Trad beef with JPII
#31
(12-26-2010, 03:19 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:15 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 02:58 PM)violet Wrote: I heard it said that he was a good theologian but not a great leader.

I think that's more trying to build a reasonable legacy for him than fact.

He was charismatic and never made too many enemies because he bent like a reed in the wind.  People liked him and have attributed "good theologian" and "the Great" to him for no other reason, really, than he was likable.  And he certainly was likable and charismatic, but that's not really what being a priest let alone the Pope is about.

You don't like his theology?  Everything he has ever written seems to be HUGE part of modern Catholic thought and culture. 

...and that is a HUGE part of the problem.  I have respect for the Papacy as an office, but I have no qualms in saying that John Paul II may be the worst pope the Church has ever had.  He promoted the new, false religion of Vatican II almost exclusively (in a fallible way) while filling the role of the Guardian of Truth, rarely using his position to defend truth other than anti-abortion sentiment.  His "theology" is centered around man, not God.  His countless encyclicals deal mostly with man's dignity, which is seen today as a major doctrine in the new religion, since it is the objective of the destroyers of the Church to worship man over God.
Reply
#32
(12-28-2010, 06:48 PM)Nic Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:19 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:15 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 02:58 PM)violet Wrote: I heard it said that he was a good theologian but not a great leader.

I think that's more trying to build a reasonable legacy for him than fact.

He was charismatic and never made too many enemies because he bent like a reed in the wind.  People liked him and have attributed "good theologian" and "the Great" to him for no other reason, really, than he was likable.  And he certainly was likable and charismatic, but that's not really what being a priest let alone the Pope is about.

You don't like his theology?  Everything he has ever written seems to be HUGE part of modern Catholic thought and culture. 

...and that is a HUGE part of the problem.  I have respect for the Papacy as an office, but I have no qualms in saying that John Paul II may be the worst pope the Church has ever had.  He promoted the new, false religion of Vatican II almost exclusively (in a fallible way) while filling the role of the Guardian of Truth, rarely using his position to defend truth other than anti-abortion sentiment.  His "theology" is centered around man, not God.  His countless encyclicals deal mostly with man's dignity, which is seen today as a major doctrine in the new religion, since it is the objective of the destroyers of the Church to worship man over God.

What do you mean by "False religion" of VII?

Doesn't man have dignity?  Is there something heretical about that?  Doesn't man have dignity in so far as He reflects God's nature?

Reply
#33
(12-28-2010, 08:05 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 06:48 PM)Nic Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:19 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:15 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 02:58 PM)violet Wrote: I heard it said that he was a good theologian but not a great leader.

I think that's more trying to build a reasonable legacy for him than fact.

He was charismatic and never made too many enemies because he bent like a reed in the wind.  People liked him and have attributed "good theologian" and "the Great" to him for no other reason, really, than he was likable.  And he certainly was likable and charismatic, but that's not really what being a priest let alone the Pope is about.

You don't like his theology?  Everything he has ever written seems to be HUGE part of modern Catholic thought and culture. 

...and that is a HUGE part of the problem.  I have respect for the Papacy as an office, but I have no qualms in saying that John Paul II may be the worst pope the Church has ever had.  He promoted the new, false religion of Vatican II almost exclusively (in a fallible way) while filling the role of the Guardian of Truth, rarely using his position to defend truth other than anti-abortion sentiment.  His "theology" is centered around man, not God.  His countless encyclicals deal mostly with man's dignity, which is seen today as a major doctrine in the new religion, since it is the objective of the destroyers of the Church to worship man over God.

What do you mean by "False religion" of VII?

Doesn't man have dignity?  Is there something heretical about that?  Doesn't man have dignity in so far as He reflects God's nature?

Oh my, it sounds like you haven't read alot of stuff on this forum or website.  Welcome to a website that views Vatican II as bad, as well as the Novus Ordo Mass(Ordinary Form).  I would imagine one of the biggest problems that some traditionalists would have with Pope John Paul II is the fact that he declared Archbishop LeFebvre and the current Bishops of the SSPX as having automatically excommunicated themselves by participating in the Ritual when they were consecrated as Bishops, against the express wishes of Pope John Paul II.  There is a healthy contingency here of people who attend SSPX Masses only.

