Synod on the Family
#11
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.


I will also say a lot of the hysteria over the potential loosening of the practices for remarried Catholics is most likely unfounded. The Orthodox Churches have had essentially the same practice Cardinal Kasper seems to be pushing since well before the Schism and it hasn't led to female priests or gay marriage or sanctioned abortion. I mean I can understand where the fear comes from because you look at western churches such as the Anglican Church and assume if you make any adjustments in pastoral approach that's the road you are going to go down. That isn't necessarily so.
Reply
#12
It would be great indeed if the Pope had this sort of power: modernism would be thoroughly gone in the beginning of the 20th century, we wouldn't have to worry about liberation theology, Pope Benedict would never have had to clarify his motu proprio because it would be obeyed from the very beginning.
This pattern of blind obedience and exultation of the more liberal rules and acts and the utter resistance to anything traditional the Popes propose, suggests that if the Pope was able to, say, destroy the Liturgy, it was only because most bishops were willing to do so -- precisely because they have shown themselves able to resist the Pope in other matters.

I really doubt that the problem lies in the structure of government; I think the crisis has another, more profound locus, with more sinister origins than merely inefficient hierarchy.
This is too naive of an hypothesis, and worst of all, it excuses one of the fight, because I suspect the Orthodoxes will not resist the lures of Western nihilism much better (I already know plenty of cases of Easterners parish-shopping, no rules for communion, communion for not only gays but gay-married gays, with approval of bishops, so on and so forth).


Polishtrad,
Wouldn't it be better Mass of St. John XXIII vs Mass of we-don't-know-his-whereabouts Paul VI?
Reply
#13
(10-05-2014, 02:19 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.


I will also say a lot of the hysteria over the potential loosening of the practices for remarried Catholics is most likely unfounded. The Orthodox Churches have had essentially the same practice Cardinal Kasper seems to be pushing since well before the Schism and it hasn't led to female priests or gay marriage or sanctioned abortion. I mean I can understand where the fear comes from because you look at western churches such as the Anglican Church and assume if you make any adjustments in pastoral approach that's the road you are going to go down. That isn't necessarily so.

The fear is not of a slippery-slope, but rather the fear of disobeying the Lord and os sacrilegy.
Reply
#14
(10-05-2014, 02:33 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 02:19 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.


I will also say a lot of the hysteria over the potential loosening of the practices for remarried Catholics is most likely unfounded. The Orthodox Churches have had essentially the same practice Cardinal Kasper seems to be pushing since well before the Schism and it hasn't led to female priests or gay marriage or sanctioned abortion. I mean I can understand where the fear comes from because you look at western churches such as the Anglican Church and assume if you make any adjustments in pastoral approach that's the road you are going to go down. That isn't necessarily so.

The fear is not of a slippery-slope, but rather the fear of disobeying the Lord and os sacrilegy.



That may be your fear but I've read the slippery slope argument countless times since these discussions began. I will say I didn't think any drastic changes were going to happen but after reading some of the things Pope Francis has said over the past few days I've completely changed my mind. Hopefully the bishops will listen to him. Of course that's one of the perks of being Supreme Pontiff, you can do whatever you want and nobody can stop you.  8-)
Reply
#15
(10-05-2014, 02:49 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 02:33 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 02:19 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.


I will also say a lot of the hysteria over the potential loosening of the practices for remarried Catholics is most likely unfounded. The Orthodox Churches have had essentially the same practice Cardinal Kasper seems to be pushing since well before the Schism and it hasn't led to female priests or gay marriage or sanctioned abortion. I mean I can understand where the fear comes from because you look at western churches such as the Anglican Church and assume if you make any adjustments in pastoral approach that's the road you are going to go down. That isn't necessarily so.

The fear is not of a slippery-slope, but rather the fear of disobeying the Lord and os sacrilegy.



That may be your fear but I've read the slippery slope argument countless times since these discussions began. I will say I didn't think any drastic changes were going to happen but after reading some of the things Pope Francis has said over the past few days I've completely changed my mind. Hopefully the bishops will listen to him. Of course that's one of the perks of being Supreme Pontiff, you can do whatever you want and nobody can stop you.  8-)

I'm sorry, I should have said the main fears are those. Of course I think practically it would be a disaster.
Reply
#16
Both the Synod and the beatification seem like bad ideas, the former during the current Pontificate, the latter just in general, at least until more time passes. The intellectual climate in the Church is probably in some ways better than it was on the eve of Vatican II but the current liberal Jesuit papacy and the media frenzy doesn't bode well for this Synod. The beatification is just not appropriate, especially considering there's really nothing redeeming about Paul VI, and especially considering he was the one most responsible for allowing and or promoting some of the most heinous post concilar novelties like the committee led and committee fabricated liturgy. Humanae Vitae and being a romantic melancholic character who didn't lead is not sanctity, it's tragedy. Humanae Vitae may have been heroic but if that's all he's got it's not really saint worthy.

