Francis ridicules "traditionalists" in final "Sin-od" speech
#21
(10-19-2014, 05:28 AM)PolishTrad Wrote:
"DJR" Wrote:which was at one time condemned by none other than Pope Paul VI (albeit he reversed himself later during the same year).
"Renatus Frater" Wrote:(you mean the merciful Kasper, who didn't hesitate to lie and throw a man's carreer under the bus, and basically just dismissed the Africans because they are orthodox? Yes, the liberals are such good people).
Could you guys elaborate? This sounds interesting.

In the spring of 1972 (you weren't around then, but unfortunately I was), Pope Paul VI publicly condemned the Charismatic movement.  In December of that year, there was a statement reversing the condemnation, which led many to opine whether the reputed rumors of an impostor were true, as it was precisely the year 1972 that was mentioned by one of the seers of Fatima.
Reply
#22
A most interesting theme - - I believe now that it is time we open a new thread, to redefine traditionalism, under the lights of all the ups and downs we have gone through since the beginning of this site.
Reply
#23
(10-19-2014, 01:31 PM)DJR Wrote:
(10-19-2014, 05:28 AM)PolishTrad Wrote:
"DJR" Wrote:which was at one time condemned by none other than Pope Paul VI (albeit he reversed himself later during the same year).
"Renatus Frater" Wrote:(you mean the merciful Kasper, who didn't hesitate to lie and throw a man's carreer under the bus, and basically just dismissed the Africans because they are orthodox? Yes, the liberals are such good people).
Could you guys elaborate? This sounds interesting.

In the spring of 1972 (you weren't around then, but unfortunately I was), Pope Paul VI publicly condemned the Charismatic movement.  In December of that year, there was a statement reversing the condemnation, which led many to opine whether the reputed rumors of an impostor were true, as it was precisely the year 1972 that was mentioned by one of the seers of Fatima.


Pope Paul VI is sometimes referred to as the Hamlet of the Catholic Church.

Neopelagianus
Reply
#24
[size=10pt]But the synod didn't deal with "attitudes"; it dealt with teachings and praxis.  It wasn't talking about "attitudes," so if the pope is speaking about "attitudes," he missed the discussions going on all around him. We're talking about orthodoxy versus heresy, and what he heard by many of his prelates was nothing but heresy.

Cardinal Burke said the pope is doing great damage to the Church.  An African cardinal basically said the same thing.  Do you agree with their assessments? The pope's idea regarding "traditionalists" is a bogeyman on his part.  It doesn't exist.  How is traditionalism, as the pope views it, a deformation of "a via media"? And who is he speaking about?  Let's name some names so we can get an idea of whose attitude we're supposed to avoid.

What he, and apparently others, don't seem to understand is that "traditionalism" IS the via media.  Other tendencies, like the pope's friends apparently propose, are actually deviations from the Faith, in other words, heresies. This pope, when he was an archbishop, attended a Charismatic conference attended by Catholics and Protestants and, in full view of the assembled crowd, knelt down for the "blessing" of a Protestant "clergyman." The idea that a Protestant has the ability to "bless" a Catholic, let alone a bishop, is an absolute deviation from the thinking of the Catholic Church.  This pope's personal views are not a via media.  And I had read the thread before I posted.
[/quote]
[/size]
_________

Congratulations for trying to point these things out...and, incidentally, you are correct in your postings. I'm amazed that there are so many who either don't get what's happening with this pope or don't want to get it (or just can't bring themselves to).  After all that happened last week, Francis, very near the beginning of his comments, praises the truly heretical Lorenzo Baldisseri and Peter Erdo. The pope is either a devotee of  Alinsky or the principles are intrinsic to him. He does, indeed, triangulate, creating extremes that most often don't exist, as counterpoints and then putting himself at the third point, which is intended to be portrayed as the position of reason, in Church palance, a position of pastoral charity. Therefore, traditionalists MUST be portrayed as extremists.  In reality, however, there are just two positions: traditionalists and modernists, true Catholics and heretics.

While we're at it, some here might want to stop carping at Church Militant which, by the way, is about the only Catholic media outlet with intestinal fortitude enough to openly defend dogma and true faith and criticize those who are compromising Christ's teachings. But, then again, almost all the rest of those outlets work for or depend upon support from one or more of the very bishops/cardinals responsible for the crisis in the first place.

Do any really think it was a coincidence that the end of the synod--which was intended to bulldoze synod fathers with an end run in the form of the interim report taken directly to the media (and the world, as a result)--coincided with the beatification of Paul VI, embodiment of a new era in the Church (new church?) and, to many, the embodiment of error beyond comprehension.

But let's watch how many bishops and cardinals who did not roll over and play dead for Kasper, Baldisseri, Erdo (aka Pope Francis) are reassigned, demoted, humiliated, replaced either to intimidate them back into line with the intended changes on family and homosexuality or to whittle away at the opposition numbers to get to that two-thirds vote in 2015 to ensure that dogma gives way to political (and social) popularity. I just think it's very spiritually telling that Cardinal Burke's humility in all of this has elevated him; the enemies of faith, is their arrogance, have been layed low...for the time being. It's also interesting that all of this pent-up zeal for even more change and compromise on dogma has accelerated under a new pope while His Holiness Pope Benedict abdicated under mysterious circumstances. We are headed for a up or down vote on error and heresy and a new era in which the Church hierarchy can right itself or we are headed for schism.

I don't think satan--and his agents--will just sit back and watch for the next year. It's going to get very nasty. But if satan is, indeed, involved, what else could you expect. And those who are his allies in that effort will become even more evident. By their fruits you shall know them. And if you went to a traditional Mass yesterday, "Many are called, but few are chosen," will sound familiar to you.
Reply
#25
(10-18-2014, 08:09 PM)Geremia Wrote:
(10-18-2014, 06:44 PM)PatienceAndLove Wrote: If there was something to be in a tizzy over, I am fairly sure Mr Voris would have mentioned it.
He doesn't appear to consider collegiality a heresy, either.
Well, there is collegiality, and then there is collegiality.
Reply
#26
(10-20-2014, 01:43 PM)Papist Wrote:
(10-18-2014, 08:09 PM)Geremia Wrote: He doesn't appear to consider collegiality a heresy, either.
Well, there is collegiality, and then there is collegiality.

Collegiality is not a heresy--neither in the formal doctrine of the Church on the supreme authority of the college of bishops, nor in a general praxis that favors collegial decisions making or government.  Geremia has tried to claim it is before, but as far as I've seen, he's never presented any evidence to demonstrate it.
Reply
#27
(10-20-2014, 01:53 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote:
(10-20-2014, 01:43 PM)Papist Wrote:
(10-18-2014, 08:09 PM)Geremia Wrote: He doesn't appear to consider collegiality a heresy, either.
Well, there is collegiality, and then there is collegiality.

Collegiality is not a heresy--neither in the formal doctrine of the Church on the supreme authority of the college of bishops, nor in a general praxis that favors collegial decisions making or government.  Geremia has tried to claim it is before, but as far as I've seen, he's never presented any evidence to demonstrate it.
Agreed.
Reply
#28
(10-20-2014, 01:53 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote:
(10-20-2014, 01:43 PM)Papist Wrote:
(10-18-2014, 08:09 PM)Geremia Wrote: He doesn't appear to consider collegiality a heresy, either.
Well, there is collegiality, and then there is collegiality.

Collegiality is not a heresy--neither in the formal doctrine of the Church on the supreme authority of the college of bishops, nor in a general praxis that favors collegial decisions making or government.  Geremia has tried to claim it is before, but as far as I've seen, he's never presented any evidence to demonstrate it.
The college of bishops does not have supreme authority alongside the pope. The Church does not have two heads.
Reply
#29
(02-14-2015, 01:08 AM)Geremia Wrote:
(10-20-2014, 01:53 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote:
(10-20-2014, 01:43 PM)Papist Wrote:
(10-18-2014, 08:09 PM)Geremia Wrote: He doesn't appear to consider collegiality a heresy, either.
Well, there is collegiality, and then there is collegiality.

Collegiality is not a heresy--neither in the formal doctrine of the Church on the supreme authority of the college of bishops, nor in a general praxis that favors collegial decisions making or government.  Geremia has tried to claim it is before, but as far as I've seen, he's never presented any evidence to demonstrate it.
The college of bishops does not have supreme authority alongside the pope. The Church does not have two heads.

You are right, the Church has one head, Christ. Yet, Christ rules through His Pope and the Bishops.
Reply
#30
One, a temptation to hostile inflexibility, that is, wanting to close oneself within the written word, (the letter) and not allowing oneself to be surprised by God, by the God of surprises, (the spirit); within the law, within the certitude of what we know and not of what we still need to learn and to achieve. From the time of Christ, it is the temptation of the zealous, of the scrupulous, of the solicitous and of the so-called – today – “traditionalists” and also of the intellectuals.

- The temptation to a destructive tendency to goodness [it. buonismo], that in the name of a deceptive mercy binds the wounds without first curing them and treating them; that treats the symptoms and not the causes and the roots. It is the temptation of the “do-gooders,” of the fearful, and also of the so-called “progressives and liberals.”

"Traditionalists aren't the only ones he was going after.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)