4cjbanning
Yes, much has been and will be said about Benedict XVI, but right now the most appropriate thing is simply:
Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and may light perpetual shine upon him.
Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and may light perpetual shine upon him.
12Diamondhead
There was in Anguera approved apparitions visionary Pedro Regis, giving message and explanation of all similar messages, finally confirming that Virgin Mary in Anguera claims that Pope Benedict XVI. was ousted from his throne. That he was blackmailed somehow, that he has to step down. Video with visionary Pedro Regis saying this was sometime circulating around, and then was removed.
Also, you can find in the work and interviews of Malachy Martin in 1997. that very soon some Pope will be forced to resign. And all his interviews were in the sign of the suppresion of the third secret of Fatima.
Also, you can find in the work and interviews of Malachy Martin in 1997. that very soon some Pope will be forced to resign. And all his interviews were in the sign of the suppresion of the third secret of Fatima.
13John5918
>11 brone:
I googled and found your quote (which you omitted to cite the source of) on a website called The Catholic Thing, dated seven years ago. These reflections by the late Pope Emeritus are interesting, but I would not be as pessimistic as the good pope.
Worldwide the Catholic Church is growing, particularly in what were formerly known as "mission territories" in Africa, Asia and South America. These areas now have well-established local churches, a sign of the efforts of the missionaries and the people's desire for Christianity; next year we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of Sudan moving from missionary prefectures to local dioceses. There is no "loss of missionary zeal", to quote from the title of that article. Missionaries are still active and zealous. A young Zambian missionary priest was killed in Burkina Faso just the other day, and several of my own missionary colleagues have been martyred over the years. Evangelisation has been one of Pope Francis' priorities, hardly surprising given where he hails from. And for a number of years now missionaries from the former mission territories have been going out to Europe, north America and Australia to (re-)evangelise those continents. The same dynamic would be true in many Christian denominations.
I googled and found your quote (which you omitted to cite the source of) on a website called The Catholic Thing, dated seven years ago. These reflections by the late Pope Emeritus are interesting, but I would not be as pessimistic as the good pope.
Worldwide the Catholic Church is growing, particularly in what were formerly known as "mission territories" in Africa, Asia and South America. These areas now have well-established local churches, a sign of the efforts of the missionaries and the people's desire for Christianity; next year we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of Sudan moving from missionary prefectures to local dioceses. There is no "loss of missionary zeal", to quote from the title of that article. Missionaries are still active and zealous. A young Zambian missionary priest was killed in Burkina Faso just the other day, and several of my own missionary colleagues have been martyred over the years. Evangelisation has been one of Pope Francis' priorities, hardly surprising given where he hails from. And for a number of years now missionaries from the former mission territories have been going out to Europe, north America and Australia to (re-)evangelise those continents. The same dynamic would be true in many Christian denominations.
23John5918
>22 brone:
And yet didn't Jesus himself express his frustration with the rigidity of the religious authorities of his time, with their clinging to the letter of the law rather than its spirit, with their insistence on blind obedience to doctrine over and above love and mercy? "And he said to them, 'The Sabbath was made for people, not people for the Sabbath; so the Son of Man is master even of the Sabbath'" (Mark 2:27-28). More broadly, while he said that he did not come to take away the existing law, he came to fulfil or complete it, ie the law had to develop (Matthew 5:17). I suspect Pope Francis shares Jesus' frustration.
And yet didn't Jesus himself express his frustration with the rigidity of the religious authorities of his time, with their clinging to the letter of the law rather than its spirit, with their insistence on blind obedience to doctrine over and above love and mercy? "And he said to them, 'The Sabbath was made for people, not people for the Sabbath; so the Son of Man is master even of the Sabbath'" (Mark 2:27-28). More broadly, while he said that he did not come to take away the existing law, he came to fulfil or complete it, ie the law had to develop (Matthew 5:17). I suspect Pope Francis shares Jesus' frustration.
24John5918
Pope Benedict XVI's cousins stand to inherit his money. None of them want it (National Catholic Register)
Benedict’s heirs sued in Munich abuse claim (Tablet)
The surviving relatives of the late Pope Benedict XVI stand to inherit money from his legacy, according to the executor of his last will and testament. None of these relatives seem willing to touch it. One cousin has already refused to accept the inheritance; four others have not yet responded. If they are smart, they will turn it down as well. The problem is that, by accepting the money, an heir also takes over any legal claims against the deceased, according to estate laws in Germany, where the cousins all live. Joseph Ratzinger, as he was known before adopting his papal name, is a defendant in one of the most-watched cases of clerical sexual abuse in the country...
Benedict’s heirs sued in Munich abuse claim (Tablet)
The plaintiff wants €300,000 compensation from the archdiocese and €50,000 from Joseph Ratzinger’s heirs...
26John5918
Ex-pope Benedict's cross stolen from German church (Citizen Digital)
A cross that former pope Benedict XVI used to wear on his chest has been stolen from a church in southern Germany where it was on display, police said Tuesday. The pectoral cross was in a case in the wall of St. Oswald's church in Traunstein, in the state of Bavaria, where the late Benedict spent his adolescent years...
29John5918
>28 brone:
Thanks for that thought. I think it's very similar to Pope Francis' pastoral approach, prioritising love and mercy over "rationalism, historicism, form and historical origins".
Thanks for that thought. I think it's very similar to Pope Francis' pastoral approach, prioritising love and mercy over "rationalism, historicism, form and historical origins".
31John5918
>30 brone:
Yes, I think we all agree that the liturgy should be celebrated in a reverential manner. The "liturgical movement" to which he refers was of course one of the catalysts for the reform of the liturgy.
Yes, I think we all agree that the liturgy should be celebrated in a reverential manner. The "liturgical movement" to which he refers was of course one of the catalysts for the reform of the liturgy.
33John5918
>32 brone: a liturgical "return to the origins and the removal of the various layers piled up over the years" he took delight in the "fundamental step in the renewal of ecclesiology" he was "overjoyed with the decisions that augured well for the future" " the renewal coming was better than anyone hoped for"
Well yes, that's precisely what Vatican II did. As Sacrosanctum concilium says, "The rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity; they should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions; they should be within the people's powers of comprehension, and normally should not require much explanation" (34). Even as a young altar server all those years ago I was aware that the Tridentine mass was not simple, was encumbered with useless repetitions, and was difficult even for the adults to comprehend even with much explanation. Of course we liked the useless repetitions at the time because it meant there was plenty of action for the altar boys (only boys in those days - 50% of Catholic children were automatically excluded, although we did have to wear long dresses!) The reformed liturgy is based on ancient roots (Tradition) and a lot of the "useless" accretions and repetitions which had come to encumber the old liturgy were removed.
Three years later Ratzinger was beating a different drum
Can you cite a reference for this different drum in 1966, as I'd be interested to read what the then theologian Ratzinger said at the time? Here, perhaps? Worth noting that Ratzinger, although a brilliant theologian who assisted at the Council as one of the periti or theological advisors, was not one of the Council Fathers, not one of the bishops carrying the authority and burden of making decisions, not one of those who approved Sacrosanctum concilium by a vote of 2,147 to 4. Hardly any Council Fathers are still alive. I've had the privilege of meeting half a dozen or so of them over the years, and none of them were expressing any reservations about the teaching documents which they approved at the Council.
I think we have to make a distinction between the reformed liturgy itself on the one hand, and on the other hand poor understanding and/or celebration of the liturgy as well as actual abuses of it. All post-conciliar popes, up to and including Benedict and Francis, have spoken out against bad liturgy and abuses, but you seem to forget that there was also bad and abusive liturgy during the period when the Tridentine mass was the norm. I can recall plenty of examples from my own early years as a daily altar server. Bad, poorly understood, ill-prepared, hurriedly and/or sloppily celebrated, theologically unsound liturgy can be found anywhere, regardless of which rite one is using.
In conversations on another part of LT, I have agreed with you that there was some appalling liturgy during the transition period after the Council when the revisions were coming into force. I remember one priest telling me that they had no preparation for it at all and were simply told to say mass in English facing the people from the next Sunday! Sadly some of this poorly understood and transitional liturgy still continues in some (many?) places. The solution is more liturgical training for both priests and people on what the liturgy is as well as how it should be celebrated, which is precisely what Pope Francis is advocating. Questioning the authority of Vatican II and the pope, and hankering after a rite which has been superseded for good theological reasons, is not the solution, and undermines the unity which is a key part of our Church's liturgical prayer.
Well yes, that's precisely what Vatican II did. As Sacrosanctum concilium says, "The rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity; they should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions; they should be within the people's powers of comprehension, and normally should not require much explanation" (34). Even as a young altar server all those years ago I was aware that the Tridentine mass was not simple, was encumbered with useless repetitions, and was difficult even for the adults to comprehend even with much explanation. Of course we liked the useless repetitions at the time because it meant there was plenty of action for the altar boys (only boys in those days - 50% of Catholic children were automatically excluded, although we did have to wear long dresses!) The reformed liturgy is based on ancient roots (Tradition) and a lot of the "useless" accretions and repetitions which had come to encumber the old liturgy were removed.
Three years later Ratzinger was beating a different drum
Can you cite a reference for this different drum in 1966, as I'd be interested to read what the then theologian Ratzinger said at the time? Here, perhaps? Worth noting that Ratzinger, although a brilliant theologian who assisted at the Council as one of the periti or theological advisors, was not one of the Council Fathers, not one of the bishops carrying the authority and burden of making decisions, not one of those who approved Sacrosanctum concilium by a vote of 2,147 to 4. Hardly any Council Fathers are still alive. I've had the privilege of meeting half a dozen or so of them over the years, and none of them were expressing any reservations about the teaching documents which they approved at the Council.
I think we have to make a distinction between the reformed liturgy itself on the one hand, and on the other hand poor understanding and/or celebration of the liturgy as well as actual abuses of it. All post-conciliar popes, up to and including Benedict and Francis, have spoken out against bad liturgy and abuses, but you seem to forget that there was also bad and abusive liturgy during the period when the Tridentine mass was the norm. I can recall plenty of examples from my own early years as a daily altar server. Bad, poorly understood, ill-prepared, hurriedly and/or sloppily celebrated, theologically unsound liturgy can be found anywhere, regardless of which rite one is using.
In conversations on another part of LT, I have agreed with you that there was some appalling liturgy during the transition period after the Council when the revisions were coming into force. I remember one priest telling me that they had no preparation for it at all and were simply told to say mass in English facing the people from the next Sunday! Sadly some of this poorly understood and transitional liturgy still continues in some (many?) places. The solution is more liturgical training for both priests and people on what the liturgy is as well as how it should be celebrated, which is precisely what Pope Francis is advocating. Questioning the authority of Vatican II and the pope, and hankering after a rite which has been superseded for good theological reasons, is not the solution, and undermines the unity which is a key part of our Church's liturgical prayer.
35John5918
>34 brone:
Well, that sounds very much like what I said, that in practice there have been some issues which need to be resolved. It would be very misleading to construe that as a criticism of the Council or the reformed liturgy per se, nor as a call for a return to the old liturgy which he was all in favour of reforming.
Well, that sounds very much like what I said, that in practice there have been some issues which need to be resolved. It would be very misleading to construe that as a criticism of the Council or the reformed liturgy per se, nor as a call for a return to the old liturgy which he was all in favour of reforming.
37John5918
>36 brone:
That's interesting. What suspicion are you referring to? Do you think it was part of the same conspiracy theory that had "conservative" elements in the Vatican murder Pope John Paul I?
That's interesting. What suspicion are you referring to? Do you think it was part of the same conspiracy theory that had "conservative" elements in the Vatican murder Pope John Paul I?
39John5918
>38 brone:
Looks like a very small red flag compared to that long paragraph! And it doesn't actually contradict that paragraph.
Looks like a very small red flag compared to that long paragraph! And it doesn't actually contradict that paragraph.
41John5918
>40 brone:
I think we all agree that the way some of the reforms have been implemented (or "carried out", to use Benedict's words) in some places does indeed bear being examined, and all popes up to and including Francis have called for the liturgy to be properly celebrated. That is not a criticism of the reforms, but of their patchy implementation. It is not a call to return to the antecedent liturgy. I think you're clutching at straws and bending Benedict's words to make them support your position.
I think we all agree that the way some of the reforms have been implemented (or "carried out", to use Benedict's words) in some places does indeed bear being examined, and all popes up to and including Francis have called for the liturgy to be properly celebrated. That is not a criticism of the reforms, but of their patchy implementation. It is not a call to return to the antecedent liturgy. I think you're clutching at straws and bending Benedict's words to make them support your position.
45John5918
>44 brone:
And the centrality of the liturgy is precisely the pastoral basis of Francis' growing disquiet about those who choose to separate themselves from the liturgy of the Church.
And the centrality of the liturgy is precisely the pastoral basis of Francis' growing disquiet about those who choose to separate themselves from the liturgy of the Church.
47John5918
>46 brone:
Once again I would respectfully suggest that your assertion that "The liturgical reform, as it was carried out, distanced itself evermore from its origins" just doesn't match the reality. Once again I also agree with you that "some have set up their self-made liturgy", in the sense of not following the reforms laid out by the Church, whether that be by experimenting with irregular liturgies, by celebrating the liturgy thoughtlessly or sloppily, or by clinging to an old antecedent liturgy. That is why it could be said that "today we need a new liturgical movement" or, as Pope Francis has said, better study and catechesis of the liturgy. The pope has criticised all these different abuses of the liturgy.
It's interesting how bishops can be influenced by young priests. Given that the majority of Christians live in the Global South, and that the Global South has a huge majority of young people compared to the ageing demographic of Europe and north America (with some estimates suggesting that close to 90% of the world's youth are in developing countries), the voice of the young will become increasingly important. I recall how Archbishop Saint Oscar Romero was influenced by the murder of a young priest who was working for justice for the poor, and how Romero himself was murdered by the same US-supported right wing regime which murdered Fr Rutilio Grande.
Once again I would respectfully suggest that your assertion that "The liturgical reform, as it was carried out, distanced itself evermore from its origins" just doesn't match the reality. Once again I also agree with you that "some have set up their self-made liturgy", in the sense of not following the reforms laid out by the Church, whether that be by experimenting with irregular liturgies, by celebrating the liturgy thoughtlessly or sloppily, or by clinging to an old antecedent liturgy. That is why it could be said that "today we need a new liturgical movement" or, as Pope Francis has said, better study and catechesis of the liturgy. The pope has criticised all these different abuses of the liturgy.
It's interesting how bishops can be influenced by young priests. Given that the majority of Christians live in the Global South, and that the Global South has a huge majority of young people compared to the ageing demographic of Europe and north America (with some estimates suggesting that close to 90% of the world's youth are in developing countries), the voice of the young will become increasingly important. I recall how Archbishop Saint Oscar Romero was influenced by the murder of a young priest who was working for justice for the poor, and how Romero himself was murdered by the same US-supported right wing regime which murdered Fr Rutilio Grande.
49John5918
>48 brone:
And yet the tradition of the Church has always been that whenever the liturgy is reformed, the old rite is set aside, not because it is harmful, but because the Church has moved on. When the Tridentine rite was imposed in 1570, I think those who wanted to continue using older rites generally received short shrift. So you are calling for a break with this tradition?
And yet the tradition of the Church has always been that whenever the liturgy is reformed, the old rite is set aside, not because it is harmful, but because the Church has moved on. When the Tridentine rite was imposed in 1570, I think those who wanted to continue using older rites generally received short shrift. So you are calling for a break with this tradition?
52John5918
>51 brone: those of us who followed Benedict
Those of us who followed Benedict surely describes all of us Catholics, just as we followed John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II, and as we now follow Francis.
Those of us who followed Benedict surely describes all of us Catholics, just as we followed John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II, and as we now follow Francis.
54John5918
>53 brone:
Yes, I fully agree with you that there are many "hard sayings" in the bible which people prefer not to follow, but I don't know where you go to church as I certainly hear them preached regularly from the pulpit.
The hardest saying of them all, of course is, "You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. The second resembles it: You must love your neighbour as yourself" (Matthew 22:37-39).
Other hard sayings include, "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9) in this age where so many people seem to be making war (or making a profit out of manufacturing and selling the weapons of war); "Put away your sword" (Matthew 26:52) and "he will judge between the nations and arbitrate between many peoples. They will hammer their swords into ploughshares and their spears into sickles. Nation will not lift sword against nation, no longer will they learn how to make war" (Isaiah 2:4) in an age where resources which should be used for feeding the world's population ("ploughshares" and "sickles") are instead being squandered on weapons, which are proliferating; and "In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers {and sisters} of mine, you did it to me" (Matthew 25:31-46), particularly the case of "I was a stranger and you made me welcome" (v36) in this age where we seem to be doing the exact opposite to strangers whom we label "refugees", "immigrants", "asylum seekers", "illegals", "undocumented" or whatever.
By failing to live up to these hard sayings we do indeed collude with the work of the devil.
Yes, I fully agree with you that there are many "hard sayings" in the bible which people prefer not to follow, but I don't know where you go to church as I certainly hear them preached regularly from the pulpit.
The hardest saying of them all, of course is, "You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. The second resembles it: You must love your neighbour as yourself" (Matthew 22:37-39).
Other hard sayings include, "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9) in this age where so many people seem to be making war (or making a profit out of manufacturing and selling the weapons of war); "Put away your sword" (Matthew 26:52) and "he will judge between the nations and arbitrate between many peoples. They will hammer their swords into ploughshares and their spears into sickles. Nation will not lift sword against nation, no longer will they learn how to make war" (Isaiah 2:4) in an age where resources which should be used for feeding the world's population ("ploughshares" and "sickles") are instead being squandered on weapons, which are proliferating; and "In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers {and sisters} of mine, you did it to me" (Matthew 25:31-46), particularly the case of "I was a stranger and you made me welcome" (v36) in this age where we seem to be doing the exact opposite to strangers whom we label "refugees", "immigrants", "asylum seekers", "illegals", "undocumented" or whatever.
By failing to live up to these hard sayings we do indeed collude with the work of the devil.
56John5918
>55 brone:
It would be interesting to see the source for this post, as it appears to be full of flaws. What is "one world religion", for example? Yes, "many norms will be challenged", because it is always good to be self-aware and to interrogate and challenge our own assumptions, to make them stronger if they are correct or to modify them if they turn out to be misaligned. Celibacy and priesthood have already been challenged in most Christian denominations (bearing in mind that this is a Christian, not a solely Catholic, group), but even in the Catholic Church they are also being modified, with the return to ordination of married deacons a good few years ago, and the more recent ordination of hundreds (thousands?) of married former Anglican priests. If "sexuality will be the key issue", it is only because conservative culture warriors are making it so. Most ordinary people just want to be left alone with their sexuality. "Marxists are instituting a reconceptualization of the reality and doctrine of grace" is absolute nonsense, but if you believe that anybody is doing so, perhaps you could present something substantial which could be discussed here. Dare I suggest that you could also cite a source for us to study ourselves?
"Dualism" is not a fundamentally Christian thing. It came into Christianity with Augustine from his Manichean background, what some would describe as "pagan", and integrating it into Christianity has proved challenging to theologians throughout the ages.
As for "dialogue with the world is to be placed ahead of proclamation to the world", why do you make it a zero sum either/or game? It must indeed be both/and. You seem to be unaware of the renewed push for "proclamation" which has been underway in the Catholic Church since Pope Paul VI's Evangelii Nuntiandi in 1975, reinforced by John Paul II and Benedict XVI, and expressed most recently by Francis in Evangelii Gaudium. Many would argue that evangelisation is a key part of Francis' papacy. You also do a great injustice to Catholic missionaries if you think their sole function "is to liberate all {people (not only men)} from all forms of oppression". Once again it is not either/or. Missionaries proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ, and they are also faithful to the "hard sayings" which I referenced in >54 John5918: above and to the doctrine of the Catholic Church which emphasises the common good, the preferential option for the poor (which can be seen in the life and ministry of Jesus himself), and yes, liberation from oppression. It is not a culture war where proclamation and liberation are set in opposition to each other, where you can have only one and the other is seen as undermining it. That is dualism!
Last month we celebrated the requiem mass of a Sudanese missionary bishop who was known both for baptising and confirming thousands and also for courageously and prophetically speaking out against oppression, slavery, human rights abuses and religious discrimination. I had lunch last week with a 75 year old US Catholic missionary priest who has spent the last ten years living in a camp for people displaced by violent conflict, most of that time sleeping in a shared tent, in one of the most inhospitable climates and terrains in the world, continually proclaiming the Good News to some of the poorest of the poor amidst the violence, by his presence, his solidarity with them in sharing their daily struggles, his daily mass, his bible studies and catechesis, and yes, by also doing whatever he can to alleviate their poverty and oppression. Deo gratias! Try telling these two missionaries, and people like them, that they are "Marxists"!
It would be interesting to see the source for this post, as it appears to be full of flaws. What is "one world religion", for example? Yes, "many norms will be challenged", because it is always good to be self-aware and to interrogate and challenge our own assumptions, to make them stronger if they are correct or to modify them if they turn out to be misaligned. Celibacy and priesthood have already been challenged in most Christian denominations (bearing in mind that this is a Christian, not a solely Catholic, group), but even in the Catholic Church they are also being modified, with the return to ordination of married deacons a good few years ago, and the more recent ordination of hundreds (thousands?) of married former Anglican priests. If "sexuality will be the key issue", it is only because conservative culture warriors are making it so. Most ordinary people just want to be left alone with their sexuality. "Marxists are instituting a reconceptualization of the reality and doctrine of grace" is absolute nonsense, but if you believe that anybody is doing so, perhaps you could present something substantial which could be discussed here. Dare I suggest that you could also cite a source for us to study ourselves?
"Dualism" is not a fundamentally Christian thing. It came into Christianity with Augustine from his Manichean background, what some would describe as "pagan", and integrating it into Christianity has proved challenging to theologians throughout the ages.
As for "dialogue with the world is to be placed ahead of proclamation to the world", why do you make it a zero sum either/or game? It must indeed be both/and. You seem to be unaware of the renewed push for "proclamation" which has been underway in the Catholic Church since Pope Paul VI's Evangelii Nuntiandi in 1975, reinforced by John Paul II and Benedict XVI, and expressed most recently by Francis in Evangelii Gaudium. Many would argue that evangelisation is a key part of Francis' papacy. You also do a great injustice to Catholic missionaries if you think their sole function "is to liberate all {people (not only men)} from all forms of oppression". Once again it is not either/or. Missionaries proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ, and they are also faithful to the "hard sayings" which I referenced in >54 John5918: above and to the doctrine of the Catholic Church which emphasises the common good, the preferential option for the poor (which can be seen in the life and ministry of Jesus himself), and yes, liberation from oppression. It is not a culture war where proclamation and liberation are set in opposition to each other, where you can have only one and the other is seen as undermining it. That is dualism!
Last month we celebrated the requiem mass of a Sudanese missionary bishop who was known both for baptising and confirming thousands and also for courageously and prophetically speaking out against oppression, slavery, human rights abuses and religious discrimination. I had lunch last week with a 75 year old US Catholic missionary priest who has spent the last ten years living in a camp for people displaced by violent conflict, most of that time sleeping in a shared tent, in one of the most inhospitable climates and terrains in the world, continually proclaiming the Good News to some of the poorest of the poor amidst the violence, by his presence, his solidarity with them in sharing their daily struggles, his daily mass, his bible studies and catechesis, and yes, by also doing whatever he can to alleviate their poverty and oppression. Deo gratias! Try telling these two missionaries, and people like them, that they are "Marxists"!
57John5918
A further reflection on the right wing "conservative" tendency I mentioned in >56 John5918:, particularly in the USA, to create a zero sum dynamic, a form of dualism where things which ought to be (and indeed in the real world actually are) complementary, are held to be contradictory and mutually exclusive. This is what is often described as culture war.
I'm currently reading For God and My Country: Catholic Leadership in Modern Uganda*, a 2020 book by US author J J Carney, which examines the lives of seven Catholic leaders in post-colonial Uganda, including laity and clergy, women and men, local and national, well known and little known, and how their Catholicism drives and is integrated into their public leadership. In his introduction he explicitly contrasts their model with that of the current Church in his native USA. As I have said often, in the Church in Africa can be found very traditional Catholic piety (daily mass, Marian devotion, rosary, eucharistic adoration and processions, veneration of saints, etc) and moral theology (including on abortion, homosexuality, etc) side by side with a deep commitment to the tradition of social justice as currently expressed in Catholic Social Teaching. Carney concurs that there is no contradiction, no dichotomy. He also shows how these leaders make the Church present in society without attempting to impose theocracy. Effective Christian witness and proclamation is through action, love and service, not through trying to give Christian doctrine a privileged place in society. The words attributed to Saint Francis of Assisi come to mind, "Preach the gospel constantly; use words {only} when necessary". The at times rather arrogant Church in the Global North could learn a lot from the humble Global South!
* No touchstone.
I'm currently reading For God and My Country: Catholic Leadership in Modern Uganda*, a 2020 book by US author J J Carney, which examines the lives of seven Catholic leaders in post-colonial Uganda, including laity and clergy, women and men, local and national, well known and little known, and how their Catholicism drives and is integrated into their public leadership. In his introduction he explicitly contrasts their model with that of the current Church in his native USA. As I have said often, in the Church in Africa can be found very traditional Catholic piety (daily mass, Marian devotion, rosary, eucharistic adoration and processions, veneration of saints, etc) and moral theology (including on abortion, homosexuality, etc) side by side with a deep commitment to the tradition of social justice as currently expressed in Catholic Social Teaching. Carney concurs that there is no contradiction, no dichotomy. He also shows how these leaders make the Church present in society without attempting to impose theocracy. Effective Christian witness and proclamation is through action, love and service, not through trying to give Christian doctrine a privileged place in society. The words attributed to Saint Francis of Assisi come to mind, "Preach the gospel constantly; use words {only} when necessary". The at times rather arrogant Church in the Global North could learn a lot from the humble Global South!
* No touchstone.
60John5918
>59 brone:
Interesting. A rather niggardly legacy. I would have described the legacy of Benedict XVI more fulsomely, including his theological sophistication, his continuation of the trajectory of previous popes on nonviolence and Catholic Social Teaching (this "trajectory" being part of the Tradition of the Church), his coining of the terms "hermeneutic of continuity" and "rupture", and his resurrection of the tradition of papal resignation. Deo gratias.
Interesting. A rather niggardly legacy. I would have described the legacy of Benedict XVI more fulsomely, including his theological sophistication, his continuation of the trajectory of previous popes on nonviolence and Catholic Social Teaching (this "trajectory" being part of the Tradition of the Church), his coining of the terms "hermeneutic of continuity" and "rupture", and his resurrection of the tradition of papal resignation. Deo gratias.
61John5918
Has Pope Francis betrayed his predecessors’ legacies? (Where Peter Is)
The answer to the question in the title is, of course, a resounding "No!" I've quoted only a very small part, and it's well worth reading the whole article.
I naïvely thought that we’d learned enough from history to understand that popes come and go, fat popes follow thin popes, tall ones follow short ones, and extroverted pontiffs follow popes who are shy and bookish. In the previous century and a half, we’d seen the pendulum swing back and forth several times, and despite numerous scandals, upheavals, and cultural shifts, the Church was somehow still standing... We must understand that each pope is unique, and no pope can bind his successors to continue his personal projects. To judge a papacy on the extent to which a pontiff upholds the “legacy” of one of his predecessors is not only unfair to the man but betrays a gross mistrust of Christ’s promise to the Church regarding Peter and his successors. The French philosopher Jean Guitton — who served in a similar role with Paul VI as Seewald with Benedict and Weigel with John Paul — recognized this. In the preface to The Pope Speaks, his book of conversations with Pope Paul, Guitton wrote, “Every pontiff remains himself. He keeps his moods, his human way of being. Without wishing to, perhaps without being aware of it, he stamps his office with his humanity as a seal. I would even say that in that high office where one is no longer judged except by God, the personality can sometimes blossom into ease and joviality, as was seen in the case of John XXIII, who resolved to be plainly and simply himself. Yet Pope Paul’s way cannot be that of Pope John”...
The answer to the question in the title is, of course, a resounding "No!" I've quoted only a very small part, and it's well worth reading the whole article.
64John5918
>62 brone:
A "heretic" is someone defined as such by the Church, not just someone that you disagree with, and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin hasn't been defined as such. He was a flawed human being like all of us, and he was mistaken in some of his theological and scientific opinions. That doesn't alter the fact that he made some significant contributions to theology, and those who make use of his work are well aware of its weaknesses as well as its strengths. He is not "the darling of the progressives and evolutionists", but he is one of many theologians who have made important contributions to Christian theology. Nobody is perfect, and the modern trend of dismissing someone completely because of mistakes in some parts of their work is neither charitable nor helpful. As the old English proverb says, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
A "heretic" is someone defined as such by the Church, not just someone that you disagree with, and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin hasn't been defined as such. He was a flawed human being like all of us, and he was mistaken in some of his theological and scientific opinions. That doesn't alter the fact that he made some significant contributions to theology, and those who make use of his work are well aware of its weaknesses as well as its strengths. He is not "the darling of the progressives and evolutionists", but he is one of many theologians who have made important contributions to Christian theology. Nobody is perfect, and the modern trend of dismissing someone completely because of mistakes in some parts of their work is neither charitable nor helpful. As the old English proverb says, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
65John5918
Message in the sky over Italy’s beaches spreads conspiracy theory on Francis being the ‘anti-pope’ (euronews)
Sounds like a PR stunt to publicise his book!
Messages transported by small planes over Italy’s beaches this summer have spread the debunked conspiracy theory that Pope Francis is not the legitimate head of the Catholic Church. Planes carrying odd messages about Benedict XVI, the former head of the Catholic Church who resigned in 2013 after suffering from debilitating health issues, have appeared in the spotless blue sky above Italy’s most populated beaches this summer... The strange messages have attracted the curiosity of thousands of beachgoers, as well as that of the local media. That’s exactly what journalist Andrea Cionci, who believes Francis is not the legitimate pope, wanted. For a while now, Cionci - who writes for the Italian rightwing newspaper Libero - has tried to spread a conspiracy theory saying that Pope Francis is the “anti-pope” put in office to replace Benedict XVI - Joseph Ratzinger - with a more liberal and progressive figure. According to the journalist, the pope left hints in his resignation speech that he wasn’t really abdicating - but that he was being forced to do so. He said the truth would be revealed by three cardinals in the know after Ratzinger’s death - a prediction that has failed to materialise after the former pope died on 31 December 2022... several experts, among which are supporters of Francis and more conservative Catholics, have disproven his theory...
Sounds like a PR stunt to publicise his book!
66John5918
Suspect in Theft of Benedict XVI’s Pectoral Cross Arrested, Say Police (National Catholic Register)
Several months after the theft of a pectoral cross bequeathed by the late Pope Benedict XVI to a parish in his native Bavaria, police have apprehended the suspect in the Czech Republic. The cross — which is still missing — was stolen on June 19 of this year from a display case on the wall of St. Oswald’s Church in the city of Traunstein. According to the Bavarian State Criminal Police Office, the 53-year-old suspect, whom police claimed is a serial thief with a history of property crimes across several European countries, left traces at the crime scene which led to his identification via an international data match...
67John5918
Cardinal Parolin: Benedict XVI’s legacy will bear fruit for the Church (Vatican News)
An attitude of “flying high with the two open wings of reason and faith, albeit always with humility, effort, and perseverance”: This is the legacy, “alive and set to bear fruit in the future journey of the Church,” that Benedict XVI leaves behind a little less than a year after his death. Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin made the remarks during the presentation of the 2023 Ratzinger Prize, the first ceremony for the Prize since the death of its namesake. Cardinal Parolin described the former Pope as “a pastor and teacher of faith” and “a luminous and courageous example of dialogue.” Pope Benedict’s Magisterium, the Cardinal said, is “characterized by an awareness of the cultural and spiritual situation of the world,” and of the tensions between peoples and between man and creation...
69John5918
Vatican to Publish Private Homilies of Pope Benedict XVI (ACI Africa)
The Vatican will publish the previously uncirculated “private” homilies of the late Pope Benedict XVI in the coming year, the Holy See has announced. The Vatican Publishing House said Dec. 23 that it intends to release “a book of some 130 homilies given by the late Pope Benedict XVI at private Sunday Masses,” according to Catholic News Service (CNS). The homilies comprise “30 given while {Benedict} was pope and more than 100 given to members of his household once he retired”...
70John5918
EWTN to Air Conference on Pope Benedict XVI One Year After His Death (ACI Africa)
One year after the death of Pope Benedict XVI, scholars, experts, and friends of the late pontiff will meet in Rome on Dec. 30–31 in the Benedict XVI Hall of the Campo Santo Teutonico at the Vatican to discuss his legacy...
71John5918
Pope Francis Says Benedict XVI "blesses us and accompanies us" from Heaven (ACI Africa)
In his final Angelus address of 2023, Pope Francis paid tribute to Pope Benedict XVI on the one-year anniversary of his predecessor’s death, saying that the late pontiff continues to bless and aid the Church from heaven. Speaking Dec. 31 from the window of the Apostolic Palace and following a longer discourse on the Holy Family’s secret to enduring hardships, Francis said that Benedict XVI “lovingly and wisely” served the Church. “We feel so much affection for him, so much gratitude, so much admiration. From heaven he blesses us and accompanies us”...
73John5918
>72 brone:
Can you give a reference for those quotes, please? I'd be interested to see the context. But while Latin might have given rise to "no jealousies" when it was the universal language of Catholic liturgy, quite plainly it is giving rise to plenty of "jealousies", disagreements and conflicts now that it isn't. As for the Church being "at pains to preserve Latin", it quite clearly still is. Latin can still be found in many elements of Church life. Your argument is not about the use of Latin per se; it is about the use of an antecedent liturgical rite which has been superseded. The current universal liturgical rite of the Church is published in Latin and the Latin text can be freely used, as well as the many vernacular language versions.
Can you give a reference for those quotes, please? I'd be interested to see the context. But while Latin might have given rise to "no jealousies" when it was the universal language of Catholic liturgy, quite plainly it is giving rise to plenty of "jealousies", disagreements and conflicts now that it isn't. As for the Church being "at pains to preserve Latin", it quite clearly still is. Latin can still be found in many elements of Church life. Your argument is not about the use of Latin per se; it is about the use of an antecedent liturgical rite which has been superseded. The current universal liturgical rite of the Church is published in Latin and the Latin text can be freely used, as well as the many vernacular language versions.
75John5918
>74 brone:
That's really not very helpful. Can you point me at the document in which he says these, please? But remember two things. Firstly, that he was referring to the use of Latin in the mass, not specifically to the use of an antecedent liturgical rite that had been superseded. The Latin language continues to be found in the Church and in the mass. Secondly, he was speaking twenty or more years ago, before this antecedent liturgy had become a rallying point for a small but vocal minority of Catholics who openly oppose the teaching of the Church, as expressed in the Second Vatican Council, and, in a vitriolic manner, of the papacy.
That's really not very helpful. Can you point me at the document in which he says these, please? But remember two things. Firstly, that he was referring to the use of Latin in the mass, not specifically to the use of an antecedent liturgical rite that had been superseded. The Latin language continues to be found in the Church and in the mass. Secondly, he was speaking twenty or more years ago, before this antecedent liturgy had become a rallying point for a small but vocal minority of Catholics who openly oppose the teaching of the Church, as expressed in the Second Vatican Council, and, in a vitriolic manner, of the papacy.
77John5918
>76 brone:
I'm a tad surprised that you can't see the difference between disagreeing with someone (eg the pope) in a rational and civil fashion on the one hand, and making toxic personal attacks laden with innuendo, scorn, ridicule, disparagement, vitriol and disinformation on the other. But perhaps I'm just old-fashioned (traditional, one might say), and I'm out of touch with the modern sport of trial by social media?
I'm a tad surprised that you can't see the difference between disagreeing with someone (eg the pope) in a rational and civil fashion on the one hand, and making toxic personal attacks laden with innuendo, scorn, ridicule, disparagement, vitriol and disinformation on the other. But perhaps I'm just old-fashioned (traditional, one might say), and I'm out of touch with the modern sport of trial by social media?
78brone
>77 John5918: Yes you do seem a bit stiff lately, I will pray that you will overcome all this "disinformation" you have to suffer....JMJ....
80John5918
>79 brone:
This quote from the 19th century Pope Leo XIII appears to have been taken from a letter by Archbishop Vigano, a well known critic of the current pope, and can be found here and on a number of other "conservative" websites. But those words could be used to describe those who constantly attack the papacy and the teaching authority of the Church. I wonder whether Leo XIII could even have imagined the sort of organised abuse being heaped on his successor Francis by dissidents within that same Church?
Just for the record, "the New World Order" is a baseless conspiracy theory.
This quote from the 19th century Pope Leo XIII appears to have been taken from a letter by Archbishop Vigano, a well known critic of the current pope, and can be found here and on a number of other "conservative" websites. But those words could be used to describe those who constantly attack the papacy and the teaching authority of the Church. I wonder whether Leo XIII could even have imagined the sort of organised abuse being heaped on his successor Francis by dissidents within that same Church?
Just for the record, "the New World Order" is a baseless conspiracy theory.
82John5918
>81 brone:
I think there are many people who support the papacy but are willing to admit that it may have been unwise (or imprudent) in allowing Fiducia supplicans to be published now rather than waiting for the second phase of the Synod on Synodality to be completed at the end of 2024. Reports from the first phase suggested that while delegates from different wings of the Church had not changed their opinion on certain issues, nevertheless they expressed a greater understanding of the position of others who took a different view. That increased mutual understanding is a good starting point for crafting a statement which all could buy into. On the other hand, FS was a response to questions from bishops, and since some European bishops were already moving ahead in a direction which challenged certain aspects of Church teaching, the Vatican may have felt that there was a degree of urgency to nip that in the bud before it went too far. One might also argue that the wording of the document contained some ambiguity, whether deliberate or unintentional. I have not noticed any "silence" on this, and I find it is being discussed openly (but respectfully) by bishops, at least in the Catholic circles within which I move.
However one can do all of that without undermining the papacy and the Church's teaching authority. Elsewhere I have referred to an article describing the process where African bishops met, and the president of the African bishops' conference, SECAM, then travelled to Rome to express their concerns, where a statement was crafted which was agreed by himself, the Holy Father and the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. This statement emphasised the unity of the Church and the African bishops' respect and support for the Holy Father. That's a far cry from the sort of ridicule, disparagement and denigration of the papacy and the Church's teaching authority which sadly we see all too often from a small minority within the Church and, if I may say so, in some of the posts from your good self.
I recall again the reading from Ephesians 4:29-32 in Morning Prayer last Friday, which advises us on how to speak: "No foul word should ever cross your lips; let your words be for the improvement of others, as occasion offers, and do good to your listeners; do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God who has marked you with his seal, ready for the day when we shall be set free. Any bitterness or bad temper or anger or shouting or abuse must be far removed from you -- as must every kind of malice. Be generous to one another, sympathetic, forgiving each other as readily as God forgave you in Christ", and I find it sad that in this Christianity group we don't see more of that sort of helpful and positive discourse. Or, as the old Catholic saying goes, "In all things, charity". Reading generally about US politics I notice that the use of disparaging nicknames (eg "Crooked Joe Biden") seems to be a standard right wing ploy, and sadly the same dynamic also appears in this Christianity group, ridiculing and denigrating a cardinal ("Tuchy") or a pope ("banana republic dictator").
Your suggestion that "dissent" is suppressed doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as the example of the African bishops shows. Perhaps your memory fails you as to how dissent was suppressed in the past, even during our lifetime, with many books banned and theologians silenced? A long list of recent theologians were restricted by the Vatican - Charles Curran, Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Kung, Hans Wijngaards, Yves Congar, Matthew Fox - the list goes on. You yourself often refer to the theologian Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who was restricted by the Church. But their works are now available for people to make up their own minds. The Church is now more open than it has ever been.
I think if one's greatest criticism of a pope who is pretty much respected throughout the world by Catholics and non-Catholics alike is that he is at times a little imprudent in his timing, that's rather a minor fault to be set against all his positive attributes. None of us is perfect. If however one wishes to oppose the papacy and Church teaching on ideological grounds, then I suppose it's another weapon in one's arsenal.
I think there are many people who support the papacy but are willing to admit that it may have been unwise (or imprudent) in allowing Fiducia supplicans to be published now rather than waiting for the second phase of the Synod on Synodality to be completed at the end of 2024. Reports from the first phase suggested that while delegates from different wings of the Church had not changed their opinion on certain issues, nevertheless they expressed a greater understanding of the position of others who took a different view. That increased mutual understanding is a good starting point for crafting a statement which all could buy into. On the other hand, FS was a response to questions from bishops, and since some European bishops were already moving ahead in a direction which challenged certain aspects of Church teaching, the Vatican may have felt that there was a degree of urgency to nip that in the bud before it went too far. One might also argue that the wording of the document contained some ambiguity, whether deliberate or unintentional. I have not noticed any "silence" on this, and I find it is being discussed openly (but respectfully) by bishops, at least in the Catholic circles within which I move.
However one can do all of that without undermining the papacy and the Church's teaching authority. Elsewhere I have referred to an article describing the process where African bishops met, and the president of the African bishops' conference, SECAM, then travelled to Rome to express their concerns, where a statement was crafted which was agreed by himself, the Holy Father and the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. This statement emphasised the unity of the Church and the African bishops' respect and support for the Holy Father. That's a far cry from the sort of ridicule, disparagement and denigration of the papacy and the Church's teaching authority which sadly we see all too often from a small minority within the Church and, if I may say so, in some of the posts from your good self.
I recall again the reading from Ephesians 4:29-32 in Morning Prayer last Friday, which advises us on how to speak: "No foul word should ever cross your lips; let your words be for the improvement of others, as occasion offers, and do good to your listeners; do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God who has marked you with his seal, ready for the day when we shall be set free. Any bitterness or bad temper or anger or shouting or abuse must be far removed from you -- as must every kind of malice. Be generous to one another, sympathetic, forgiving each other as readily as God forgave you in Christ", and I find it sad that in this Christianity group we don't see more of that sort of helpful and positive discourse. Or, as the old Catholic saying goes, "In all things, charity". Reading generally about US politics I notice that the use of disparaging nicknames (eg "Crooked Joe Biden") seems to be a standard right wing ploy, and sadly the same dynamic also appears in this Christianity group, ridiculing and denigrating a cardinal ("Tuchy") or a pope ("banana republic dictator").
Your suggestion that "dissent" is suppressed doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as the example of the African bishops shows. Perhaps your memory fails you as to how dissent was suppressed in the past, even during our lifetime, with many books banned and theologians silenced? A long list of recent theologians were restricted by the Vatican - Charles Curran, Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Kung, Hans Wijngaards, Yves Congar, Matthew Fox - the list goes on. You yourself often refer to the theologian Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who was restricted by the Church. But their works are now available for people to make up their own minds. The Church is now more open than it has ever been.
I think if one's greatest criticism of a pope who is pretty much respected throughout the world by Catholics and non-Catholics alike is that he is at times a little imprudent in his timing, that's rather a minor fault to be set against all his positive attributes. None of us is perfect. If however one wishes to oppose the papacy and Church teaching on ideological grounds, then I suppose it's another weapon in one's arsenal.
84John5918
>83 brone:
I think it's worth remembering that Fiducia supplicans explicitly does not allow blessing of irregular unions. In that regard it is a restatement of traditional Church teaching on marriage and a rebuff to European bishops who were moving in that direction. What it does is reiterate another traditional Church teaching, that a priest can bless any individual who reaches out to ask for God's grace without having to enquire about their moral status.
I haven't yet seen an English translation of last November's Ad Theologiam Promovendam, which has been published in Latin and Italian, neither of which I speak, so I can't really comment. If you've found an English version could you share the link, please? But Vatican News reported that it was an update to the Statutes of the Pontifical Academy of Theology, calling for "a fundamentally contextual theology capable of reading and interpreting the Gospel in the conditions in which men and women live daily, in different geographical, social, and cultural environments". Theology must "develop in a culture of dialogue and encounter between different traditions and different disciplines, between different Christian denominations and different religions", must engage "openly with all, believers and non-believers alike", must "make use of new categories developed by other forms of knowledge, in order to penetrate and communicate the truths of faith and transmit the teaching of Jesus in today's languages, with originality and critical awareness", must not be "abstract and ideological, but spiritual, worked out on one's knees, pregnant with adoration and prayer; a transcendent discipline and, at the same time, attentive to the voice of the people". None of that is controversial, and is very much in line with the teaching of Vatican II's Gaudium et spes #4, which calls on the Church to "read the signs of the times". ATP also calls on theologians to practice "the approach of transdisciplinarity", which another document, Veritatis gaudium, more than five years ago explained as "situating and stimulating all disciplines against the backdrop of the Light and Life offered by the Wisdom streaming from God’s Revelation". For this reason, theology must "make use of new categories developed by other forms of knowledge, in order to penetrate and communicate the truths of faith and transmit the teaching of Jesus in today's languages, with originality and critical awareness". Again, nothing unusual there.
The dismissive use of the term "ghost writers" ignores the fact that any Church teaching document is not the whim of a single writer but is composed, discussed, critically examined and prayed over by a large number of theologians, canon lawyers, bishops, experts and others before being promulgated. That has been normal traditional Church practice for centuries, and it's one of the reasons why we have dicasteries in the Vatican, a Pontifical Academy of Theology, and many other institutions down to diocesan level. And I wonder why you continue using a dismissive made-up nickname, "Tuchy", for a cardinal? Cardinal Fernández' nickname is "Tucho", after an Argentinian football legend. He has said that his nickname “Tucho” comes from the one given to the high-scoring footballer Norberto Doroteo Méndez, who played for the Argentina national team between 1945 and 1956. The nickname had originally been his father’s, and Fernández was called Tuchito – little Tucho – after he was born (link). It was certainly not a pejorative, and to be frank your continued deliberate use of the wrong nickname looks a bit ridiculous.
And may I wish you every blessing today, Ash Wednesday, and during the Lenten period which we are entering. A priest is coming to our rural village chapel for mass this morning, which is a great blessing for us and our local community.
I think it's worth remembering that Fiducia supplicans explicitly does not allow blessing of irregular unions. In that regard it is a restatement of traditional Church teaching on marriage and a rebuff to European bishops who were moving in that direction. What it does is reiterate another traditional Church teaching, that a priest can bless any individual who reaches out to ask for God's grace without having to enquire about their moral status.
I haven't yet seen an English translation of last November's Ad Theologiam Promovendam, which has been published in Latin and Italian, neither of which I speak, so I can't really comment. If you've found an English version could you share the link, please? But Vatican News reported that it was an update to the Statutes of the Pontifical Academy of Theology, calling for "a fundamentally contextual theology capable of reading and interpreting the Gospel in the conditions in which men and women live daily, in different geographical, social, and cultural environments". Theology must "develop in a culture of dialogue and encounter between different traditions and different disciplines, between different Christian denominations and different religions", must engage "openly with all, believers and non-believers alike", must "make use of new categories developed by other forms of knowledge, in order to penetrate and communicate the truths of faith and transmit the teaching of Jesus in today's languages, with originality and critical awareness", must not be "abstract and ideological, but spiritual, worked out on one's knees, pregnant with adoration and prayer; a transcendent discipline and, at the same time, attentive to the voice of the people". None of that is controversial, and is very much in line with the teaching of Vatican II's Gaudium et spes #4, which calls on the Church to "read the signs of the times". ATP also calls on theologians to practice "the approach of transdisciplinarity", which another document, Veritatis gaudium, more than five years ago explained as "situating and stimulating all disciplines against the backdrop of the Light and Life offered by the Wisdom streaming from God’s Revelation". For this reason, theology must "make use of new categories developed by other forms of knowledge, in order to penetrate and communicate the truths of faith and transmit the teaching of Jesus in today's languages, with originality and critical awareness". Again, nothing unusual there.
The dismissive use of the term "ghost writers" ignores the fact that any Church teaching document is not the whim of a single writer but is composed, discussed, critically examined and prayed over by a large number of theologians, canon lawyers, bishops, experts and others before being promulgated. That has been normal traditional Church practice for centuries, and it's one of the reasons why we have dicasteries in the Vatican, a Pontifical Academy of Theology, and many other institutions down to diocesan level. And I wonder why you continue using a dismissive made-up nickname, "Tuchy", for a cardinal? Cardinal Fernández' nickname is "Tucho", after an Argentinian football legend. He has said that his nickname “Tucho” comes from the one given to the high-scoring footballer Norberto Doroteo Méndez, who played for the Argentina national team between 1945 and 1956. The nickname had originally been his father’s, and Fernández was called Tuchito – little Tucho – after he was born (link). It was certainly not a pejorative, and to be frank your continued deliberate use of the wrong nickname looks a bit ridiculous.
And may I wish you every blessing today, Ash Wednesday, and during the Lenten period which we are entering. A priest is coming to our rural village chapel for mass this morning, which is a great blessing for us and our local community.
86John5918
>85 brone: In Africa it took one day for the bishops to not observe the provisions of FS
That is really rather an exaggeration, isn't it? The Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference, for example, produced a very balanced response to FS within a couple of days, while the bishops of Sudan and South Sudan, as far as I am aware, have not produced any reaction. In these two countries facing between them war, violence*, rape, looting, ethnic cleansing, corrupt governance, tribalism, poverty, starvation, millions of refugees and displaced persons, floods and disease, they have rather more pressing concerns than hypothetically blessing an irregular same sex union - I rather doubt whether any Sudanese or South Sudanese priest or bishop has ever been asked to do so. The irregular unions which they come across would be polygamous heterosexual ones. But as I have patiently explained to you here and/or in various parallel threads, the African bishops did express their concerns about some aspects of FS in view of African cultural sensitivities around homosexuality. The president of the continental bishops' conference went to Rome to share those concerns with the pope and the President of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, and between them they crafted a statement which all three could agree to, and which explicitly demonstrated the African bishops' respect for and unity with the Holy Father. This is a far cry from the "weaponisation" (your word) of this document by some Catholics who can't even bring themselves to refer to the pope by any of his titles.
James Martin
If Fr James Martin carried out a formal liturgical blessing of a same sex union, then he is out of step with Church teaching, and his own conscience and his religious superiors are no doubt reflecting on this. But he is by no means the first or the last priest to be in that situation; you yourself often speak approvingly of priests who openly flout Church teaching with regard to the liturgy. The Church goes on, regardless of individual priests who bend or break the rules.
The ghost rider tuchy wrote 5,000 words which I can say in 10, "you don't need to be a saint to receive a blessing"
By "tuchy" I presume you are again making up your own disparaging nickname for Cardinal Fernandez? It really does get a bit tedious. But virtually any part of Christian scripture and doctrine is explained in "5,000 words which I can say in 10". "Love your neighbour as yourself" is only five words, but millions of words have been written to deepen our understanding of that simple and yet infinitely complex principle. As for the eleven word summary, "you don't need to be a saint to receive a blessing", that's basically the whole of one of the two main points of FS, and it's something we can all agree on, I think. The other main point is "the Church does not give liturgical blessings to irregular unions", a rebuff to some European bishops, and apparently to Fr Martin, who wish to move in that direction.
I am amused though to hear you describe Cardinal Fernandez as "the ghost rider". I have visions of the good cardinal dressed in Nicolas Cage's leather jacket, his grinning skull on fire as he rides a blazing motorbike through the night carrying out vigilante acts of gratuitous violence.
* See, for example, One Year after Papal Visit, South Sudan Still Plagued by Violence.
That is really rather an exaggeration, isn't it? The Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference, for example, produced a very balanced response to FS within a couple of days, while the bishops of Sudan and South Sudan, as far as I am aware, have not produced any reaction. In these two countries facing between them war, violence*, rape, looting, ethnic cleansing, corrupt governance, tribalism, poverty, starvation, millions of refugees and displaced persons, floods and disease, they have rather more pressing concerns than hypothetically blessing an irregular same sex union - I rather doubt whether any Sudanese or South Sudanese priest or bishop has ever been asked to do so. The irregular unions which they come across would be polygamous heterosexual ones. But as I have patiently explained to you here and/or in various parallel threads, the African bishops did express their concerns about some aspects of FS in view of African cultural sensitivities around homosexuality. The president of the continental bishops' conference went to Rome to share those concerns with the pope and the President of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, and between them they crafted a statement which all three could agree to, and which explicitly demonstrated the African bishops' respect for and unity with the Holy Father. This is a far cry from the "weaponisation" (your word) of this document by some Catholics who can't even bring themselves to refer to the pope by any of his titles.
James Martin
If Fr James Martin carried out a formal liturgical blessing of a same sex union, then he is out of step with Church teaching, and his own conscience and his religious superiors are no doubt reflecting on this. But he is by no means the first or the last priest to be in that situation; you yourself often speak approvingly of priests who openly flout Church teaching with regard to the liturgy. The Church goes on, regardless of individual priests who bend or break the rules.
The ghost rider tuchy wrote 5,000 words which I can say in 10, "you don't need to be a saint to receive a blessing"
By "tuchy" I presume you are again making up your own disparaging nickname for Cardinal Fernandez? It really does get a bit tedious. But virtually any part of Christian scripture and doctrine is explained in "5,000 words which I can say in 10". "Love your neighbour as yourself" is only five words, but millions of words have been written to deepen our understanding of that simple and yet infinitely complex principle. As for the eleven word summary, "you don't need to be a saint to receive a blessing", that's basically the whole of one of the two main points of FS, and it's something we can all agree on, I think. The other main point is "the Church does not give liturgical blessings to irregular unions", a rebuff to some European bishops, and apparently to Fr Martin, who wish to move in that direction.
I am amused though to hear you describe Cardinal Fernandez as "the ghost rider". I have visions of the good cardinal dressed in Nicolas Cage's leather jacket, his grinning skull on fire as he rides a blazing motorbike through the night carrying out vigilante acts of gratuitous violence.
* See, for example, One Year after Papal Visit, South Sudan Still Plagued by Violence.
87John5918
>86 John5918:
German bishops halt move toward establishing a Synodal Council at Vatican’s request (Catholic News Agency)
I post this here not because it is particularly on topic for a thread entitled "Post Benedict XVI" but because, following >85 brone: and >86 John5918:, it is another example of how bishops' conferences resolve their differences with the Vatican without "weaponising" (again, your own word) them. As Pope Francis wrote, it is important for the universal Church to steer a "common path". This move by the German bishops, like the African bishops' process I described, is prioritising the unity of the Church and respect for the papacy and the Church's teaching authority over and above disagreement on particular issues.
German bishops halt move toward establishing a Synodal Council at Vatican’s request (Catholic News Agency)
In a significant setback for the Synodal Way project in Germany, the German bishops will not be voting on a step toward a forbidden “Synodal Council” at their upcoming plenary assembly at the Vatican’s request. German Bishops Conference (DBK) spokesman Matthias Kopp confirmed on Feb. 17 that the bishops have removed a vote on endorsing a committee that is preparing the Synodal Council, a mixed body of laity and bishops that would govern the Church in Germany, from the agenda of their Feb. 19–22 meeting in Augsburg. The development comes after the DBK received a letter from the Vatican on the same day. “This letter requests that the General Assembly — also due to upcoming discussions between representatives of the Roman Curia and representatives of the German Bishops’ Conference — not vote on the statutes of the Synodal Committee,” Kopp told Germany’s Catholic News Agency (KNA)... recently, Pope Francis wrote a private letter to four German Catholic laywomen describing the preparatory committee, and not just the Synodal Council, as one of “numerous steps being taken by significant segments” of the Church in Germany “that threaten to steer it increasingly away from the universal Church’s common path”...
I post this here not because it is particularly on topic for a thread entitled "Post Benedict XVI" but because, following >85 brone: and >86 John5918:, it is another example of how bishops' conferences resolve their differences with the Vatican without "weaponising" (again, your own word) them. As Pope Francis wrote, it is important for the universal Church to steer a "common path". This move by the German bishops, like the African bishops' process I described, is prioritising the unity of the Church and respect for the papacy and the Church's teaching authority over and above disagreement on particular issues.
89brone
"Certainly, the results of {Vaticanll} seem cruelly opposed to the expectations of everyone beginning with JohnXXXlll and then PaulVl: expected was a new Catholic Unity instead we have been exposed to dissention which---to use the words of Paul Vl--- seems to have gone from self-criticism to self-destruction. Expected was a new enthusiasm and many wound up discouraged and bored. Expected was a great step forward and instead we find ourselves faced with a progressive process of decadence which has developed for the most part precisely under the sign of calling back to the council and has therefore contributed to the discrediting for many. The net result therfore seems negative. I am repeating here what I said 10 years ago after the conclusion of the work: it is incontrovertible that this period has definetly been unfavorable for the Church". Ratziger 1984, If I were a Cardinal I'd vote for an Italian in the upcoming conclave and suggest the name Pius....JMJ....
90John5918
>89 brone:
I'm sorry the good pope felt that way. I'm old enough to remember the pre- and post-Vatican II period, and I certainly experienced the excitement of "a new Catholic Unity", constructive "self-criticism", "a new enthusiasm", and "a great step forward", particularly during the 1970s and '80s. However reactionary influences were still at work even then, and certainly by the 1990s and early 2000s, during the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, there was a sense that the momentum had been lost, and I know many Catholics who were beginning to lose their enthusiasm. Some would date that trend even earlier - I recall a book entitled What Ever Happened to Vatican II by a Catholic priest, Fr Michael Winter, which was published in 1985, just a year after your quote from then Cardinal Ratzinger, which chronicled some of the ways in which the substantial reforms of Vatican II were being frustrated, with only superficial changes taking place. As a result of this lack of progress many Catholics did end up becoming "discouraged and bored". Thank God that a new pope, Francis, has injected new enthusiasm into the Church, although the "dissension" feared by Ratzinger in 1984 has returned to haunt us as those uncomfortable with reform now attack the papacy and the teaching authority of the Church.
I'm sorry the good pope felt that way. I'm old enough to remember the pre- and post-Vatican II period, and I certainly experienced the excitement of "a new Catholic Unity", constructive "self-criticism", "a new enthusiasm", and "a great step forward", particularly during the 1970s and '80s. However reactionary influences were still at work even then, and certainly by the 1990s and early 2000s, during the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, there was a sense that the momentum had been lost, and I know many Catholics who were beginning to lose their enthusiasm. Some would date that trend even earlier - I recall a book entitled What Ever Happened to Vatican II by a Catholic priest, Fr Michael Winter, which was published in 1985, just a year after your quote from then Cardinal Ratzinger, which chronicled some of the ways in which the substantial reforms of Vatican II were being frustrated, with only superficial changes taking place. As a result of this lack of progress many Catholics did end up becoming "discouraged and bored". Thank God that a new pope, Francis, has injected new enthusiasm into the Church, although the "dissension" feared by Ratzinger in 1984 has returned to haunt us as those uncomfortable with reform now attack the papacy and the teaching authority of the Church.
91brone
Cardinal Heenan the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster felt the same way as Ratzinger, Heenan said, "the pope and most of the Council Fathers shared an illusion that they had come together for a short convivial meeting. God was merciful in allowing Pope John to die before witnessing the results of his decision to hold a council"....JMJ....
92John5918
>91 brone:
You don't cite a source or a date for that quote, so it's difficult to set it in context. It's an opinion voiced by the good cardinal, but it would need to be tested against the opinions of the thousands of other Vatican II Fathers. On the website of one of the Catholic schools named after the good cardinal, it reports, "Cardinal Heenan attended the Vatican Council from 1962 – 1965. He was cautious yet determined about implementing its decisions in his diocese. He furthered ecumenical dialogue through his warm friendship with the Chief Rabbi and the Archbishop of Canterbury" (link). "Cautious yet determined" is exactly what one would expect from a bishop. I've had the privilege of meeting around half a dozen of the Council Fathers over the years, and none of them expressed any negative sentiments. There's a thread about it somewhere on LT (link) which includes quotes from some of them: "The greatest experience of my whole life: the Second Vatican Council" (South African Archbishop Denis Hurley); a "truly unique and spiritually enriching experience... surely a great gift" (British missionary Bishop Colin Davies). Worth remembering also that the then Fr Ratzinger attended as a peritus, a theology advisor, not as a decision-making bishop, so his experience of it was not the same as theirs.
A long quote from Italian Bishop Luigi Bettazzi may be pertinent (link), "It made me fully aware for the first time of the catholicity of the church: we Italians often think of the church as 'our' thing, but at the council so many bishops were from Africa, Asia and Latin America, whereas at the First Vatican Council, which ended in 1870, the bishops from these places were usually Europeans rather than native-born. Secondly, the Spirit was abroad—you could feel the dynamism as, united in faith, the participants sought the truth needed for new times. Thirdly, I was invigorated by meetings with other bishops who, like me, were inspired by a Charles de Foucauld–type spirituality and believed their task was to serve the poor and live a modest lifestyle as we promised in the 'Catacomb Pact.'” Hopes for collegiality and aggiornamento were not illusory, but were subsequently hindered "Mainly by people who have preserved the mentality of the conciliar minority and remain particularly influential within the church’s central administration, the Roman Curia" (although in 2024 one might add also by a similar minority within the US Church). And to those who see negativity following the Council, Bishop Bettazzi warns, "If the need for aggiornamento or updating had been ignored and there was no council, the negative effects would have been significant."
Attempts to undermine the legitimacy of Vatican II collapse when one looks at the reality that all the teaching documents of the council were agreed virtually unanimously by the thousands of Council Fathers. To give just one example, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, was agreed by 2,147 bishops with only 4 against. The fact is that for every anecdotal quote from a Council participant bishop who had reservations about it, there are plenty of positive quotes which provide a more complete and balanced picture.
You don't cite a source or a date for that quote, so it's difficult to set it in context. It's an opinion voiced by the good cardinal, but it would need to be tested against the opinions of the thousands of other Vatican II Fathers. On the website of one of the Catholic schools named after the good cardinal, it reports, "Cardinal Heenan attended the Vatican Council from 1962 – 1965. He was cautious yet determined about implementing its decisions in his diocese. He furthered ecumenical dialogue through his warm friendship with the Chief Rabbi and the Archbishop of Canterbury" (link). "Cautious yet determined" is exactly what one would expect from a bishop. I've had the privilege of meeting around half a dozen of the Council Fathers over the years, and none of them expressed any negative sentiments. There's a thread about it somewhere on LT (link) which includes quotes from some of them: "The greatest experience of my whole life: the Second Vatican Council" (South African Archbishop Denis Hurley); a "truly unique and spiritually enriching experience... surely a great gift" (British missionary Bishop Colin Davies). Worth remembering also that the then Fr Ratzinger attended as a peritus, a theology advisor, not as a decision-making bishop, so his experience of it was not the same as theirs.
A long quote from Italian Bishop Luigi Bettazzi may be pertinent (link), "It made me fully aware for the first time of the catholicity of the church: we Italians often think of the church as 'our' thing, but at the council so many bishops were from Africa, Asia and Latin America, whereas at the First Vatican Council, which ended in 1870, the bishops from these places were usually Europeans rather than native-born. Secondly, the Spirit was abroad—you could feel the dynamism as, united in faith, the participants sought the truth needed for new times. Thirdly, I was invigorated by meetings with other bishops who, like me, were inspired by a Charles de Foucauld–type spirituality and believed their task was to serve the poor and live a modest lifestyle as we promised in the 'Catacomb Pact.'” Hopes for collegiality and aggiornamento were not illusory, but were subsequently hindered "Mainly by people who have preserved the mentality of the conciliar minority and remain particularly influential within the church’s central administration, the Roman Curia" (although in 2024 one might add also by a similar minority within the US Church). And to those who see negativity following the Council, Bishop Bettazzi warns, "If the need for aggiornamento or updating had been ignored and there was no council, the negative effects would have been significant."
Attempts to undermine the legitimacy of Vatican II collapse when one looks at the reality that all the teaching documents of the council were agreed virtually unanimously by the thousands of Council Fathers. To give just one example, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, was agreed by 2,147 bishops with only 4 against. The fact is that for every anecdotal quote from a Council participant bishop who had reservations about it, there are plenty of positive quotes which provide a more complete and balanced picture.
93brone
The changes that came about as PV! said , were used to justify a "dangerous and reckless interpretation". In many cases the changes that came about in the name of the council were diametrically opposed to what the council actually mandated; the liturgy alone would fill a volume. The fuzzy warm feeling folk hymns put in place of Such Hymnals as The Edmund Campion and the St Jean DeBreuf hymnals not to mention the dissapearance of any chant. Gregorian Chant was actually ordered by the council to be the norm for sung Masses. Show me one word from the council ordering or I'll go out on a limb here and say, even recommending that the entire Mass be said in the vernacular, Mass facing the people, facing other than Ad Orientum, standing for Communion, Communion in the hand, instituting Eucharistic ministers, and obscuring the tabernacle in the corner. To mention this you become a "dissident", "one of a small number of 1.5 billion Catholics". The Truth is by their "fruit you shall know them". The objective truth if we have the courage to to make a careful examination of the Counciliar and post Counciliar years the "reforms" hijacked from what the council mandated contributed and still contribute to the demolition of the Church, the ruin of the priesthood, the destruction of the Sacrifice and the disappearance of religious life as well as the heretical Tielhardian doctrine prevalent in Catholic schools and Universities a teaching born out of Liberalism and Protestantism, condemned by the Church Magisterium many times....JMJ....
94John5918
>93 brone:
The claim that "the changes that came about in the name of the council were diametrically opposed to what the council actually mandated" is certainly open to challenge, and is not the view of many of the Council Fathers who are on record. You're correct, of course, that the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, did not itself detail every minor change, but it set the tone and intention for the detailed changes to be made after study, consultation, prayer and discernment, which is what happened.
I agree with you completely that some appalling "fuzzy warm feeling folk hymns" made an appearance in the early years of the transition, but the worst of those have now faded into obscurity, and many of those which survive are actually scripturally based. Good new music which is not "folk" has been produced in many pastoral and liturgical centres. In Sudan, our own cardinal was a liturgist and musician who composed music for the Arabic mass, and in East Africa masses were composed at the Gaba Pastoral Institute for the Kiswahili mass. The traditional English language hymn books were not replaced and are still very much in use, in my experience. The hymns used in the Divine Office (Liturgy of the Hours, the breviary, the daily prayers recited by all clergy and religious throughout the world) are almost all old traditional hymns. "Chant" has not disappeared and, while it might not technically be Gregorian Chant, chant in that style is still very much in evidence - the Gelineau psalms, settings for the Easter Exsultet, Taize chants, etc, as well as the chants for singing various parts of the mass, including the gospel, the proper prayers, the doxology, etc. Watch a video of a major mass in the Vatican and you'll hear plenty of chant.
As for "the demolition of the Church, the ruin of the priesthood, the destruction of the Sacrifice and the disappearance of religious life", this is a fiction. The Church is alive and well, African seminaries are full, I've just been looking at research documenting the massive increase in religious sisters in Africa, and the Church in the Global South is full of joy and hope, as well as sacrifice - some of my own colleagues have been martyred. It's natural that each one of us speaks from our limited experience, but cheer up and take heart that the US malaise that you apparently see does not represent the global Church.
The claim that "the changes that came about in the name of the council were diametrically opposed to what the council actually mandated" is certainly open to challenge, and is not the view of many of the Council Fathers who are on record. You're correct, of course, that the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, did not itself detail every minor change, but it set the tone and intention for the detailed changes to be made after study, consultation, prayer and discernment, which is what happened.
I agree with you completely that some appalling "fuzzy warm feeling folk hymns" made an appearance in the early years of the transition, but the worst of those have now faded into obscurity, and many of those which survive are actually scripturally based. Good new music which is not "folk" has been produced in many pastoral and liturgical centres. In Sudan, our own cardinal was a liturgist and musician who composed music for the Arabic mass, and in East Africa masses were composed at the Gaba Pastoral Institute for the Kiswahili mass. The traditional English language hymn books were not replaced and are still very much in use, in my experience. The hymns used in the Divine Office (Liturgy of the Hours, the breviary, the daily prayers recited by all clergy and religious throughout the world) are almost all old traditional hymns. "Chant" has not disappeared and, while it might not technically be Gregorian Chant, chant in that style is still very much in evidence - the Gelineau psalms, settings for the Easter Exsultet, Taize chants, etc, as well as the chants for singing various parts of the mass, including the gospel, the proper prayers, the doxology, etc. Watch a video of a major mass in the Vatican and you'll hear plenty of chant.
As for "the demolition of the Church, the ruin of the priesthood, the destruction of the Sacrifice and the disappearance of religious life", this is a fiction. The Church is alive and well, African seminaries are full, I've just been looking at research documenting the massive increase in religious sisters in Africa, and the Church in the Global South is full of joy and hope, as well as sacrifice - some of my own colleagues have been martyred. It's natural that each one of us speaks from our limited experience, but cheer up and take heart that the US malaise that you apparently see does not represent the global Church.
95John5918
Pope Francis: Benedict XVI Defended me in Face of Accusations "that I promoted gay marriage" (ACI Africa)
In a new book interview with Pope Francis, the Holy Father recalled that Benedict XVI defended him when he was accused of promoting “homosexual marriage.” In the Spanish-language book “The Successor: My Memories of Benedict XVI,” Pope Francis relates that on one occasion he had “a very beautiful visit with him Benedict XVI when some cardinals came to see him, surprised by my words about marriage, and he was very clear with them.” “One day they showed up at his house to practically put me on trial and accused me before him that I promoted homosexual marriage. Benedict didn’t get agitated, because he knew perfectly well what I think. He listened to them all, one by one, calmed them down and explained everything to them,” Pope Francis recounted... The Holy Father related that after these words “some went to tell Benedict that I was saying heresies and what do I know. He listened to them and with great high-mindedness, helped them distinguish things... he told them: ‘This is not a heresy.’ How he defended me!... He always defended me”...
96John5918
Ratzinger Foundation’s Pioneer International Congress to Explore Philosophical Vision, Theology of Pope Benedict XVI (ACI Africa)
The International Ratzinger Foundation will hold the first international congress “Cooperatores Veritatis” (“Co-workers of the Truth”) at Pan American University in Mexico City from April 17–19 to explore the dialogue between Pope Benedict XVI — who would have turned 97 years old today, April 16 — and philosophical traditions. According to the event’s website, the congress came about as a result of a research project initiated by the International Ratzinger Foundation, which seeks to “to establish an extensive network of researchers across various fields of knowledge to perpetuate systematic studies on the profound intellectual and spiritual legacy of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.” As part of this project, the collective work “Joseph Ratzinger in Dialogue with Philosophical Traditions: From Plato to Vattimo,” was published in which 19 authors explore how Pope Benedict XVI “engages with the great philosophers of the Western tradition and dialogues with them from his unique theological perspective”...
97Diamondhead
Malachy Martin was saying in 1997. that Pope will be forced to resign, as a plan of infiltrated enemy in the church.
98John5918
>97 Diamondhead: But with all due respect, Malachy Martin said a lot of things which have long since been discredited.
99Diamondhead
>98 John5918: I dont know on what exactly do you mean. I cant say I agree with everything Malachy said.
In Anguera approved apparitions you have the following mention from Our Lady:
"King will be ousted, and the day will come when there will be two thrones, but only on one throne there will be the true succesor of St. Peter"
Seer Pedro Regis said that this message already came to be with this situation when Benedict resigned, and there were two Popes.
We need to be cautious with this matter, but we have the right to speak openly about all the information that is in the eter. Number of people that knows all the information that was shared is extremely limited, and that is great shame. People at least need to know what is being said.
In Anguera approved apparitions you have the following mention from Our Lady:
"King will be ousted, and the day will come when there will be two thrones, but only on one throne there will be the true succesor of St. Peter"
Seer Pedro Regis said that this message already came to be with this situation when Benedict resigned, and there were two Popes.
We need to be cautious with this matter, but we have the right to speak openly about all the information that is in the eter. Number of people that knows all the information that was shared is extremely limited, and that is great shame. People at least need to know what is being said.
100brone
Malachi Martin, Irish born American citizen and Priest. Malachi had huge credentials but the one that got him "long since discredited" was that he was a Traditionalist Priest who loved the Latin Mass. Martin was one of the most expansive Catholic thinkers of the last century. The reason for the short answer from John5918 is because Martin was and still is despised by the Hierarchal Church especially for exposing apostasy of Jesuit modernists. Martin who was as educated and learned in the same areas as the Modernists patron saint Tielhard de Chardin. Martin opposed Tielhardian "higher criticism" of the bible and the Jesuit belief that the modernist demands absolute freedom of science in the widest sense of the word. Malachi opposed the past and current policy of Bergoglio and Jesuits of "refusing to allow theology to be tied down." Translation fixed dogma;s are now targets, Malachi opposed jsuitical Notions of guaranteeing the liberity of individual Catholics against encroachments by those big bad backward nationalistic traditionalists....JMJ....
101John5918
>100 brone:
Thanks for that clarification. I had never heard of Malachi Martin until his name came up in a post on this group a year or so ago in connection with an arguably pornographic book that the poster was recommending, describing its as "the most important book ever". I looked Martin up online, and he sounds like an interesting character, especially during the earlier academic part of his life. He left the Jesuits at his own request, and there is some unclarity over his subsequent status. It appears he supported a number of conspiracy theories. He died of a fall in 1999. I'm not sure what you mean by "those big bad backward nationalistic traditionalists", but Martin is described as a "traditionalist". He was certainly very critical of the Catholic Church, and some of his conspiracy theories were Church-related.
Thanks for that clarification. I had never heard of Malachi Martin until his name came up in a post on this group a year or so ago in connection with an arguably pornographic book that the poster was recommending, describing its as "the most important book ever". I looked Martin up online, and he sounds like an interesting character, especially during the earlier academic part of his life. He left the Jesuits at his own request, and there is some unclarity over his subsequent status. It appears he supported a number of conspiracy theories. He died of a fall in 1999. I'm not sure what you mean by "those big bad backward nationalistic traditionalists", but Martin is described as a "traditionalist". He was certainly very critical of the Catholic Church, and some of his conspiracy theories were Church-related.
102Diamondhead
>101 John5918: Oh yes, that book series explains everything Malachy Martin was trying to say, but he couldnt. Its all there in the form of a novel. But you can understand everything in the rigth way only if you read all four parts of the series, otherwise you can even get the wrong picture, if you read only half of the series. This book deals with many different stuff. It appears there is a...umh...a false secret also. A year ago you couldnt even find all of those books online. These books disappear, than reappear under different titles.
This is what Malachy was hinting...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFRy7Nk1oVE&t=3s
And this is explanation of it in four parts...
part one...
https://www.amazon.com/Night-Zagreb-%C4%90avolja-no%C4%87-Book-ebook/dp/B0BTB64M...
part two...
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0CTR54S5Q?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_tkin_1&...
part three...
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0CVFFN79L?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_tkin_2&...
part four...
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0CTHRMD1V?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_tkin_3&...
1. Assertions that book is pornographic...
Speculation is Malachy Martin was killed in his "fall". Some say that when they brought him to the hospital before he died he said "I was pushed"
Author, whoever he is, if he is still alive obviously doesnt want to "fall", so he avoids anything that could put him in the casket of Christian whsitleblowing or label him in any way similar to Malachy Martin.
Vulgar language helps with this. However, to label it as pornographic, as someone who read all four book - well, its just not true. Books are imbued with religion, Divine Mercy diary, etc...
I mean, just the fact that Pope John Paul II. in Fulda congress openly said he will never reveal the third secret of Fatima... says it all...
But now that Francis tickles "empty hell" you can understand the underground described in the book and how prophetic the story is.
This is what Malachy was hinting...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFRy7Nk1oVE&t=3s
And this is explanation of it in four parts...
part one...
https://www.amazon.com/Night-Zagreb-%C4%90avolja-no%C4%87-Book-ebook/dp/B0BTB64M...
part two...
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0CTR54S5Q?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_tkin_1&...
part three...
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0CVFFN79L?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_tkin_2&...
part four...
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0CTHRMD1V?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_tkin_3&...
1. Assertions that book is pornographic...
Speculation is Malachy Martin was killed in his "fall". Some say that when they brought him to the hospital before he died he said "I was pushed"
Author, whoever he is, if he is still alive obviously doesnt want to "fall", so he avoids anything that could put him in the casket of Christian whsitleblowing or label him in any way similar to Malachy Martin.
Vulgar language helps with this. However, to label it as pornographic, as someone who read all four book - well, its just not true. Books are imbued with religion, Divine Mercy diary, etc...
I mean, just the fact that Pope John Paul II. in Fulda congress openly said he will never reveal the third secret of Fatima... says it all...
But now that Francis tickles "empty hell" you can understand the underground described in the book and how prophetic the story is.
