Posted on 07/02/2010 4:21:11 AM PDT by TSgt
In its long struggle to grapple with sexual abuse, the Vatican often cites as a major turning point the decision in 2001 to give the office led by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger the authority to cut through a morass of bureaucracy and handle abuse cases directly.
The decision, in an apostolic letter from Pope John Paul II, earned Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, a reputation as the Vatican insider who most clearly recognized the threat the spreading sexual abuse scandals posed to the Roman Catholic Church.
But church documents and interviews with canon lawyers and bishops cast that 2001 decision and the future popes track record in a new and less flattering light.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
IAC, what has you I suspect, the plain truth that the ministry of Jesus was conducted more like that of mendicant friars than that of a settled ministry depending on a tithe. There is always the problem that a settled ministry leads to the accumulation of wealth and clerical luxury. Jesus' criticism of the Temple was in part a criticism of the great wealth of the temple. That, of course, was only incidental to his real complaint, which was their unwillingness to to accept his authority, his claim to interpret Torah.
During medieval times, the wealth accumulated by the Church except the envy of the nobility and the disapproval of many of the laity of moderate means. The ability of the papacy to tax the wealth of their kingdoms finally led the national kings to seize or effectively control the distribution of that wealth. Luther was able successfully to lead a spiritual rebellion against Rome by enlisting the long standing German resentment of church taxation for the Crusades and other purposes. The Reformation ended up giving the state power over the Church and its wealth. the same strain of radicalism that had once opposed Rome now took the form of opposition to state churches. Evangelicalism, which developed out of this opposition to world power nonetheless has more often focused on appearances as reality. Capitalism may not be a product of evangelical Protestantism, but the two have always sat comfortably together. Poverty has often be taken as a sign of divine disfavor. This is how we get the Gospel of prosperity preached in many big-box churches today.
Bingo!
As Frank Constanza so beautifully stated: "I find tinsel distracting..."
Such non-Biblical pomp and circumstance for a man.
The Pope is handled and revered like Jesus Christ. I can’t help but to find it disgusting and I’m sure our Lord does as well.
I’m so happy Jesus made the gospel simple and did not require a middle-man or middle-religion.
Don't presume that the voices in your head are Jesus telling you what He needs and doesn't need.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
I guess these Protestants don’t realize that the Bible itself tells us that there is tradition — that all the stories about Christ and other things did not get written down. End of the Gospel of John........I wonder if everyone can figure that one out.
I often wonder what it must feel like to be a useful idiot
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Between such unseemly reverence for a man whom RCs consider to be "infallible in matters of religion" and the near worship of Mary as a "co-redeemer," the papacy shows itself to be outside orthodox, historical Christianity.
Im so happy Jesus made the gospel simple and did not require a middle-man or middle-religion.
AMEN!
"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36
The article has been debunked pillar to post.
All that’s left of your thread is “even handed” insults.
Pardon me if I fail to see your point.
What the heck? This is just high school Charlie stuff. Next you will be after Jesus for wearing his hair long.
The thread begins, if you are not aware, with the old complaints about the wealth of the Vatican. My comeback was that Protestant ministers, at least of major churches, do not lives of apostolic poverty. Then we got the usual objection to the Byzantine vestments worn by the pope and I see ridicule of them as “feminine.” —as opposed to the (Many?) “power suits” worn by some Protestant pastor. Yes, I know about Protestant missions, but my example par excellence is St. Francis of Assisi, whose story I assume that many might know, but I guess not.
Francis —his real name was Giovanni, so the name might be rendered to day as
“Frenchie” since his mother was French—wathe son of a well-to-do merchant. He went to war as something like a knight or at least man-at-arms—but his experiences horrified him and so he had a religious conversion. So he renounced the world and its possessions, symbolized by stripping himself naked of his father’s possessions and clad in monks garments went out to live a life of total poverty. He was one of those people who truly can be described as charismatic. He attracted followers not by
preaching so much as by doing thinkings such as restoring a local church that had fallen into repair. He had had a vision in which the lord asked him to build up his church. So he started small, but ended big, earning a reputation for sanctity. A cheerful saint, like a modern Italian saint, Padre Pio. But he had been like the young man who encountered Our Lord and asked what he must do to be perfect. Sell all you have, five to the poor, and follow me. Which is what Francis did. He even accompanied the Third Crusade and gained audience with Saladin, to which he preached Christ. Now the pope during his time was Innocent III, one of the “great” medieval popes. Francis applied to have his rule accepted by the Church, and some churchman objected but Innocent had a dream in which he saw the walls of the Vatican crumble but then being held up by the figure of Francis. So he gave Francis his wish. His was a new kind of order. his “Friars” wandered the country side living on alms and doing the preaching of which regular priests were often incapable. They lived on the same level as the common people, and depended on those who took them in. They had at that time no fixed “estates” like monks. And during his like, Francis held to an absolute rule of poverty. His ministry was modeled after those of Our Lord and his disciples.
So when people demand that the Vatican sell off all its treasures and give them to the poor, I can see where they are coming from. But when I look at the material wealth of certain “mega-churches, I only ask. when will you do the same. But of course, there are some very good reasons for churches to accumulate wealth. Still, from the beginning, it has been hard for a balance to be struck.
Because posters are particularly sensitive when their beliefs are challenged, flame wars easily ignite here. And frequently, the first spark was one Freeper reading the mind of another Freeper, e.g. "you believe" "you think" "you want."
Therefore, "discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal" is a major is guideline on the RF.
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.