Posted on 01/02/2005 1:59:29 PM PST by wagglebee
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the chief architect of Pope John Paul II's traditionalist moral policy, has long been a bugaboo for liberal Catholics. But they had stopped worrying that the German might one day ascend to St. Peter's throne. His hard-line views and blunt approach had earned him the epithet of panzerkardinal and too many enemies. Well, their worrying may now resume. Sources in Rome tell TIME that Ratzinger has re-emerged as the top papal candidate within the Vatican hierarchy, joining other front runners such as Dionigi Tettamanzi of Milan and Claudio Hummes of Sao Paolo. "The Ratzinger solution is definitely on," said a well-placed Vatican insider.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
OK. If you find something, from a credible source, I'll retract. But I've checked every search engine I know of, and there's not a single hit on "Montini illegitimate child" or "Paul VI illegitimate child."
I will see and let you know for sure. I remember it quite well though. It was squashed !!! Let's face it, when they squashed it back then, well there were only so many sources, and you could probably count them on one hand!!
No, the Maria Walpurga who appears at the top of the Schönborn page was a Countess (Gräfin) von Stadion, a family I had never heard of.
However, I did find a link to the Hapsburgs. This is probably not the most recent one, but it was the easiest to trace. Cardinal Schönborn (b. 1945) is a great-great-grandson of Princess Johanna von Lobkowicz (1840-1872), great-granddaughter of Princess Gabriella of Savoy-Carignano (1748-1828), great-great-granddaughter of Tommaso, Prince of Carignano (1596-1656), son of Infanta Catarina of Spain (1567-1597), daughter of King Felipe II of Spain (1527-1598).
LOL Thanks for the ping.
A Billion Christian Catholics. Bound to be some cranks :)
* It might be a major virtue of this Papacy. I trust the Pope has better info than those on F.R. and I trust he could beter anticipate the consequences of actions than those on FR. As I understand it, he has acted in a Traditional way. The Bishops have Jurisdicton and if he tried to micromanage within those jurisdictions, he might undermine that reality. That was one reason for so many trips. He brought Christ directly to us without undermining the Jurisdiction of the Bishops. He really is a great Pope
:) Yes, all 19 of them...
Likely true
As I understand it, he has acted in a Traditional way.
No, John XXIII undermined the ecclessial monarchy and John Paul II has continued his democratization of the Church. It is an innovation, not traditional. An innovation most American's support I'm sure being indoctrinated in democratic idealogy.
This is an image of a monarchial pope
Pius XII
I grasp his reasoning for collegiality, based on subsidiarty but I think it has gone way too far.
Well, that isn't exactly true. The Vatican sent several preists, at least one canon lawyer and a theologian to some Cardinals (including Cardinal Law), trying to get them to put a stop to their shuffling perdophile preists from parish to parish and diocese to diocese. They paid no attention partly because they were being lied to and sheltered by those in the middle, partly out of laziness and the "who wants to deal with this" attitude, and; I suspect, because the theologian doing the warning was very conservative (though respected) they probably thought he was exaggerating.
Thanks for posting the link to the article.
LOL
What you describe is a pro-forma response. No heads rolled--ever. Nobody was fired. No noise was made by any office in the Vatican. No reform movement was initiated.
Here's one for-instance. Roman Catholic Faithful tried for years to work within the system. It begged Cardinal George to get rid of the blatantly homosexual Bp. Ryan of Springfield who had introduced a values-neutral sexually explicit education program into elementary schools, complete with instructions on how to use condoms and information on anal and oral sex, all this despite loud protests from offended parents. He was also guilty of picking up young male prostitutes, and was sexually active with a young priest he had harrassed and then seduced. The Cardinal took the evidence for these allegations and gave the group the usual runaround. The group begged Rome to act, passing-on through its Nuncio a dossier stuffed with cold hard evidence of corruption. Nothing happened. After years of waiting for action, RCF went public, got a young male prostitute to tell his story to the media, and forced a resignation--something the Vatican or George should have done years earlier.
To put all this into perspective, consider this: it took only WEEKS for the Vatican to fire the superior general of the FSSP, a traditionalist fraternity, on a minor pretext--he would not permit a few of their priests to concelebrate in the Novus Ordo rite. And Rome fired two theologians as well from the same fraternity, again on a minor pretext. So it's clear Rome can act when it wants to, when something fires its interest--like the issue of pushing the Novus Ordo on traditionalist priests.
A Black Mass is a perversion and profanation of the Holy Sacrifice of the mass. It is an inversion of all that is the mass. Christ is the "Nameless Weakling" in a Black Mass - not the Saviour. He, and the sacrifice of Calvary, and all the salvific graces of it and the Mass are profaned in this inverted worship, which is dedicated to Satan.
Yes, a consecrated Host is used and profaned in the most vile ways imaginable in a Black Mass. The most perverted use of sex is also involved, as is ritual sacrifice. The consecrated host is either stolen, or in ideal circumstances, a co-opted wicked priest has previously consecrated it for this perverted use. Yes, that is done - as if he uses the correct sacramental intention to consecrate (even though he be personally evil), the host is validly consecrated. The co-opted wicked priest is a highly prized member of a coven indeed.
It is a glorification of pain, anguish, darkness, lie, perversion - all which is opposed to and an inversion of that which is good - that which is Christ.
In the Satanic Black Mass, it is the Catholic mass which is inverted, profaned, and mocked.
But which Catholic mass? The Tridentine - or the Novus Ordo? Did Satanists revise their ceremonials (which are not totally codified anyway) to conform with the liturgical changes arising out of Vatican II?
A true Satanist believes in God, and knows who Christ is, and what the Mass does, but rejects all this to serve Satan. In so doing, consecrates themselves to be an ememy of all that involves Christ, having totally and utterly rejected him. But - they know spirtual reality of both good and evil, and only embrace evil for themselves.
So, in their inverted rites, which form of the mass do they mock and profane?
If I said that they use Latin in their ceremonies - would that be a big enough clue?
'Why does anyone need to enlighten you? The N.O. requires no defense. You have no authority to state otherwise."
Since you feel this way, you too are also cordially invited to present a thorough and convincing defense of the NO and of Vatican II. Your input is more then welcome.
"WHY"......because there are numerous treatises out there, written by very competent, thoughtful, and respected theologians who have very clearly posited the problems with and deficienceis of both vatican II itself, and of the Novus Ordo Missae.
To merely make the dictatotial statement that "you have no authority to state otherwise" is neither true, nor is it a legitimate form of discussion or debate on this or any other forum. You do not have the right to stifle my desire for debate on this topic, not that of any other FReeper.
Again, I cordially invite you to make your case.
http://www.christianorder.com/features.html
Kasper and Lehmann will keep this from ever happening. From Michael Davies Last Interview:
I’ll tell you a good little story that Count Capponi told us at our general assembly of Una Voce. Cardinal Kasper went on an ecumenical mission to Athens last year.
JB: Cardinal Kasper? Oh he is the German.
MD: Yes. He and his fellow German, Lehmann, were made Cardinals. You see there is no chance of Cardinal Ratzinger being made Pope. The job of Kasper and Lehmann is to go to the conclave and stop anyone Ratzinger supports from being made Pope. It is interesting, Pope John Paul II wouldn’t appoint Kasper and Lehmann at first and a week later he did.
JB: Yes. Their appointment came as a shock to a lot of orthodox Catholics.
MD: Well do you know where the pressure came from? The Polish hierarchy. Because they get so much money from the Germans. So Kasper and Lehmann said, ‘You scratch our backs and we’ll scratch yours.’
JB: Is that genuine? An inside story?
MD: Oh yes definitely. The Polish hierarchy put the pressure on. But anyway Kasper went on this ecumenical mission to Athens, attended the Greek Orthodox liturgy in the morning and in the afternoon he was having lunch. Then the Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Athens, who is a good friend of Count Capponi and Una Voce, asked his Eminence how he had enjoyed the liturgy in the morning. "Oh wonderful, wonderful," said the Cardinal, "I thought I was in heaven." Then the Archbishop said that he thought perhaps that they should make some changes to the Greek liturgy because, perhaps for modern people today, some of it is too mystifying. Kasper said, "No that would be a mortal sin. You mustn’t change a thing. Keep it exactly as it is." And the Archbishop said, "Then why did you destroy your liturgy which was the equivalent of ours?"
JB: What is going on here? Saying what they think people want to hear. Now you see them now you don’t. This is perfidy
Christian Catholics? As opposed to what?
That is about what I thought you would come up with......a link (your favorite term) to a page of very feeble responses to questions regarding the Pauline NO mass. The text of this link is filled with innaccuracies, and a thorough lack of scholarship.
That is not what I asked for.
What I asked YOU for is to defend, in YOUR words both the Novus Ordo Missae, and Vatican II itself, in its conception, purpose, and in the results of its for the church and the world - clearly displaying for all the "fruits"......positive ones......of both eh Council and the NO for the church.
Show me what goods it has done for souls - the clear evidence of the "new springtime".
It is very clear that this anathema declares that it is a heresy to say that any pastor of the Catholic Church, whosoever has the power to revise the sacred liturgy, the traditional Rites, changing the customary Rites into new Rites.
Here is what Trent said:
It furthermore declares, that this power has ever been in the Church, that, in the dispensation of the sacraments, their substance being untouched, it may ordain,--or change, what things soever it may judge most expedient, for the profit of those who receive, or for the veneration of the said sacraments, according to the difference of circumstances, times, and places. (Session XXI, Decree on Communion Under Both Kinds, Chapter II)
Quite different from what Kramer claims is the Tridentine doctrine.
As a matter of fact, the official policy of the Second Vatican Council was quite clearly stated by Archbishop Pericle Felici, who at the time was the General Secretary ... Very clearly, very precisely, the policy position of the Second Vatican Council regarding itself was that those propositions and doctrines which are of a novel character are not being imposed, under any obligation, on the faithful.
Notificationes' Given by the Secretary General of the Council at the 123rd General Congregation, November 16, 1964...
Taking conciliar custom into consideration and also the pastoral purpose of the present Council, the sacred Council defines as binding on the Church only those things in matters of faith and morals which it shall openly declare to be binding. The rest of the things which the sacred Council sets forth, inasmuch as they are the teaching of the Church's supreme magisterium, ought [debent] to be accepted and embraced by each and every one of Christ's faithful according to the mind of the sacred Council.
...
+ PERICLE FELICI
Titular Archbishop of Samosata
Secretary General of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council
According to Lewis & Short, debeo with the infinite, as is the construction here, means:
(b). With inf., to be bound, in duty bound to do something; I ought, must, should, etc., do it (in class. prose always in the sense of moral necessity; in the poets sometimes for necesse est):
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.