Welcome, Violet!
Reply
#34
(12-28-2010, 08:51 PM)lumine Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 08:05 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 06:48 PM)Nic Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:19 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:15 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 02:58 PM)violet Wrote: I heard it said that he was a good theologian but not a great leader.

I think that's more trying to build a reasonable legacy for him than fact.

He was charismatic and never made too many enemies because he bent like a reed in the wind.  People liked him and have attributed "good theologian" and "the Great" to him for no other reason, really, than he was likable.  And he certainly was likable and charismatic, but that's not really what being a priest let alone the Pope is about.

You don't like his theology?  Everything he has ever written seems to be HUGE part of modern Catholic thought and culture. 

...and that is a HUGE part of the problem.  I have respect for the Papacy as an office, but I have no qualms in saying that John Paul II may be the worst pope the Church has ever had.  He promoted the new, false religion of Vatican II almost exclusively (in a fallible way) while filling the role of the Guardian of Truth, rarely using his position to defend truth other than anti-abortion sentiment.  His "theology" is centered around man, not God.  His countless encyclicals deal mostly with man's dignity, which is seen today as a major doctrine in the new religion, since it is the objective of the destroyers of the Church to worship man over God.

What do you mean by "False religion" of VII?

Doesn't man have dignity?  Is there something heretical about that?  Doesn't man have dignity in so far as He reflects God's nature?

Oh my, it sounds like you haven't read alot of stuff on this forum or website.  Welcome to a website that views Vatican II as bad, as well as the Novus Ordo Mass(Ordinary Form).  I would imagine one of the biggest problems that some traditionalists would have with Pope John Paul II is the fact that he declared Archbishop LeFebvre and the current Bishops of the SSPX as having automatically excommunicated themselves by participating in the Ritual when they were consecrated as Bishops, against the express wishes of Pope John Paul II.  There is a healthy contingency here of people who attend SSPX Masses only.

Welcome, Violet!

I read some of it.  The one describing Traditionalists didn't say much specifically about "dignity" or Vatican II other than it isn't their favorite.
Reply
#35
BTW I am currently working through all the links posted. 
Reply
#36
(12-28-2010, 09:28 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 08:51 PM)lumine Wrote: Oh my, it sounds like you haven't read alot of stuff on this forum or website.  Welcome to a website that views Vatican II as bad, as well as the Novus Ordo Mass(Ordinary Form).  I would imagine one of the biggest problems that some traditionalists would have with Pope John Paul II is the fact that he declared Archbishop LeFebvre and the current Bishops of the SSPX as having automatically excommunicated themselves by participating in the Ritual when they were consecrated as Bishops, against the express wishes of Pope John Paul II.  There is a healthy contingency here of people who attend SSPX Masses only.

Welcome, Violet!

I read some of it.  The one describing Traditionalists didn't say much specifically about "dignity" or Vatican II other than it isn't their favorite.

You'll also notice that some of the people that haunt CAF and engage in JP2 worship pop in from time to time.  They like to believe that people are only upset about JP2 because of the excoms while ignoring stuff like this:

A topless tribal woman giving the reading at a papal mass (though, in her defense, she does have her head covered).

[Image: newguinea.jpg]

The Pope kissing the Koran.

[Image: john_paul_ii_quran.jpg]

Etc.

They're trying to distract from reality.  Trads disliked JP2 long before the excoms, and with good reason.
Reply
#37
(12-29-2010, 04:49 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 09:28 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 08:51 PM)lumine Wrote: Oh my, it sounds like you haven't read alot of stuff on this forum or website.  Welcome to a website that views Vatican II as bad, as well as the Novus Ordo Mass(Ordinary Form).  I would imagine one of the biggest problems that some traditionalists would have with Pope John Paul II is the fact that he declared Archbishop LeFebvre and the current Bishops of the SSPX as having automatically excommunicated themselves by participating in the Ritual when they were consecrated as Bishops, against the express wishes of Pope John Paul II.  There is a healthy contingency here of people who attend SSPX Masses only.

Welcome, Violet!

I read some of it.  The one describing Traditionalists didn't say much specifically about "dignity" or Vatican II other than it isn't their favorite.

