Posted on 01/11/2005 6:18:33 PM PST by malakhi
| Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
After a nine month hiatus, The Neverending Story, the granddaddy of daily threads, has returned to Free Republic. Originally begun on March 24, 2001, as a religious discussion thread, the NES evolved over time into a daily thread spanning a wide variety of topics. The new and improved Neverending Story will feature conversation on religion, politics, culture, current events, business, sports, family, hobbies, general fellowship and more. We welcome you to hang your hat in our little corner of FR. We ask you to abide by the FR posting rules and, even in the midst of serious debate, to keep the discussion friendly and respectful. Those who wish to "duke it out" are asked to take it over to the Smoky Backroom. I placed this thread in "General/Chat" for a reason, so play nice and have fun! :o)
What you are saying is we have no right to criticize (knock) any person we don't know personally. Think about it.
Here's a knee-jerk criticism I made more than three years ago. I no longer have that right?
Who, in the Vatican, is more conservative than Ratzinger???
Would this person have a vested interest in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis being declared "infallible"? You bet he does.
Now, he has the "approval" of JP II but no proof of this approval. What a shock. What a suprise.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All serious theologians write books. And many unserious ones as well.
Likewise, any bishop will, from time to time, issue writings of one form or another. It's part of the job description.
SD
It's NOT just any book by a theologian, Dave. The book is called Holy Father and is by Benedict XVI. He only became Benedict XVI yesterday.
SD
I take it that they all have or had similar books about them speedily assembled, just in case they were the one elected?
Yes I should have said it was ABOUT Benedict XVI. I wonder what the other names chosen by the other contenders would have been. Be kind of interesting to get an even more inside look at who they are that way.
Lol... Ratzinger has been published a number of times... but THIS particular book is one of those "first to market" books by an American author (like the ones that came out right after 9/11). I suspect Toobin had a few chapters about JPII already in the can and a few about the process and the issues the Church is dealing with. He likely also had some work done on each of the top handful of candidates and then knocked out the rest the evening of the announcement. The cover seems clearly to have been pre-designed for a quick release. Paster the picture in... copy the appropriate chapters... and run the presses. It likely has zero insight.
What you are saying is we have no right to criticize (knock) any person we don't know personally. Think about it.
No.. that's NOT "what I'm saying". "Having personal knowledge" is not the same thing as "knowing a person personally". In all your years, the English language is still a trial for you, eh?
Here's a knee-jerk criticism I made more than three years ago. I no longer have that right?
Of course you have "the right" - though you are usually (and in this case certainly) wrong.
Who, in the Vatican, is more conservative than Ratzinger???
Likely quite a few. None that you would have ever heard of though.
Would this person have a vested interest in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis being declared "infallible"? You bet he does.
??? What's the point?
Now, he has the "approval" of JP II but no proof of this approval. What a shock. What a suprise.
See? Open your mouth post in ignorance and this is what you get. You think they don't know whether JPII approved of Ratzinger or not?
My understanding is that JPII had appointed, is that the right word, most of the cardinals. How do they go about appointing new ones? Any chance that Benedict XVI can appoint enough so that any chance of of modernism being promoted afte him is would be nil? Beneduct XVI didn't get elected the first time around which tells me there were some that may have opted for a different path.
You're acting like this is an action on the part of the Cardinals and/or the Church itself.
Look even a little bit at the link you provided an you'll see it's just some guy looking to make a quick buck. I was in Sam's Club today and noticed three seperate DVD/CD sets by the door on JPII. Just somebody looking to make a buck.
I gurantee at least three variations on "I survived the Rapture and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt" will be in circulation before the last Christian is raptured.... and that's a "twinkling of an eye". ;-)
The Pope decides whom to elevate to Cardinal. Likewise, he appoints bishops and assigns them to a territory. Obviously, he must rely somewhat upon the advice of others as to who would be a good candidate.
Any chance that Benedict XVI can appoint enough so that any chance of of modernism being promoted afte him is would be nil?
That's the idea.
SD
All but three of those voting. Ratzinger was one of the three.
How do they go about appointing new ones?
The Pope just promotes them.
Any chance that Benedict XVI can appoint enough so that any chance of of modernism being promoted afte him is would be nil?
Can? I suppose. But it's unlikely he'll appoint all that many over what I (pure guess) figure might be a 10-yr papacy. Doesn't matter that much though... "modernism" isn't a goal of the Church, and the Cardinals he's likely to be replacing weren't particularly "modern".
Beneduct XVI didn't get elected the first time around which tells me there were some that may have opted for a different path.
LOL. The fourth ballot is something like the second fastest "election" in almost 2000 years of history. I wouldn't be reading much into it taking four ballots.
I suggest you bone up on your reading comprehension.
Lol. May be time to up your dosage again Reg.
It had nothing, nothing whatsoever, with a personal approval of Ratzinger by JPII.
"Now, he has the "approval" of JP II but no proof of this approval."
Ahh.... I see.
Do you have somebody there to care for you Reg? I'm starting to get worried.
Is there a time limit before he can appoint? Or how often?
I think he's goof for 10 years, too. As pointed out earlier JPII changed the voting requirements so you may not see anymore lengthy deliberations.
The Pope is the absolute ruler of the Church. In terms of personnel, he can do whatever he pleases.
Of course there's little need to make radical changes in the college of cardinals that just elected you. If it ain't broke, etc.
Keep in mind that cardinals lose the vote at age 80 and all bishops must tender a resignation at age 65.
SD
ooops that should have been good not goof! lol
Okay, here's the obvious question. Why the age limits?
Unless I'm mistaken, that should be 75.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.