, yet, when they cannot be got, acts of faith, hope, and contrition, with the desire for those aids which the dying man has not, will convey in substance what those aids ordinarily convey. And so a Catechumen, not yet baptized, may be saved by his purpose and preparation to receive the rite. And so, again, though "Out of the Church there is no salvation," this does not hold in the case of good men who are in invincible ignorance. And so it is also in the case of our ordinations; Chillingworth and Macau1ay say that it is morally impossible that we should have kept up for 1800 years an Apostolical succession of ministers without some breaks in the chain; and we in answer say that, however true this {245} may be humanly speaking, there has been a special Providence over the Church to secure it. Once more, how else could private Catholics save their souls when there was a Pope and Anti-popes, each severally claiming their allegiance?
' (Letter to the Duke of Norfolk)
Reply
(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.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories...606816.htm

Looks like the pope prayed with muslims  ???
Reply
(01-25-2012, 03:25 PM)TrentCath Wrote: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories...606816.htm

Looks like the pope prayed with muslims  ???

And the world keeps turning, like this is ordinary.

As +Williamson would write... Kyrie eleison, indeed!
Reply
(01-25-2012, 03:29 PM)tmw89 Wrote:
(01-25-2012, 03:25 PM)TrentCath Wrote: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories...606816.htm

Looks like the pope prayed with muslims  ???

And the world keeps turning, like this is ordinary.

As +Williamson would write... Kyrie eleison, indeed!

:amen:
Reply
(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.
Reply
(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.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)