Posted on 05/05/2010 10:48:55 AM PDT by markomalley
"Fatima is a particularly significant place for this Pope," said Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi on Tuesday, noting that it was also a destination for two former Popes. The Holy Father has a thorough knowledge of the history of the Marian sanctuary, he added.
Fr. Lombardi held a press conference at the Vatican to prepare the media for the Pope's next trip out of the Vatican. He will be visiting Portugal from May 11-14.
The spokesman referred to the Pope's stop in Fatima on May 13 as the highlight and "heart" of the upcoming four-day trip to Portugal, according to Vatican Radio. But, he pointed out, Benedict XVI will not be the first Pope to visit the Marian shrine.
Two other Pontiffs have been to Fatima. In 1967, the sanctuary hosted Paul VI, and John Paul II visited in 1982, 1991 and 2000, at which time the visionaries Jacinta and Francesco were beatified.
The Portuguese shrine is not unfamiliar to Pope Benedict, since as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger extensively studied the message of Fatima. Fr. Lombardi said on Tuesday that the Pope has been involved with history of the Marian sanctuary in a "very deep, personal way."
It was him, for example, who was called upon to give a theological perspective when the third secret of Fatima was made public in 2000.
The Vatican spokesman said that the Holy Father will also deliver an intense message during his Fatima visit. Upon his arrival at the sanctuary on May 12, he will remember John Paul II and the 29th anniversary of the assassination attempt that nearly took his life on May 13, 1981.
This visit marks the Holy Father's 15th Apostolic Journey abroad in his five years and is his first to Portugal as Pope.
During today's general audience, the Holy Father greeted the people of Portugal in their language, telling them that he will be there this coming weekend at the invitation of the president of the nation and the episcopal conference.
He said he was "happy to be able to visit the 'land of Holy Mary'" on the 10th anniversary of the beatification of the shepherd children.
According to Portuguese press reports, local police are planning for a cumulative total of 450,000 people at the celebrations in Lisbon, Fatima and Portugal during the four-day visit.
But—may I ask?
Are debate teams the same as a town hall meeting?
You’re Tutsi.
None of the propaganda against them was “personal” either. And it was all cool until it exploded.
WELL PUT.
All tactics used in liu of dealing meaningfully, logically, factually, Biblically with most of the points we raise.
On threads like this, with very few exceptions, the only people telling the truth ARE Catholics.
Feel free to follow fools like Don Koenig into Hell. I've been glancing at his website and he is an idiot; the only reason he isn't a well-known idiot is because he thinks he's a scholar, he would have made it big in the comic book market.
Also, and much much more important, lurkers and fence-sitters won’t be in danger of being lead to damnation by Rome here on FR anymore.
You know, in all my time on FR I have NEVER seen a Catholic decide to leave the Church. However, I have seen a great many FReepers decide to join the Church.
Fine. Let them crucify me.
NONSENSE.
1. We have many virtually lifetime or decades long Roman Catholics who have been led of The Lord away from such and who affirm, essentially the same Biblical facts.
2. I’m not the least bit interested in exterminating RC’s as the Palestinians are Jews and Israel. I FIERCELY resent your outrageous association and analogy on that score.
3. Palestinians—similar to many RC’s, actually—rarely deal in facts or reasonableness.
But HE acted it out. He is the Lord. We are not. In fact, He specifically told us “Learn from Me, because....” and you know the rest.
I made no mention about how you personally act or react. I assume anyone should be reasonably civil; that helps to set a standard or a climate that is best for discourse.
In the town hall, people must behave according to the rules of order.
In the town square, people may say what they will. They may be rude or mean. They may be ignorant.
Both have roots in American history. The former is like open debate in the legislative branch. The latter is like the Liberty Tree to which villagers nailed whatever they wanted to say.
Ahhhhhhhhhh
yet another of the relentless efforts to turn FR into a kowtowing compliant department of the Vatican evangelistic effort.
Always soooooooooooooo impressive.
. . . and transparent.
I had no intention of doing what you implying here.
I was asking a question about something I wanted the moderator to clarify for me.
>>Fine. Let them crucify me. <<
For what?
It’s not in defense of your faith, there is no defense with those that exclusively run on ego.
The same “truth” for the usual suspects is the same “truth” for the Hutu. The tall trees, the cockroaches. Idolatry and blasphemy.
Ghandi, had the idea that we gleefully look to be beat up.
Christ said to turn the other cheek seventy times seven. It wasn’t limitless. He didn’t want us to look to be abused.
Remember there are some here that do not believe that God has the ability send His mother with a message, yet at the same time they are fully prepared to believe that Satan has the ability to send UFOs with a message.
They are blasphemous because they are trying to argue that Satan is more powerful than God.
Most of me prefers civil most of the time.
I was shocked at the things I was called and at the outrageousness of some of the religious assertions by RC’s when I first joined FR.
There has been a worsening FROM THE RC side, not an improving.
I don’t consider intense dialogue nor even fiercely stated assertions to be uncivil. Uncivil, to me are personal attacks and to a lesser degree, are outrageously disingenuous and mean-spiritedly asserted assaultive wording.
Many times it seems like a minority of RC’s—usually only those from the rabid cliques and a few that seem to be boundary workers between the cliques and the rest of the RC population . . . many times, it seems like many of those folks are deliberately going for the personal jugular any way they can get away with it.
I go for the jugular IDEA-WISE but not usually very personally. RC’s don’t seem able or willing to tell the difference.
And THAT is a PERSISTENT difference between the two camps.
Sometimes I’ll throw a ‘kosherized’ outrageous personal assault back at the assaulter for effect or in a vain hope that they’ll get the whiff of what they are doing.
Most don’t seem to care. All seems to be fair in love, war and defending the outrageousness of the Vatican.
Well, good.
Sometimes it’s very hard to tell the difference.
If you can find any errors, I’d appreciate your help.
Uhhhh . . . the 70 X 7 was to forgive . . . some would say in a single day.
And I find those assertions in that post about Prottys to be routinely untrue.
WHAT UNMITIGATED UNTRUE, BEARING FALSE WITNESS NONSENSE.
It does seem to be SOP with some cliques, however.
“Sometimes it’s very hard to tell the difference”.
Well then, that’s your difficulty, not mine.
Meanwhile, please don’t attempt to “read” my intentions.
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.