Posted on 03/24/2004 8:26:57 AM PST by CatherineSiena
Vatican, Mar. 24 (CWNews.com) - At his weekly public audience on March 24, Pope John Paul II (bio - news) recalled that 20 years ago, he consecrated "all of humanity" to the Virgin Mary, thus fulfilling "our Lady's plea at Fatima."
The Holy Father began his remarks by reminding his audience that Thursday, March 25, is the feast of the Annunciation, "which allows us to contemplate the Incarnation of the Eternal Word, made man in Mary's womb." He added that Mary's "fiat" echoes the obedience of Jesus to the divine plan, "to which we must add our 'Yes.'"
The Pope said that at three different times during his pontificate, he has made consecrations to the Virgin Mary. On December 8, 1978-- just weeks after his election-- he consecrated the Church and the world to the Immaculate Conception. In June 1979 he renewed that consecration during a visit to the shrine of the Black Madonna in Poland. Then on March 25, 1984, he made the consecration which, he said, fulfilled the terms of the Virgin's plea at Fatima.
The Pope said:
Twenty years have gone by since that day when, in spiritual union with all the bishops of the world, I entrusted all of mankind to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, in response to Our Lady's plea in Fatima.
Today's world remains too full of "hatred, violence, terrorism, and war," the Pope said. He asked for prayer for all the innocent people who suffer from violence as "so much blood continued to be shed." He appealed to the Virgin Mary's aid to help turn men's hearts and minds, to end the violence.
Although his voice was halting, the Pope read the entirety of his remarks, in Italian. When he had finished his formal delivery, he offered greetings to the 14,000 people assembled in St. Peter's Square for the audience, speaking to them in French, English, German, Spanish, and Polish. He remained in the Square for nearly an hour, giving his blessing to young couples and to the sick, and posing for pictures with pilgrim groups.
That is nice of you to concede that I am entitled to my opinion. Nonetheless, I have and do and always will cast aspersions upon those who delude themselves into anti-papal "Catholicism." Your leaders are excommunicated, your movement is a schism and the adherents of that movement are in schism. You expected maybe congatulations???????? You will have to get your congratulations from the surviving Econe crowd of excommunicati or their imagined subordinates. Don't look to Catholics for validation of the schism.
Your moral relativism and assertions of some phony moral equivalency between SSPX and other non-Catholic faiths availeth not. The Lutherans do not claim an illicit right to consecrate Catholic bishops or to ordain Catholic priests. Nor do the Methodists. Nor do the Presbyterians. Nor do the animistic pagans. Nor do the Muslims. The SSPX ex-Catholics do claim the stolen goods of Apostolic Succession and the "right" to perpetuate the schism by illicit consecrations and illicit ordinations and other illicit activity.
The schismatic whining sounds like that of the bank robber who, having been sentenced to thirty years in the hoosegow, wails that none of the OTHER bank robbers got thirty years and somehow blames the judge for his misery being caused by the sentencing judge's alleged unfairness. As any parent knows, "fair" is the ultimate four-letter word.
I am and always have been and always will be in the Roman Catholic faith, the one that is run by the Roman Pontiff whoever he may be at any given time (whether I like him personally or not and I like this pope very much) and not the one that was created by a rebellious, impudent, defiant and paranoid French archbishop, gone native in his old age as he rejected the papacy and the direct papal order NOT to consecrate the Econe 4 as bishops, thereby breaking his own written agreement NOT to consecrate those bishops.
Schismatic tastes and presumptions are NOT the Roman Catholic Church or faith.
I belong to the Roman Catholic Church that does NOT include the dead excommunicated Marcel the Impudent or the excommunicated Econe 4 or the schismatic adherents to their anti-Catholic sect. Since Christ chose and renamed Peter, now, then, at all times in between and forever: Ubi Petrus, Ibi Ecclesia.
Your opinion does not count. My opinion does not count. Excommunicated Marcel's opinion certainly does not count. Nor does Fellay's or that of any other excommunicatus or of any schismatic or even of any actual Catholic. JP II holds the keys as none of the rest of mankind does today. When his successor is elected, he will hold the keys.
Finally, it is John Paul II who excommunicated your heroes, declared SSPX a schism and declared adherents of the SSPX schism to be, well, schismatic. I follow the pope. You are no more empowered to determine the contents of what you call "the ancient Faith" than was Luther or Calvin or Zwingli or Arius or any other of your predecessors in rebellion. You should be thankful that he has not administered the full measure of justice to the cancer that is the SSPX.
2. The pope recognizes SSPX as the schismatic institution that it is and that he has declared it in excommunicating all of its bishops for defiant disobedience on a central issue of the authority of the pope to choose bishops, regardless of the impudent posings of the excommunicated Marcel, et al.
3. The controversy over inclusion of the Gentiles within the Church without first requiring that they become Jews (and that the adult male Gentiles undergo adult circumcision, inter alia) was, contrary to Protestant opinion, resolved when Peter gave his papal assent to Paul's episcopal urging and not when Paul allegedly overruled Peter. The event is known as the Council of Jerusalem and is covered in Acts.
4. If you have some big problem with John Paul II as Shepherd, then you had better find a new flock and a new shepherd because things aren't going to be revised because of your discomfort.
5. "Your" faith will be watered down only if you let it be watered down. YOUR faith is not watered down because the pope does not punish those you (or SSPX) want punished as you (or SSPX) want them punished. I would probably agree with you on most of whom should be punished and might even exceed you in what punishment I think desirable. Fortunately, my opinion does not matter. Neither does yours. Neither does the opinion of SSPX excommunicati and schismatics. Nor, OTOH, does the opinion of any actual Catholic in the pews. A good thing too since Ted the Swimmer and Lurch are sent to the US Senate every six years by a constituency that is nominally majority "Catholic."
6. You are certainly NOT being slaughtered by the new priests ordained in the Rockford diocese. We have 48 seminarians in the pipeline right now, ordained 11 last year, will ordain 3 this year but another 11 next year. Not one of them for service in the schism. You are not being slaughtered by the recent ordinands graduated from either of the Nebraska seminaries under Bruskewitz (one FSSP) and one diocesan, serving orthodox dioceses throughout the nation who can trust Bruskewitz to carry on the important work of priestly formation or numerous other seminaries as well. Not only is Bruskewitz quite orthodox but I understand he has prohibited SSPX folk as well the NOW gang and Planned Barrenhood from receiving the Eucharist in the Lincoln Diocese.
7. Rule A: The Pope is right on matters of faith and morals and no one appointed you to decide otherwise.
Rule B: If the pope ever seems wrong on rulings having to do with faith and morals, go back to Rule A, AND read up on the heresy of "Americanism" as described by the quite orthodox Pope Leo XIII.
8. I do not read up on Catholic Answers because, having become acquainted with Gerry Matatics about a decade ago, I have lost any respect for Keating unless and until he deals justly with Gerry. Others may reasonably disagree. I also know people who have a great deal of respect for Keating. In any event, whatever his actual drawbacks, Keating is neither a schismatic nor excommunicated nor some heterodox AmChurch windtunnel and therefore, as an actual Catholic, has some standing in these controversies. I haven't the slightest idea of what he might say. Keating, however, is not the pope either. His opinion is his opinion and nothing more.
9. I will hold to each and every tenet of the Roman Catholic Faith as I did as a Tridentine altar boy in my youth. I will remain in communion with Rome.
10. "Pedophiles and other wolves???" I would gladly see them burned at the stake after being submitted to whatever other purgative technologies and disciplines imagination may devise. Have you ever heard of the Cluniac reform? Do you disobey Jesus Christ over the choices He made of apostles such as Peter (who denied Him three times), Thomas (who denied the Resurrection without physical proof) and Judas (well, Judas!!!!)? Why not? They were all bishops too.
11. Being traditional is no sin. Being traditional REQUIRES submission to the papacy in all things moral. Impersonating and sullying the good name of tradition by non-stop malicious campaigns of character assassination and personal vituperation against Christ's Vicar on Earth was the game of Luther and of Marcel and of the SSPX and of no Catholic genuinely attached to anything vaguely "traditional." Ubi Petrus, Ibi Ecclesia.
12. Any cradle Catholic (and sinner) over fifty or so is likely to have "gone before you" in having participated in the pre-Conciliar forms of the Church. If you are much under fifty, I was serving the Tridentine Mass before you were born. I almost allowed myself to be driven from the Church by the liturgical atrocities but it would NEVER have been to a group such as SSPX or any other group dishonestly claiming to be Roman Catholic while rejecting the authority of the papacy. If I had left it would have been for the Eastern Orthodox Church, most likely its Russian Orthodox in America manifestation, which has rejected Roman Catholic belief as to the papacy for a millenium and more but does not claim to BE the Roman Catholic Church or to choose the RCC bishops any more than the RCC claims to choose Eastern Orthodox bishops. SSPX is offensive in many ways but one of the most poisonous offenses is the false claim of Roman Catholicism in the midst of a carnival of self-worship in the form of a "rightist" cafeteria "Catholicism".
13. Perhaps you have some interest or expertise in Lutheran worship services. I have never had occasion to pay much attention to them since I am Catholic. I have the spiritual fortitude to challenge phony "cafeteria Catholics" who claim to be the real thing. That will suffice.
14. You whine the whine and talk the talk. Now, walk the walk. Take up your cross and follow Jesus Christ as He commanded and stop the pity party. Then and only then will you be calling a spade a spade.
15. Actual Catholics will win the battle WITHIN the Church with or without you, with or without the SSPX schismatics, with or without the excommunicated bishops of SSPX, despite the pedophiles, despite the heterodox, despite the ultramontane self-worshippers, despite the taste police, despite the self-appointed "popes" and without those who congregate only in lonely little self-ghettoized platoons rejecting the Great Commission to convert all, platoons cowering in little corners, patting themselves on the back for their imagined "tradition" and their all-important wounded "feelings" and being full-fledged nannynags and "churchladies" of the SNL variety who spend their lives judging and inviting judgment upon themselves in a little Biblical reversal.
16. I can easily imagine two of you in a foxhole, believing yourselves to be the last two. One says: "You know there were once millions of us and now there are just thee and me and, frankly,I am not always certain of thee!"
Sleep well, indeed!!!
This should become part of the Coat of Arms of the TTGC.
Tells all one needs to know and justifies what may be 'uneven' sentencing.
BTW, saw your anti-hero Bert the Lavendar at last nights MilwSymph concert--for some reason he did not make it a point to find me and express greetings.
Was that capital S in She an accident?
- She should be venerated in the highest terms.
Also knows as worship
Just as Adam and Eve committed the first sin - from a tree - it required an Adam (Christ) and an Eve (Mary) to undo the sin.
That's a twisted picture and not scriptural. There is no mention of a last eve in the bible. But neither are any of the other things about Mary that RC's believe.
Since the first creatures fell - the redemption must come from ones who were without sin
"ones" making Mary a co-redemer right? That's an evil one.
One of the most unscriptural inventions of Catholicism.
- thus the Immaculate conception and Mary's preservation from all sin - and Christ's sinlessness. But a belief in Mary, though helpful in salvation, is not required - just a big help - as she is the Mediatrix of all graces. By now - all of the NO's should be in fits - since the whole Medatrix thing is so Pre-VII and not approved by Catholic Answers Protestant Redux.
For many Catholics I believe that belief in Jesus is not necessary for salvation, "only helpful". That's certainly what Mel said.
Since the question of the papacy and the primacy of Peter is of paramount importance in these troubled times,and since I have seen no one on Free Republic give a comprehensive and correct definition of what infallibillity and ex cathedra actually means,would you please tell me what you understand by the above statement. If you cannot would you point out the documents that you use to support the statement you made and please include documents written this past century and as close to today as possible. Thankyou.
That is most generous of your reformationship to cede that I, as a Catholic, have some right to post opinions on Catholic threads in spite of your attempt to hijack them for some sola Scriptura propaganda and uninvited evangelizing of Roman Catholics.
I also have a right to tell you to butt out. You have a right to ignore me. I don't care about the extent of your involvement in any issue having to do with Roman Catholicism since you are separate from the original Church of Jesus Christ and its internal arguments are purely none of your reformed bidness. I feel every confidence that you will specify the extent of your involvement if that serves your purposes whether we want to hear it or not. You have a right to post. Catholics have a right to respond in defense of Holy Mother the Church.
I guess RCC-IOS would be the Roman Catholic, or authentic, interpretation of Scripture. Check with the pope and the Teaching Magisterium generally. You may be surprised at what you learn. Further, what part of "Sola Scriptura is not and never was and never will be the Catholic standard, don't you understand?????" Assuming it were any of your reformed business which it is not. I would not bring this up at all but for your uninvited advice of the endlessly tiresome variety that we go scuba-diving in Scripture over every controversy great and small in the hope that we may erroneously wander down some "reformed" path.
For your information, the Roman Catholic Church DOES discern whether Marian apparitions are approved (not required) for belief based upon the consistency of the messages with pre-existing orthodoxy according to the entire Teaching Magisterium and not just Scripture much less "reformed" notions thereof. Such apparitions as Rue Bac, LaSalette, Lourdes, Fatima, Knock and Akita have been approved. Such apparitions as those reported at Garabandel (alas) are not and such as Medjugorge and "Our Lady of the Roses" in Flushing, Queens, have been rejected outright. If and when "reformed" opinions of the validity of apparitions are ever required, don't call us; we will be sure to call you.
If the meaning of Scripture were so clear, there would be ONE "reformed" church not a squabbling Tower of allegedly Scriptural Babel in which thousands of "reformed" sects each with its own particular idiosyncratic wrinkles engage over their respective "clear" understandings of Scripture (TOPIOS).
As to your last paragraph, you came hunting us. We did not come hunting you. You are hunting us within our house. We are not hunting you in yours. As one who (probably with some reason) imagines yourself a follower of Christ, you might adopt the humility of minding your own non-Catholic business (unless and until you are a member of Christ's Church founded on Peter and now run by John Paul II) because no Catholic worth his or her salt will give the slightest consideration to "theological" arguments from outside the fold. You disagree with us. We know that. You do not enjoy the fullness of the Faith and therefore you disagree with us. We understand that. You likely do not enjoy the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass or all seven sacraments. We understand that. Apparently we need to tell you that when you trespass while you imagine that it is your job to evangelize those poor benighted Catholics to make them other than Catholic for "our own good.".
Do you think that Jesus Christ was incarnated, lived His life, exercised His ministry, suffered in the Garden at Gethsemane, was arrested, beaten, flogged, crowned with thorns, reviled, spit upon, mocked, forced to carry His cross along the Via Dolorosa, stripped, crucified, died and was buried and resurrected, all so that a renegade Augustinian monk with an unrestrained libidinous yen for a nun both of them voluntarily consecrated and vowed to celibacy could belatedly found His Church after fifteen hundred years of alleged darkness?
I don't and neither does any properly catechized Catholic.
If you want to swap anathemas with a Catholic over Marian doctrines and devotions, find an actual Roman Catholic scholar (and not a schismatic one). There are plenty of them here and some may indulge you. I have never claimed to be more than a street-fighting elk on reasonably vigilant patrol. If you want a street fight, I'm your Elk, although I am willing to share you with genuinely Catholic volunteers and aspiring novices of sufficient savagery.
P.S. Marian apparitions started well before a century ago. IIRC, she gave St. Dominic the rosary in an apparition roughly contemporaneous with the crushing of the Albigensian heresy. Many centuries ago in any event.
P.P.S. The New York Times is, I assure you, decidedly NOT a Catholic press outlet and NEVER has been but its correspondent was present at the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima during October 1917 and his belief at what he actually saw was printed on the front page of the New York Times. As Casey Stengel used to say: You could look it up!
FWIW, as a Roman Catholic and devotee of Mary, I recognize the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as a gift of my Savior and the sole atonement necessary for the forgiveness of my sins. I also recognize that Mary cooperated with redemption by giving her assent to bearing the Christ Child fathered by the Holy Ghost by responding to Gabriel: Let it be done unto me according to thy word (the Magnificat) and by faithfully serving her Son. Do you disagree with those statements being Catholic doctrine (documentation?) or with those statements?
I would gladly have paid to see the interaction between you and Rectalbertie, though, had he/she/it been other than the coward that bertie clearly is.
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.