Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 4   [ 70 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 8:07 pm 
Offline
Prodigal Son of Thunder
Prodigal Son of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 10:54 am
Posts: 40159
Location: Ithilien
Religion: Dunedain Catholic
Church Affiliations: AWC, CSB, UIGSE-FSE (FNE)
My point was only that a very ecumenical Pope was not afraid to use the title - repeatedly.

_________________
Formerly Bagheera

"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the King." (1 Peter 2:17)
Federation of North-American Explorers - North Star Group - How You Can Help


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 8:20 pm 
Offline
King of Cool
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 76285
Religion: Anticukite Catholic
Peregrinator wrote:
My point was only that a very ecumenical Pope was not afraid to use the title - repeatedly.


Honestly, the claim that the only reason for anyone to have reservations about the title Co-Redemptrix is 'ecumenism' is a lot of nonsense, the title has existed since the 14th century and has always been controversial, long before there was such a thing as 'ecumenism' and before there was such a thing as 'Protestantism'. I don't think it was ecumenical concerns that led 15th century Dominicans to accuse the Franciscans who employed the title of heresy, nor was it concern about ecumenism that prevented 400 years of Popes from employing the term until 1922 when it was first used by Benedict XV.

_________________
Excelsior!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:19 pm 
Offline
Resident Philosopher
Resident Philosopher
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 6:28 pm
Posts: 11093
Location: Playing Guitar for Siggy's Choir...
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 2nd Deg. KoC, SSFJDOG
tAnGo wrote:
Peregrinator wrote:
To be fair St. John Paul II referred to Our Lady as "Co-redemptrix" six times in Papal addresses. So I don't think this attitude toward the title can be blamed solely on ecumenism.


bah, it's TOTALLY because some Catholics are afraid of non-Catholics accusing them of Mary worship...

Ok, well, it might also be because some Catholics are so poorly catechized that they actually think Co-redemptrix really does imply Mary worship.


The term itself is problematic if taken plainly with no explanation. I don't think anyone has a problem with the doctrine, but even I am nervous about the title given to her as a result of the doctrine. I won't say I object (and will gladly embrace it if defined) but where I stand right now I am not sure it is a good title.

FJ

_________________
Ut est rabidus.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:32 am 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6663
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
tAnGo wrote:
Peregrinator wrote:
To be fair ̶S̶t̶.̶ John Paul II referred to Our Lady as "Co-redemptrix" six times in Papal addresses. So I don't think this attitude toward the title can be blamed solely on ecumenism.


bah, it's TOTALLY because some Catholics are afraid of non-Catholics accusing them of Mary worship...

Ok, well, it might also be because some Catholics are so poorly catechized that they actually think Co-redemptrix really does imply Mary worship.



Actually, Peregrinator is right.

Some people downplayed it because of ecumenism, but that is only one reason. But I think it's one of the major reasons.

In fact, Rahner, Ratzinger, and Congar expressed concerns over the Marian Schema before the council due to how it would affect ecumenism - and not just Protestants, but all the “Orthodox.”

The point was that a large portion of Mariology was killed after the council. This was also in part thanks to the New Theology view that Mary was being too elevated. So much so that they became much too deficient in their view of Her. I don’t need hear about people actually being excessive in their Mariology views – that’s not the point. The point is the New Theology won the day and Mariology and its developments over the particularly the last few centuries was severely hampered.

And as a side note tAnGo, we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism and irreligious dialogue, spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual, then to care about developing Co-redemptrix beyond using the title 6 times in 26+ years.

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:58 am 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 837
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
tAnGo wrote:
Peregrinator wrote:
To be fair ̶S̶t̶.̶ John Paul II referred to Our Lady as "Co-redemptrix" six times in Papal addresses. So I don't think this attitude toward the title can be blamed solely on ecumenism.


bah, it's TOTALLY because some Catholics are afraid of non-Catholics accusing them of Mary worship...

Ok, well, it might also be because some Catholics are so poorly catechized that they actually think Co-redemptrix really does imply Mary worship.



And as a side note tAnGo, we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism and irreligious dialogue, spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual, then to care about developing Co-redemptrix beyond using the title 6 times in 26+ years.


So now Pope John Paul II is being accused of "spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual,", by Alexandros who is allowed to use the title 'Catholic' under his username. :shock: Pope John Paul II who is now a saint. This puts the criticisms of Pope Francis into perspective.

