To all forum members: Criticism of priests
#41
LaRoza Wrote:Yes, but calling him a heretic on the forum and wishing he is excommunicated is definately not the answer.

Not for a parish priest, but it may be appropriate for a Cardinal who denigrates the liturgy, makes quasi-heretical statements, etc., repeatedly and in public from his dignity as a Prince of the Church and a Bishop.

Thus the line in Canon Law

without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons

If a Bishop is going around making people believe objectively sinful behavior, and behavior in his diocsese is the type that is continually restricted by the Holy See (e.g., liturgical dancing), and it is not only allowed but encouraged, then the advantage goes towards not keeping silent since it is a scandal of the faithful.

That said, there is certain amount of reverence towards the office that is required and we shouldn't talk about bishops who delve in heresy the same way we gossip around the office water cooler.

There is a balance. If we find ourselves delighting in scandal, such as Fr. Moderator seems to do at Traditio, then that is wrong.  But bringing scandal to light and calling superiors to task in an appropriate manner with respect for their office is in no way a problem, at least in my mind.


Reply
#42
LaRoza Wrote:
QuisUtDeus Wrote:I think Doc was being sarcastic.

I saw some other people claiming it was the work of Satan and demonic in nature (their claims were based on either vague words, possibly antiquated passages, which I cannot blame or just disagreement)

I got it because it contains many devotions which I want to keep handy including the St. Michael's Chaplet.

Oh, then maybe you're right and he was serious.  It's hard to tell online a lot of times...
Reply
#43
QuisUtDeus Wrote:Oh, then maybe you're right and he was serious.  It's hard to tell online a lot of times...

Yeah, the book is pretty good mostly, citing the history and approval and dates of various devotions and papal quotations and imprimaturs, but some of them are vaguely cited or not at all. Most are though.
Reply
#44
LaRoza Wrote:
DrBombay Wrote:Yeah, that Pieta book is bad news. Best to stay away.

Evidence and reasoning?

I got it because it had the text of prayers I wanted but were never in the same easily used book before. It seems to be a bit out of date though, but out of date isn't bad when you know what has changed.

It's like that AQ link says. It's superstitious and heretical in spots and, might I add, absurd and ridiculous in others.

I'm sure you're knowledgable enough about the faith to separate the wheat from the chaff but many folks won't be.
Reply
#45
DrBombay Wrote:It's like that AQ link says. It's superstitious and heretical in spots and, might I add, absurd and ridiculous in others.
Which spots? I think that site is misrepresenting the book, or referring to another book.

The issues are in the priest quote, which may be shaky because but that could just be explained by time. What was the situation like at the time of publishing?

Also, the promises of St. Bridget are odd. It wouldn't be the first time something was improperly translated, as the Divine Mercy devotion was condemned by the Church for a time because of a misunderstanding due to translation issues.

Reply
#46
LaRoza Wrote:
DrBombay Wrote:It's like that AQ link says. It's superstitious and heretical in spots and, might I add, absurd and ridiculous in others.
Which spots? I think that site is misrepresenting the book, or referring to another book.

The issues are in the priest quote, which may be shaky because but that could just be explained by time. What was the situation like at the time of publishing?

Also, the promises of St. Bridget are odd. It wouldn't be the first time something was improperly translated, as the Divine Mercy devotion was condemned by the Church for a time because of a misunderstanding due to translation issues.

Ugh. I'm gonna have to go dig up my copy, it's in the garage somewhere. I'll get back to you.
Reply
#47
DrBombay Wrote:Ugh. I'm gonna have to go dig up my copy, it's in the garage somewhere. I'll get back to you.

I'm going to bed, so don't go out of your way :)

Reply
#48
LaRoza, how do you reconcile with what you said with what Jesus said?:

"15. But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
16 . And if he will not hear thee, join with thee besides, one or two: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.
17. And if he will not hear them, tell the Church. And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the Publican." (Matthew 18:15-17)
Reply
#49
Slayer Wrote:LaRoza, how do you reconcile with what you said with what Jesus said?:

"15. But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
16 . And if he will not hear thee, join with thee besides, one or two: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.
17. And if he will not hear them, tell the Church. And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the Publican." (Matthew 18:15-17)

I did not say I took the quotations I posted as dogma, only the point.

I could remove them entirely from the post and still not lose meaning. Those rules do not conflict with what I said.
Reply
#50
"But when Cephas was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." Even St. Paul criticized St. Peter, the first pope!

"Mutter Vogel" should be given absolutely no credence and the only place where this appears, is the Pieta booklet which is full of false and heretical promises.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)