The sad thing is the only reason for these frenzied beatifications is to further sanctify the Second Vatican Council,an event that history will show was just as much a rupture with tradition as the Protestant Reformation.
Reply
#17
(10-05-2014, 02:57 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 02:49 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 02:33 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 02:19 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.


I will also say a lot of the hysteria over the potential loosening of the practices for remarried Catholics is most likely unfounded. The Orthodox Churches have had essentially the same practice Cardinal Kasper seems to be pushing since well before the Schism and it hasn't led to female priests or gay marriage or sanctioned abortion. I mean I can understand where the fear comes from because you look at western churches such as the Anglican Church and assume if you make any adjustments in pastoral approach that's the road you are going to go down. That isn't necessarily so.

The fear is not of a slippery-slope, but rather the fear of disobeying the Lord and os sacrilegy.



That may be your fear but I've read the slippery slope argument countless times since these discussions began. I will say I didn't think any drastic changes were going to happen but after reading some of the things Pope Francis has said over the past few days I've completely changed my mind. Hopefully the bishops will listen to him. Of course that's one of the perks of being Supreme Pontiff, you can do whatever you want and nobody can stop you.  8-)

I'm sorry, I should have said the main fears are those. Of course I think practically it would be a disaster.



That just simply hasn't been our experience. Of course I can appreciate why you might feel that way.
Reply
#18
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.

The decentralizations of the East did not prevent them from adopting the heresies of remarriage and abortion/contraception. In fact as someone has already noted, the East has already adopted what Kasper is only now starting to try to push onto the West. "Oikonomia" for Marriage is a roman liberalism, but a greek "orthodoxy".
Reply
#19
(10-05-2014, 03:31 PM)1seeker Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.

The decentralizations of the East did not prevent them from adopting the heresies of remarriage and abortion/contraception. In fact as someone has already noted, the East has already adopted what Kasper is only now starting to try to push onto the West. "Oikonomia" for Marriage is a roman liberalism, but a greek "orthodoxy".


Well that's simply not accurate. No Orthodox Church allows abortion. Not sure where you got that from. As to the issue of remarriage the current Orthodox practice has essentially been in place since well before the schism, some 1500 years longer than the current Roman Catholic practice of annulments. In other words the Catholic Church had the current Orthodox practice for almost 600 years.  :)
Reply
#20
(10-05-2014, 03:31 PM)1seeker Wrote:
(10-05-2014, 01:50 PM)Klemens Wrote: All we can do is pray for the sanity of those participating in the Synod. Everything rests in our Lord's hands. Even scandalous canonisations have been willed by our Lord. However, being the realpolitik person that I am, I cannot help but think that these modernist developments have resulted from the inherent flaw of centralisation within the Latin Church, as exemplified by the post-Conciliar revolution. I frequently find myself believing in the superiority of Orthodox ecclesiology precisely because of its de-centralised structure. Other factors contribute to this „Byzantofilia", yet this doubt about the necessity of Roman supremacy always provides a seemingly rational and objective pull toward the East. I hope that these comments are not taken with offence, as I know that many on this forum would strongly object to such questions.

The decentralizations of the East did not prevent them from adopting the heresies of remarriage and abortion/contraception. In fact as someone has already noted, the East has already adopted what Kasper is only now starting to try to push onto the West. "Oikonomia" for Marriage is a roman liberalism, but a greek "orthodoxy".

Abortion and contraception might get a nod and a wink from some Orthodox priests and hierarchs but neither were historically considered acceptable and most traditional/ conservative Orthodox would not be supportive of either. As far as divorce and remarriage goes, the  position of the Orthodox is justified based on their own reading of scripture and tradition but some of the complete laxity and nonchalance about the issue is actually more a modern phenomenon.

Orthodoxy, for the most part,has kept to traditions and customs long since abandoned by the West and all in the midst of horrific Muslim and communist persecution and all without the papacy.  Is the divorce/remarriage thing any better just because it's called an "annulment" and justified through legalistic verbiage in the Roman Catholic Church?

The claims of the East, especially in light of the collapse of The Roman Catholic Church in the mid 20th century even with the papacy, are compelling and will not go away.  For some of us the triumphalist apologetics of Roman Catholics so popular in the pre conciliar era are not convincing in light of the Catholic about face of Vatican 2. 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)