Alexandros are you more knowledgeable about Catholic theology and a better judge of what may or may not be "errors" than both Pope John Paul II AND Pope Francis? And if so, when did you become so more knowledgeable than two Popes, and how? What are your qualifications?

When you say "we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism", whom do you mean by "we"?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 8:27 am 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6663
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
So now Pope John Paul II is being accused of "spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual,", by Alexandros who is allowed to use the title 'Catholic' under his username. :shock: Pope John Paul II who is now a saint. This puts the criticisms of Pope Francis into perspective.



Where’s your qualifications to question if I am Catholic? I can play this game too.


Anyway, I shouldn’t have said anything as it is a sensitive topic – it just irks me that he so much wasted energy and allowed so many bizarre things to happen because he pursued his brand ecumenism and instead of other ventures in its place. That’s just how it goes though.


I can provide all the information you need proving the “accusations,” but it’s probably not best to go down this path (my fault again). Nothing I said is false if you look into it, expect “spewing” is probably not a charitable choice of words,so I apologize about that one.



Quote:
Alexandros are you more knowledgeable about Catholic theology and a better judge of what may or may not be "errors" than both Pope John Paul II AND Pope Francis? And if so, when did you become so more knowledgeable than two Popes, and how? What are your qualifications?


How do you yourself judge them as right? Where are your qualifications? See how silly an argument that is?


If a Pope fathered children out of wedlock, I guess I’m not allowed to say that is wrong, huh?

If the current Pope solicited a saint to protect a false religion I suppose I have to just embrace it, regardless of infallible teachings from other Popes and the Church herself that false religions are bad, right?

Or maybe if the Pope said the moon is made of cheese, I guess I turn off my brain and accept it, right?


Maybe every single thing Pope Francis does requires the next Pope to approve or disapprove. Since I have no qualifications in determining what is bad, I have no qualifications in determining what is good either, right? (and I am talking about non-authoritative stuff like off the cuff remarks and things like Pachamama).



Quote:
When you say "we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism", whom do you mean by "we"?



Tango and I - Since I named him specifically.

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:59 am 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 837
Religion: Looking for answers
I didn't question if you're a Catholic, Alexandros, I was referring to the fact that when registering for "The Catholic Message Board" when asked about what your religion is, to go under your username, it states:

'Religion: "Catholic" is reserved for practicing Catholics (upper case C, please) under the authority of the Pope.'

You don't appear to have much respect for the authority of the Pope, neither Pope Francis nor Pope John Paul II who is now a saint.

I'm not questioning whether you are a Catholic or not, but are you a Catholic under the authority of the Pope or above the authority of the Pope?

I'm pretty sure the Catholic Church does not teach that "false religions are bad,".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 10:30 am 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 82388
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
forumjunkie wrote:
The term itself is problematic if taken plainly with no explanation. I don't think anyone has a problem with the doctrine, but even I am nervous about the title given to her as a result of the doctrine. I won't say I object (and will gladly embrace it if defined) but where I stand right now I am not sure it is a good title.

FJ

I agree with FJ.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 10:37 am 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6663
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
I didn't question if you're a Catholic, Alexandros, I was referring to the fact that when registering for "The Catholic Message Board" when asked about what your religion is, to go under your username, it states:



'Religion: "Catholic" is reserved for practicing Catholics (upper case C, please) under the authority of the Pope.'



You don't appear to have much respect for the authority of the Pope, neither Pope Francis nor Pope John Paul II who is now a saint.



You cannot say you are not questioning it and in the literal very next sentences question it.

What are your qualifications for determining that I don’t have respect for their authority?


Quote:
You don't appear to have much respect for the authority of the Pope, neither Pope Francis nor Pope John Paul II who is now a saint.




Oh? I thought I made it clear. Read it again:

Alexandros wrote:
(and I am talking about non-authoritative stuff like off the cuff remarks and things like Pachamama)



Also, are you saying Popes are impeccable and/or no one can make any determination that they did something wrong? If so, please give me the specific infallible Church teaching that states this (since I am not qualified or something).


Quote:
I'm not questioning whether you are a Catholic or not, but are you a Catholic under the authority of the Pope or above the authority of the Pope?



Huh....?



That’s like saying, “I’m not questioning whether or not you are a United States citizen, but do have a state issued birth certificate and social security number or did you cross the border and are undocumented?”



See, the later means I am not a citizen. See how that works?

But, anyway...

I am certainly under the authority of the Pope.


But I know where this is going. So again: Please demonstrate, with infallible teaching from a Pope, that in all instances one cannot determine if Popes make mistakes and can disagree with them. Let’s see it.


Quote:
I'm pretty sure the Catholic Church does not teach that "false religions are bad,".



St. Paul, who has authority to teach, and whose writings were canonized by the Church as Scripture – which makes them authoritative and infallible (again, according to the Church) teaches this:


“No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons” (1 Corinthians 10:20)

And I shouldn't have to repeat the 1st Commandment about not having other gods before the Lord.


Paganism is a false religion. St. Paul says they worship demons. Are you going to tell me demon worship is not bad?


If it's not so bad then St. Paul must be wrong and you have no problems worshiping, say, Shiva? Go ahead and pray to it then if it’s not bad.

(Note: do NOT do that)


Also, what are your qualifications for interpreting Church teaching like this?

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 10:56 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 12:47 am
Posts: 15375
Religion: Catholic (SSPX)
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
forumjunkie wrote:
The term itself is problematic if taken plainly with no explanation. I don't think anyone has a problem with the doctrine, but even I am nervous about the title given to her as a result of the doctrine. I won't say I object (and will gladly embrace it if defined) but where I stand right now I am not sure it is a good title.

FJ

I agree with FJ.


Yeah, I think that's a fair enough assessment.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:47 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 837
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
What are your qualifications for determining that I don’t have respect for their authority?

I have a General Certificate of Secondary Education qualification in English Language, in other words, I can read, and when I read this:
Alexandros wrote:
And as a side note tAnGo, we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism and irreligious dialogue, spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual, then to care about developing Co-redemptrix beyond using the title 6 times in 26+ years.
I wrote this:
Denise Dee wrote:
You don't appear to have much respect for the authority of the Pope, neither Pope Francis nor Pope John Paul II who is now a saint.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 4:06 am 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6663
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
What are your qualifications for determining that I don’t have respect for their authority?

I have a General Certificate of Secondary Education qualification in English Language, in other words, I can read, and when I read this:
Alexandros wrote:
And as a side note tAnGo, we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism and irreligious dialogue, spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual, then to care about developing Co-redemptrix beyond using the title 6 times in 26+ years.
I wrote this:
Denise Dee wrote:
You don't appear to have much respect for the authority of the Pope, neither Pope Francis nor Pope John Paul II who is now a saint.


And I have a bachelor's degree in Religious Studies and a Masters in Theology. I guess that means I can interpret Papal happenings better than you. And just to be clear, it really doesn't mean that, but that was not the point anyway.

The point was that the argument of "qUaLiFiCaTiOnS" is asinine in the face of a Pope doing something against already established Catholic doctrine. Why do you need qualifications when the qualified men (Popes and ecumenical councils) have already authoritatively declared paganism is bad??

If a Pope allows a pagan ritual to be done to him, am I supposed to sit here and accept it? Paganism has been routinely condemned by the authority of the Church, past Popes, and identified as from the devil by Sacred Scripture. If a Pope makes a non-authoritative gesture towards paganism (or even passively allows a ritual to happen to him) what should I do?

The answer is to go with what is taught by the authority of the Church instead of some off the cuff remark and/or passive or active participation in a false ritual.

Otherwise we will become legal positivists (Papal Positives?) or try to maintain some sort of bizarre double-think.

So when JPII let's a Native American do a pagan purification ritual to him, what I am suppose to think? It's clearly wrong based on previous authoritative teaching. It's foolish to to tolerate events like this or sweep them under the rug, thinking they are no big deal. And it doesn't matter if he is canonized a "saint" - canonizations themselves be imprudent, and they are not a guarantee that the person possessed a life free from public scandal and are models of Catholicity in all things.


So let's see the answer to the question:

Demonstrate, with infallible teaching from a Pope, that in all instances one cannot determine if Popes make mistakes and can disagree with them.

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:58 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 4989
Location: I have no memory of this place....
Religion: Catholic
I would think that if anyone, following an attitude of uncritical empathy or some other well-meaning but ill-advised attitude, does something that either passively signifies, or in fact manifests, that they are standing against themselves, what they profess to believe, and the dignity of an office which others have conferred on them, then those others have a moral duty to inform and correct them.

Uncritical empathy doesn't make someone instantly virtuous, not in the slightest. It in fact can lead you into all kinds of different errors. Yet it appears to me to be something of an axiomatic belief of this Pope.

