Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

It’s interesting to note that they describe these upcoming sessions as “meetings” or “doctrinal discussions” (entretiens doctrinaux), while Schönborn calls them “negotiations”.Since the full reintegration of the SSPX is at stake, the word “negotiations” seems more suited to these sessions.

1 posted on 09/15/2009 8:35:47 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...
Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, one of the four readmitted, said the bishops had no intention of changing their views in these sessions.” No, absolutely not,” he said. “We do not change our positions, but we have the intention of converting Rome, that is, to lead Rome towards our positions.”


Bishop Tissier de Mallerais

2 posted on 09/15/2009 8:40:32 AM PDT by NYer ( "One Who Prays Is Not Afraid; One Who Prays Is Never Alone"- Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

Last time I checked, Pope Benedict is still the pope , and Cardinal Schönborn is still just the cardinal who spent most the summer attacking the Pope.


4 posted on 09/15/2009 9:01:20 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

Both Schonborn and Tissier de Mallerais need to zip it. Let the meetings progress in peace and good will, free from speculation and public posturing in the secular press. Both seem to want to put a turd in the punchbowl, if you’ll pardon the crude vernacular.


5 posted on 09/15/2009 9:21:17 AM PDT by marshmallow ("A country which kills its own children has no future" -Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
This includes such fundamental conclusions of the Second Vatican Council as its positions on Judaism, other non-Christian religions, other Christian churches and on religious freedom as a basic human right,

Which merely begs the question: what are those conclusions? What conclusions on these questions are allowable, or even possible?

For instance, can there be a "basic human right" to believe falsehood? We can say that for prudential reasons, a political right to do so ought to exist, but a "human right" is something different.

6 posted on 09/15/2009 9:46:14 AM PDT by B Knotts (Calvin Coolidge Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
From Rorate Caeli:

As we had mentioned earlier today, the Holy See Press Office has confirmed that the doctrinal talks between the Holy See and the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX) will begin in mid-October.
"The first meeting, which will mark the beginning of the dialogue with the Lefebvrists, will take place in the second half of October," Father Federico Lombardi, spokesman of Pope Benedict XVI, said [today].(La Croix)

11 posted on 09/15/2009 1:29:31 PM PDT by ELS (Vivat Benedictus XVI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

I don’t entirely disagree with them.


12 posted on 09/15/2009 1:36:45 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (TAZ:Untamed, Unpredictable, Uninhibited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

Bleh. I so don’t like the SSPX. Mostly for their position on Jews and secondly for their lack of humility and obedience to Mother Church.


13 posted on 09/16/2009 8:15:03 AM PDT by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson