|
Post by Séamus on Apr 19, 2018 0:41:45 GMT
Pope Francis will have to receive some pro-life merit points for supporting the parents of Alphie Evans. Appropriate that the boy that the boy was consciously or unconsciously named after the saint of moral theology.
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Apr 19, 2018 13:41:40 GMT
Pope Francis will have to receive some pro-life merit points for supporting the parents of Alphie Evans. Appropriate that the boy that the boy was consciously or unconsciously named after the saint of moral theology. Signed this three days ago and then it was as much as 20 000 names in support. Didn´t notice his name then!
|
|
|
Post by cato on May 8, 2018 18:42:00 GMT
My first post on this topic last May 2017 opined ,(not an original thought I confess) that Pope Francis was steering the petrine office and the Church more in an Anglican direction. His refusal to sort out a doctrinal dispute among the German bishops over Protestant spouses receiving the Holy Eucharist seems to be another example of this refusal to be a Pope in the traditional sense. A group of 7 German Conservative bishops brought the case to Rome and now the Pope has said agree among yourselves, which hopefully they won't if that means teaching error.
Looking at it from another point of view perhaps it is an example of the Holy Spirit protecting the church by preventing a pope teaching formal error.
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on May 8, 2018 21:16:01 GMT
Looking at it from another point of view perhaps it is an example of the Holy Spirit protecting the church by preventing a pope teaching formal error. It doesn't seem an isolated case. Why was the Pope only able to SUGGEST his radical departure regarding Communion for the remarried in a vague passage in an innuendo in an apostolic exhortation? It does seem as though some force is keeping him from compromising his office.
|
|
|
Post by cato on May 8, 2018 21:30:06 GMT
Cardinal John Henry Newman was often criticised for his opposition to the hyperultramontane atmosphere of the Church in his day. His balanced views on so many issues are a great gift to the Church in our time especially as so many former theological dissenters have reinvented themselves as rigid sour pussed papists.
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on May 20, 2018 7:50:44 GMT
I don't how much the wedding of the new Duke and Duchess of Sussex would have cost all up,I don't particularly begrudge them either, but I hope everyone does keep the extravaganza in mind when the usual fiscal criticism about papal visits begins in Ireland. Trivia: Did you know that, due to post-war rationing in Britain, the Australian Girl Guides sent over much of the ingredients for (the then Princess) Elizabeth's 1947 wedding cake?(which possibly lasted longer than most of her children's marriages)
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Oct 15, 2018 7:12:46 GMT
The WASHINGTON POST, in a comment whose authorship was attributed to two journalists, was probably a bit more perceptive than most newspapers concerning the canonisation of Paul VI : "Paul VI is the third pope to be canonized in four years... Though a canonization is meant to reflect a person's virtues,not his or her place in history, some say the Church has placed itself in an awkward position by turning sainthood into a near-default for modern popes...... Four years ago Pope John Paul II was named a saint,a step that seemingly secured the legacy for one of the towering figures of the 20th century. Instead, his papacy has come under an increasingly sharp and unsaintly critique, with some faithful saying his muted response in the early years of the sexual abuse crisis continues to haunt the Catholic Church. Debate about the actions of a papal saint would have been highly improbable during an earlier era of Catholicism, when popes were only rarely given the highest honor of the faith. But in recent years the Vatican has given rise to a rapid surge in papal saint-making... before history has rendered a final judgment on their papacies" The presence of 5000 pilgrims from El Salvador cheering on Romero's canonisation by Francis seems almost a full-circle from the early-80s booing-incident of John Paul, who was perceived as cool towards the archbishop's memory. It's interesting that St Oscar's plea to America to cease funding his government was ignored, not by the more-conservative Reagan, whose presidency he never saw, but by the liberal Carter establishment. Considering Paul's HUMANÆ VITÆ, perhaps both men should be seen in a wider spectrum. Also canonised was Katherine Kasper. My father was once reluctant to bless himself with a proffered relic-card, saying that she looked like a hard German woman, who'd possibly decide that he should carry more pain for the good of his soul. I'm sure that isn't the case.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 16, 2018 19:55:31 GMT
I do have a problem with the recent trend to canonise 20th century Popes. The subtext to this trend is that Vatican II is such an unparalled blessing that anyone associated with it must be a saint. There has even been a move recently to start the cause of John Paul I! Before this the last papal canonisation was Pope Pius X and before that was Pius V from the 16th century!
St Paul VI presided over a catastrophic period in church life at least in the West. It seems the main good thing he did from a conservative point of view was not caving into the advocates of the pill. As popes go he was a bit of a hapless well meaning new teacher who lost control of his class.
I think St Oscar Romero was much more complex that the lefty icon some paint him as.He was quite orthodox , even close to Opus Dei. His death came about due to his condemnation of oppression violence and great horrific injustice. In the light of those things he could not remain silent. It was moving to see photographs of the two saints together.
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Feb 22, 2019 2:54:55 GMT
I wonder what left-leaning supporters, both church and secular, of Francis are thinking after his remark that the devil was the originator of all sexual abuse? Believers in church doctrine will have little problem, as long as it's acknowledged the devil always has help, and the help needs to be dealt with sometimes, but it would almost seem like His Holiness is destined to become another Paul VI- displeasing to almost every side of the spectrums.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Feb 28, 2019 14:37:44 GMT
Last week's sexual abuse meeting in Rome was useful in that it highlighted the scourge that has poisoned the church for the last 40 odd years.
However it only skimmed the surface. The delegates were told what they could talk about and could only deal with the media after the conference was over.
Fine words were said by the holy father but he himself is directly implicated in several recent serious coverup allegations. In any other organisation a CEO would stand aside in similar circumstances but the church has never faced such a crazy chaotic corrupt situation. A mighty mess indeed. The mess maker may be defined by this sorry dispiriting clerical debacle.
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Mar 29, 2019 15:42:41 GMT
In the news: reports of a viral video where filial kissing of St. Peter´s ring gets refused one by one. According to the new Papal spokesman due to a wish not to spread disease implying that kissing the ring may cause bad health. Isn´t that extremly odd news? At first glance the satire site Eye of the Tiber came to mind. But this appears to be real news and not fake. What sense can be made of that story is frankly a bit diffuse to my already unhealthily confused mind.
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Mar 29, 2019 16:01:18 GMT
In the news: reports of a viral video where filial kissing of St. Peter´s ring gets refused one by one. According to the new Papal spokesman due to a wish not to spread disease implying that kissing the ring may cause bad health. Isn´t that extremly odd news? At first glance the satire site Eye of the Tiber came to mind. But this appears to be real news and not fake. What sense can be made of that story is frankly a bit diffuse to my already unhealthily confused mind. Successive Popes have been reducing the majesty associated with the office, and not just liberals. We hear so much about Pope Benedict's red shoes, but neither himself nor St. John Paul II decided to re-instigate the papal crown or tiara which Paul VI renounced. Personally I think all this is a mistake. The majesty of the Pope's office should be visible, and each successive Pope then has to cast away some other trapping of the papacy to signal how humble he is. "Humility will always, by preference, go clad in scarlet and gold; pride is that which refuses to let gold and scarlet impress it or please it too much." G.K. Chesterton, Heretics.
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Mar 29, 2019 16:52:58 GMT
In the news: reports of a viral video where filial kissing of St. Peter´s ring gets refused one by one. According to the new Papal spokesman due to a wish not to spread disease implying that kissing the ring may cause bad health. Isn´t that extremly odd news? At first glance the satire site Eye of the Tiber came to mind. But this appears to be real news and not fake. What sense can be made of that story is frankly a bit diffuse to my already unhealthily confused mind. This reminded me a little of a very brief video I saw of Merkel and her disgust with the German flag: www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2HHgY59lGI
|
|
|
Post by cato on Mar 29, 2019 18:18:51 GMT
The pope according to a few people I know can be quite moody and has a short fuse. He is also an old man and some of us get more impatient as we age!
The video that is causing the controversy is only part of his audience in Loreto. In the earlier part he didn't refuse to let people kiss the ring of Peter then in the part we were shown he does start acting like they have the plague!
He doesn't like people kissing the ring but it is a traditional gesture of honour to St Peter and the office and not simply the current bishop of Rome.
I actually think the loss of the tiara and the various trappings is a good thing. I would go further and advocate the Vatican gives up its special privileges as an independent state and let Italy run the various museums St Peters etc as part of the heritage of Europe. They already run many famous churches in the rest of Italy and seem to do a reasonable job. The church gets to use them for ceremonies but cannot wreck them in an urge to update.
Why? I think the present day papacy has radically undermined the office . The Vatican has deep rooted radical financial and sexual scandals that are indeed linked to clerical priviledge. To save the Petrine office we may need to divest ourselves of trappings that are no longer fit for purpose. The Irish church has a similar dilemma. Do we continue to uphold structures while numders of believers fall and we fail to evangelize?
One thing that went under the radar in Loreto which should please traddies - Francis celebrated mass ad orientam with no concelebrants!
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Mar 29, 2019 20:18:41 GMT
Could the Papal spokesman remark be considered simply a media show type practical joke? Almost as if saying "let's tell them it was all about hygien - at least it will upset some stupid traddies". That was the stranger part, even if the fact of refusing many times in itself plays odd strings not so little too, the latter (for better) might be natural due to pressure and frustration outside the film clip.
Edit: Having belatedly seen the actual full clip tonight it looks most like a deliberate playful action to make people avoid overly outward gestures. Folk around are heard laughing and the Pope smiles as he quickly pulls away his hand.
|
|