_________________
"End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path, one that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it. White shores, and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:17 am 
Offline
There Can Be Only One
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Posts: 13021
Location: Nuevo Mexico
Religion: Catholic
Gandalf the Grey wrote:
I would think that if anyone, following an attitude of uncritical empathy or some other well-meaning but ill-advised attitude, does something that either passively signifies, or in fact manifests, that they are standing against themselves, what they profess to believe, and the dignity of an office which others have conferred on them, then those others have a moral duty to inform and correct them. ...


I love this sentence. Its construction; I don't care about its meaning. It rolls on like a river.

_________________
Where’er the Catholic sun doth shine,
There’s music and laughter and good red wine.
At least I’ve always found it so.
Benedicamus Domino!
~Hilaire Belloc

Semper Fi!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:38 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 837
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
Denise Dee wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
What are your qualifications for determining that I don’t have respect for their authority?

I have a General Certificate of Secondary Education qualification in English Language, in other words, I can read, and when I read this:
Alexandros wrote:
And as a side note tAnGo, we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism and irreligious dialogue, spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual, then to care about developing Co-redemptrix beyond using the title 6 times in 26+ years.
I wrote this:
Denise Dee wrote:
You don't appear to have much respect for the authority of the Pope, neither Pope Francis nor Pope John Paul II who is now a saint.


And I have a bachelor's degree in Religious Studies and a Masters in Theology. I guess that means I can interpret Papal happenings better than you...



...So let's see the answer to the question:

Demonstrate, with infallible teaching from a Pope, that in all instances one cannot determine if Popes make mistakes and can disagree with them.

With your bachelor's degree in Religious Studies and Masters in Theology, can you let me know how do I find out which teachings from a Pope are infallible teachings and which teaching are not infallible teachings?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:56 pm 
Offline
Journeyman
Journeyman

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:53 pm
Posts: 837
Religion: Looking for answers
Alexandros wrote:
Denise Dee wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
What are your qualifications for determining that I don’t have respect for their authority?

I have a General Certificate of Secondary Education qualification in English Language, in other words, I can read, and when I read this:
Alexandros wrote:
And as a side note tAnGo, we know JPII was much too concerned with ecumenism and irreligious dialogue, spewing errors and allowing all sort of nonsense like pagan worship/ritual, then to care about developing Co-redemptrix beyond using the title 6 times in 26+ years.
I wrote this:
Denise Dee wrote:
You don't appear to have much respect for the authority of the Pope, neither Pope Francis nor Pope John Paul II who is now a saint.


And I have a bachelor's degree in Religious Studies and a Masters in Theology. I guess that means I can interpret Papal happenings better than you. And just to be clear, it really doesn't mean that, but that was not the point anyway.

The point was that the argument of "qUaLiFiCaTiOnS" is asinine in the face of a Pope doing something against already established Catholic doctrine. Why do you need qualifications when the qualified men (Popes and ecumenical councils) have already authoritatively declared paganism is bad??

If a Pope allows a pagan ritual to be done to him, am I supposed to sit here and accept it? Paganism has been routinely condemned by the authority of the Church, past Popes, and identified as from the devil by Sacred Scripture. If a Pope makes a non-authoritative gesture towards paganism (or even passively allows a ritual to happen to him) what should I do?

Are you claiming that Pope John Paul II did not know that Popes and ecumenical councils have authoritatively declared paganism is bad, or are you claiming that Pope John Paul II allowed “a pagan ritual to be done to him” despite knowing the authoritative Catholic teaching on Pagan ritual?

There is a third possible which I think you should consider, which is that Pope John Paul II understood Catholic teaching better than you do, and he did nothing contrary to authoritative Catholic teaching.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:51 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6274
Religion: Christian
Given that multiple Church Fathers have diverse perspectives ... as well as the strong/ various (dealbreaker level) opinions in this discussion, the clues indicate that there is a profound lack of clarity on this foundational issue IMHO.

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:06 am 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 82388
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
Cardinal Ratzinger was not happy with the first gathering at Assisi.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:54 am 
Offline
There Can Be Only One
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Posts: 13021
Location: Nuevo Mexico
Religion: Catholic
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
... there is a profound lack of clarity on this foundational issue ... .

A profound lack of clarity is a characteristic of this Papacy. A certain amount of which is characteristic of Argentinian culture.

_________________
Where’er the Catholic sun doth shine,
There’s music and laughter and good red wine.
At least I’ve always found it so.
Benedicamus Domino!
~Hilaire Belloc

Semper Fi!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Pope on co redemptorix
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:03 am 
Offline
Paladin
Paladin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:12 am
Posts: 6663
Location: Filii Tonitrui
Religion: Catholic
Denise Dee wrote:
With your bachelor's degree in Religious Studies and Masters in Theology, can you let me know how do I find out which teachings from a Pope are infallible teachings and which teaching are not infallible teachings?


Maybe. Although I would not credit it to my degrees.


I can assure you that this one is not a doctrine at all:


Quote:
Demonstrate, with infallible teaching from a Pope, that in all instances one cannot determine if Popes make mistakes and can disagree with them.



Hence, trying to make a point about "qualifications" and "who are you to question X, Y and Z" only goes so far. Catholics are not mindless minions who just follow every word, gesture, “off the cuff” remark, and Papal event like it’s from Divinity Itself.



Denise Dee wrote:
Are you claiming that Pope John Paul II did not know that Popes and ecumenical councils have authoritatively declared paganism is bad, or are you claiming that Pope John Paul II allowed “a pagan ritual to be done to him” despite knowing the authoritative Catholic teaching on Pagan ritual?



In these instances, I cannot say for sure what he was thinking or believed for certain. The only thing I can 100% say for certain is that the events themselves were bad, highly imprudent, scandalous, and confusing. They leave open the possibly of onlookers deriving error or heresy.


A pagan ritual done to him in public, without a word of correction or repentance from JPII’s mouth tells us that something is wrong in his judgment or theology. Exactly what that is, I am not totality sure.


The only thing I can determine, beyond the event being bad in and of itself, is JPII’s belief that “authentic” experiences in false religions are from the true God. He states so himself here:


Quote:
"It must first be kept in mind that every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God’s Spirit, achieved a deeper religious experience. Handed on to others, this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions.


In every authentic religious experience, the most characteristic expression is prayer. Because of the human spirit’s constitutive openness to God’s action of urging it to self-transcendence, we can hold that “every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person.”

(Address to the Members of the Roman Curia, 22 Dec. 1986, n. 11; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 5 Jan. 1987, p. 7).



Firstly, no one can identify that a particular set of “doctrines, rites, and precepts” from pagans are always 100% authentic. Surely you must agree with this point. Not even the Pope can see into the spiritual realm and know which pagan rituals are good, and which are bad – right? Any sane person will agree with this. St. Paul says to not partake in food sacrificed to pagan gods because they are associated with demons. Hence, logic tells us to stay away from all pagan ritual.


Second, allowing the rituals bolsters the people who are preforming them – will they stop their paganism and convert if the Pope himself stands there and accepts their purification ritual? It certainly doesn’t say “this is wrong, please embrace the true faith.” If a mother setups an event where her son was allowed punch her daughter in front of her without punishment, will the boy assume he did something wrong?


Third, the quote above was an address, and carries no weight of authority, this is just a quote to try and understand what is happening. We know that participating in pagan rituals is forbidden as that would be direct worship and violates the first commandment. Additionally, even if false religions were born from responding to some kind of openness to God, St. Paul himself says pagan gods are devils. St. Paul and Holy Scripture trump JPII’s non-authoritative speech here. A false religion can come to a correct conclusion on something (stealing is wrong, one God, etc.), but that doesn’t mean we publicly encourage their prayers and ritual (e.g. do not eat food sacrificed to pagan gods).


And this is what I am talking about. A speech to the Roman Curia does not override Scripture and the commandments. An event where the Pope tolerates a pagan ritual (native American purification, Pachamama, etc.) does not override established doctrine and authority. The Pope is not above Divine and Natural Law.



Quote:
There is a third possible which I think you should consider, which is that Pope John Paul II understood Catholic teaching better than you do, and he did nothing contrary to authoritative Catholic teaching.


Because...???


What if my response was just this: “The other possibility is that you yourself do not understand Catholic teaching and Pope John Paul II was actually wrong.”

Full stop. No explanations. Because that is what you just did.



But consider the following questions: What do you think could happen if a pagan tries to do a ritual to you? 100% of the time nothing happens?

What do you think someone ignorant in the faith will assume when they see such an event? Will they always come to the right conclusion? Yes or no?

Do you think Catholic seeing such and even from their Pope will always have the correct understanding that paganism is from the devil, or will they think it’s perfectly fine?

_________________
-Alexander
"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 4   [ 70 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


Jump to: