Say what you want about JP2
#11
(08-28-2012, 10:52 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(08-28-2012, 10:50 PM)DrBombay Wrote: I find it ironic (infuriating? sad? sickening?) that JPII steadfastly refused to approve Communion in the Hand for Poland for his entire pontificate then when Benedict got in, that's one of the first things he did.  You plug one hole and three more spring a leak. Meh.  :titanic:
Trolling again?  What's new?

Trolling?  I was just pointing out a fact.
Reply
#12
I, for one, have no desire to pass judgement on the state of any man's soul – living or dead.

How else could John Paul receive but on the tongue? He had parkinson's. Like the picture if you will, but the fact remains that he presided over what can rightly be termed the eclipse of the Church. Take heart, I do, as the sun reappears as bright as ever at the conclusion of a solar eclipse so will the Church's light beam forth mightily once more, but in God's good time.
Reply
#13
He will be Saint John Paul II before long I expect.

Not for me though because at that point I will reject the new church entirely as false and have a jolly good think about what to do.
Reply
#14
(08-29-2012, 07:19 AM)ggreg Wrote: He will be Saint John Paul II before long I expect.

Not for me though because at that point I will reject the new church entirely as false and have a jolly good think about what to do.


Are there any saints that questionable?  Serious question.
Reply
#15
Not that lived in my lifetime and did the things he did.  I'm much more capable of judging him not to be a saint based on direct experience than someone who lived 1000 years ago or someone who lives 1000 years from now.  We know our time and the context of a person's actions in that time.

Ancient saints?  Who knows?  But in 2000 years of Catholic history and with historical study being as complete and thorough as it is, you might think that a diary would have turned up somewhere of a saint that had a particular vice or documented attachment to sin AFTER the church had canonised them.  There are a lot of saints and they are famous in their lifetime, some of them.  It would only take an ex-lover or person who was wronged by them to write it down and bury that document away somewhere.  Or a canonization commission to lose a document in the Vatican archive which turned up a few hundred years later.

As far as I know, nothing like that has ever happened.  You can bet your bottom dollar the forces against the Church would love to be able to show it had.

Whatever JP2 was, he was not a saint, not if the word saint has any meaning or relevance to what it used to mean.  I lived through his entire pontificate and was mature and aware of the issues, debacles and scandals for the entire period.  I have a good memory and I am not a revisionist like some of you.

Of course if we are changing the meaning of words, then I won't be a lapsed Catholic in the traditional sense of the word either.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)