You'll also notice that some of the people that haunt CAF and engage in JP2 worship pop in from time to time.  They like to believe that people are only upset about JP2 because of the excoms while ignoring stuff like this:


I don't haunt CAF, and I don't post there, either; however I do pop in here once in a while.
Reply
#38
(12-29-2010, 05:46 PM)lumine Wrote:
(12-29-2010, 04:49 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 09:28 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 08:51 PM)lumine Wrote: Oh my, it sounds like you haven't read alot of stuff on this forum or website.  Welcome to a website that views Vatican II as bad, as well as the Novus Ordo Mass(Ordinary Form).  I would imagine one of the biggest problems that some traditionalists would have with Pope John Paul II is the fact that he declared Archbishop LeFebvre and the current Bishops of the SSPX as having automatically excommunicated themselves by participating in the Ritual when they were consecrated as Bishops, against the express wishes of Pope John Paul II.  There is a healthy contingency here of people who attend SSPX Masses only.

Welcome, Violet!

I read some of it.  The one describing Traditionalists didn't say much specifically about "dignity" or Vatican II other than it isn't their favorite.

You'll also notice that some of the people that haunt CAF and engage in JP2 worship pop in from time to time.  They like to believe that people are only upset about JP2 because of the excoms while ignoring stuff like this:


I don't haunt CAF, and I don't post there, either; however I do pop in here once in a while.

OK, thanks for clarifying.
Reply
#39
(12-28-2010, 08:05 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-28-2010, 06:48 PM)Nic Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:19 PM)violet Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 03:15 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(12-26-2010, 02:58 PM)violet Wrote: I heard it said that he was a good theologian but not a great leader.

I think that's more trying to build a reasonable legacy for him than fact.

He was charismatic and never made too many enemies because he bent like a reed in the wind.  People liked him and have attributed "good theologian" and "the Great" to him for no other reason, really, than he was likable.  And he certainly was likable and charismatic, but that's not really what being a priest let alone the Pope is about.

You don't like his theology?  Everything he has ever written seems to be HUGE part of modern Catholic thought and culture. 

...and that is a HUGE part of the problem.  I have respect for the Papacy as an office, but I have no qualms in saying that John Paul II may be the worst pope the Church has ever had.  He promoted the new, false religion of Vatican II almost exclusively (in a fallible way) while filling the role of the Guardian of Truth, rarely using his position to defend truth other than anti-abortion sentiment.  His "theology" is centered around man, not God.  His countless encyclicals deal mostly with man's dignity, which is seen today as a major doctrine in the new religion, since it is the objective of the destroyers of the Church to worship man over God.

What do you mean by "False religion" of VII?

Doesn't man have dignity?  Is there something heretical about that?  Doesn't man have dignity in so far as He reflects God's nature?

I mean that after Vatican II, a false religion was instituted within the "official structure" of the Church and has existed side-by-side with the True Religion for 50 years now.  Since then, the false religion has blended somewhat with the true, thus creating the massive confusion we see today.  Something VERY similar happened about 1500 years ago - look into it, it is called the Arian Crisis, when nearly all of the Church conformed to Arianism (like today with "the spirit of Vatican II" and Modernism).
Reply
#40
My concern: Pope John Paul II has consistently represented some of the most visible and most easily-identifiable modernist and liberal elements of the post-conciliar Church.    He has repeatedly been a voice for the problems, rather than the solutions plaguing Holy Mother Church today, and forfeited legitimate  authentic Catholic teaching in return for a new 'liturgical revival' essentially speaking, he WAS the Spirit of Vatican II, all the negative changes associated with Second Vatican were somehow manifested by JPII throughout his long and troubled reign.

He failed to defend the Church to the highest degree, as the Holy Roman Pontiff should, he opened the doors (and indeed failed to close them in the first place), flooding Holy Mother Church with sin and immorality both literally (his 'dancers' in the Lateran and St Peters), and figuratively (by failing to condemn prevalent heresies of the time).  Often lauded for his staunch conservatism in regards to birth control and abortion, this is indeed pretty shallow as I can't think of a modern Pontiff who was expressly for these things.  So, basically, John Paul II represents some of the most dangerous problems within Holy Mother Church today.  Indeed, as the most visible and identifiable Catholic within the world, he should be expressly visible as a sign of staunch and timeless tradition, rather than youthful revival and rejuvenation.

He's subverted the minds of Catholic youth and his papacy gave birth to the Charismatic movement, youth liturgical revivalism, and a host of other less-than-Catholic practices.  Other than the fact that some of his writing is ludicrous, that is  ;D
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)