Poll: How do you feel about the new pope, Pope Francis?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
15
0%
0 0%
13
0%
0 0%
41
0%
0 0%
5
0%
0 0%
1
0%
0 0%
Total 0 vote(s) 0%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Poll. Pope Francis: Impressed? Unimpressed?
#31
I love him. He'll be excellent.
Reply
#32
(03-16-2013, 12:26 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: I think back to Blessed Pius IX who was considered an extreme liberal, almost a revolutionary, upon his election...

That isn't true.  In fact, Pius IX is on record complaining about the lies of the Freemasons who claimed him as one of their own.  Nothing in his record supported their claims, they just lied.

Unfortunately, Bergoglio's record is undeniable.  He really is a liberal, to say the least!

(03-16-2013, 12:26 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: What bothers me about Pope Francis is his extreme pride. Pride in how humble he is. 'Look at me! I'm so humble I won't wear the appropriate garb when I come out onto the balcony. Look at me! I ride the bus with the Cardinals. Look at me! I take an ordinary car to pay my hotel bill in person.' Now his false humility goes beyond himself. 'Look at me! I'm so humble I won't let the Cardinals wear their appropriate garb when I meet with them.'

C.S. Lewis dealt with this sort of false humility in the Screwtape Letters for those who have read them. I am extremely worried that his pride may undo much of the good that Papa Emeritus did. At the very least his false humility is denigrating the Petrine Office. As somebody pointed out in another thread, the garb, ceremonial, etc. are not to meant glorify the man holding the Office, they are to give appropriate dignity to that Office. He is continuing the denigration of the Petrine Office begun by his immediate predecessors in refusing Coronation, suppressing the Roman Nobility and their part in Papal ceremony, etc.

May God have mercy on his Church!

Absolutely dead on!
Reply
#33
(03-16-2013, 12:27 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote:
(03-16-2013, 08:24 AM)TerraMariana Wrote: You mentioned previously that on another thread somebody pointed out that all the outer trappings of being a Pope are not to meant glorify the man holding the Office, but are to give appropriate dignity to that Office. Do you (or anybody else) remember on which thread that was? I thought that person put it very well but when I tried to find the post later I wasn't able to. 

Could this be what you're looking for?
rbjmartin Wrote:What bothers me about prelates who forsake the dignities of their office is that they mistake those dignities as their own to give up. They are not. They belong to the office and to the Church. A priest has no right to tell his parishioners to "just call me Joe." No, it is the right of the faithful to call him "Father." It is not the right of a bishop to discourage the faithful from calling him "Excellency." Again, it is our right to honor the office (not the man). I will kiss any bishop's ring, no matter how notorious a bastard he may be, because I honor his office.

It is not humility to surrender dignities that don't belong to you. Nemo dat quod non habet.

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...sg33878699

Thanks, PPE, that's exactly the quote I was referring too. :)
Reply
#34
(03-16-2013, 02:56 PM)John Lane Wrote: That isn't true.  In fact, Pius IX is on record complaining about the lies of the Freemasons who claimed him as one of their own.  Nothing in his record supported their claims, they just lied.

While Pius IX was certainly no freemason, many of the rumors swirling about Pope Francis are about as well supported as the rumors regarding Pius IX at the time of his elevation.

That said, Mr. Lane how do you explain some of Pius IX's early actions which were perceived as very liberal: the abolishment of the requirement that Jews attend sermons meant at their conversion several times a year in the Papal lands, the opening of the ghetto, the establishment of an elected assembly in the Papal lands (the only pontiff that has ever shared his temporal power with the people was Pius IX), the freeing of untold numbers of revolutionaries from the prisons (to the shock and horror of the Hapsburgs who rightly predicted that Pius would live to regret this), the dispensation of the papal treasury to feed the poor, and his donation of stone to help build the Washington monument.

These are all things that happened during the first few years of his papacy.  

It should also be noted that the establishment of an elected assembly in the Papal Lands in turn forced the other Italian states to do likewise.  

When the King of France complained about the generous grant of liberty to the press that Pius had granted he replied "tell the King of France I do not remember ever interfering with the Parisian journals."

Pius IX was also the first pontiff since the late 15th century to accept a muslim envoy, and yes it was noted by the whole world.  In addition, Pius IX also invited Protestant princes to the Vatican, to much notice. 

Somehow I think if these forums existed in 1847, I doubt everyone would be posting rousing cheers about these actions. Especially given the rumors about his freemasonic background I bet people would not be happy about that stone to help build a monument to a freemason.  
Reply
#35
(03-16-2013, 04:19 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(03-16-2013, 02:56 PM)John Lane Wrote: That isn't true.  In fact, Pius IX is on record complaining about the lies of the Freemasons who claimed him as one of their own.  Nothing in his record supported their claims, they just lied.

While Pius IX was certainly no freemason, many of the rumors swirling about Pope Francis are about as well supported as the rumors regarding Pius IX at the time of his elevation.

That said, Mr. Lane how do you explain some of Pius IX's early actions which were perceived as very liberal: the abolishment of the requirement that Jews attend sermons meant at their conversion several times a year in the Papal lands, the opening of the ghetto, the establishment of an elected assembly in the Papal lands (the only pontiff that has ever shared his temporal power with the people was Pius IX), the freeing of untold numbers of revolutionaries from the prisons (to the shock and horror of the Hapsburgs who rightly predicted that Pius would live to regret this), the dispensation of the papal treasury to feed the poor, and his donation of stone to help build the Washington monument.

These are all things that happened during the first few years of his papacy.  

It should also be noted that the establishment of an elected assembly in the Papal Lands in turn forced the other Italian states to do likewise.  

When the King of France complained about the generous grant of liberty to the press that Pius had granted he replied "tell the King of France I do not remember ever interfering with the Parisian journals."

Pius IX was also the first pontiff since the late 15th century to accept a muslin envoy, and yes it was noted by the whole world.  

Somehow I think if these forums existed in 1847, I doubt everyone would be posting rousing cheers about these actions. Especially given the rumors about his freemasonic background I bet people would not be happy about that stone to help build a monument to a freemason.  

Thank you, Someone. I never claimed he was a Freemason, just that his actions before and for awhile after his election were those of, for the times, an extreme liberal, bordering on the revolutionary.
Reply
#36
(03-16-2013, 12:27 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote:
(03-16-2013, 08:24 AM)TerraMariana Wrote: You mentioned previously that on another thread somebody pointed out that all the outer trappings of being a Pope are not to meant glorify the man holding the Office, but are to give appropriate dignity to that Office. Do you (or anybody else) remember on which thread that was? I thought that person put it very well but when I tried to find the post later I wasn't able to. 

Could this be what you're looking for?
rbjmartin Wrote:What bothers me about prelates who forsake the dignities of their office is that they mistake those dignities as their own to give up. They are not. They belong to the office and to the Church. A priest has no right to tell his parishioners to "just call me Joe." No, it is the right of the faithful to call him "Father." It is not the right of a bishop to discourage the faithful from calling him "Excellency." Again, it is our right to honor the office (not the man). I will kiss any bishop's ring, no matter how notorious a bastard he may be, because I honor his office.

It is not humility to surrender dignities that don't belong to you. Nemo dat quod non habet.

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...sg33878699

Thank you, per passionem eius
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)