Big Fan of Voris. Done with the "Lesé-majesté " policy
#31
(09-22-2014, 10:25 AM)DJR Wrote: One of the unfortunate aspects of living in "modern" times is the fact that we can know within moments what's happening in other places in the world. In our day, every time a pope sneezes, we have to hear about it.  In times past, there were Catholics who lived and died without having the slightest idea of who occupied the papacy.  Some popes only lasted a couple days, others made it a couple weeks, still others a couple months. 

The average Catholic living in, say, India in the third century (perhaps illiterate) probably had no idea about who was pope and wasn't all that concerned about who was pope or what he had to say on a daily basis.

Yep, that's what I always say. No doubt we live in a different world and we constantly have to adapt to our new environment.. but today I can only describe it as "Pope Frenzy." The social media is still relatively new. Maybe things will quiet down in a decade or two.
Reply
#32
(09-23-2014, 10:38 AM)SCG Wrote: Yep, that's what I always say. No doubt we live in a different world and we constantly have to adapt to our new environment.. but today I can only describe it as "Pope Frenzy." The social media is still relatively new. Maybe things will quiet down in a decade or two.

I remember when some posters on here were all worried early on that Pope Francis was trying to downplay and limit the papacy by referring to himself as the Bishop of Rome (never mind that this title is the most fundamental and theologically important and which constitutes him as "Pope" with all that goes with it).  For better or worse, he actually seems to have papal influence at an all time high, with way more people than I can remember trying to conform themselves to his every breath or even rumor of breath while the faith of others lives and dies with every breath he takes or is rumored to take. :shrug:
Reply
#33
(09-23-2014, 02:00 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote: [Pope Francis] actually seems to have papal influence at an all time high, with way more people than I can remember trying to conform themselves to his every breath or even rumor of breath while the faith of others lives and dies with every breath he takes or is rumored to take. :shrug:

SaintSebastian, that's brilliant! I might have to copy that in my sig line, giving you credit of course.

:LOL:
Reply
#34
(09-23-2014, 02:00 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote: I remember when some posters on here were all worried early on that Pope Francis was trying to downplay and limit the papacy by referring to himself as the Bishop of Rome (never mind that this title is the most fundamental and theologically important and which constitutes him as "Pope" with all that goes with it).  For better or worse, he actually seems to have papal influence at an all time high, with way more people than I can remember trying to conform themselves to his every breath or even rumor of breath while the faith of others lives and dies with every breath he takes or is rumored to take. :shrug:
Papal infallibility has been carried to an all-time high, by some trads and Modernists alike.
Reply
#35
I wasn't on the forum when Benedict was still Pope, so I don't know what sort of thing went on. The only Catholic media I followed was from a rather traditional, popular NO priest from around here. And when Benedict was Pope he would always appeal to the Pope in matters of Liturgy, morals, and so on; there was indeed this rock that one could count on, that would, imperfectly as it might be, follow Jesus direction to feed His sheep.
In the secular media the news on the Pope were scarce. The only scandal he caused journalists around here was when he said Catholics should not vote on politicians that support abortion. So, pretty tame stuff.
Not so with Pope Francis: we cannot appeal to him even in the most uncontroversial of matters, say, that a person in mortal sin should not approach the Eucharist, or that people should convert to Roman Catholicism, or that they should seek sanctity. He constantly mocks and belittles traditional minded Catholics (and I'm talking not only of the likes of me, but also NO folks that have a sense of tradition and are in their way good Catholics), he says that the Roman Rite is a mere fashion, so on and so forth.
Things start to add up and one gets consternated. So its not like faith is dying because of every rumor of every breath of the Pope, but its not the role of the Pope to shake things up, to cause confusion and doubt.
Its like someone (old enough to remember) said recently: after Vatican II its not that many left the Church, but rather the Church left them. One day the Church just disappeared.
To downplay this situation is to mock faithful people that were always faithful, generations of them; you know, because we are too obtuse not to get Pastor Aeternus.

How can we be the Church Militant if we diligently ignore everything the Pope says (mind you, not only in unrecorded interviews, but in documents like Evangelii Gaudium) and does? How can we combat heretic priests when they have now support from Rome?
And can we really do that? Could people just live peaceably when the NO was forced at every parish? Was this an option?
You know, maybe neo-catholics will understand the bitterness of trads when, God willing, some future Pope just banish the NO and forces every Sunday Mass to be a solemn Tridentine Mass. Then they will be able to complain about us being so cranky.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)