La Documentation Catholique, Dec. 7, 1986.
Voodoo priests were among the guests of John Paul II at the panreligious meeting of Assisi. They were accorded the same treatment as the other confessions and were given a place to carry out their worship.
Posted on 03/25/2011 8:45:34 AM PDT by verdugo
La Documentation Catholique, Dec. 7, 1986.
Voodoo priests were among the guests of John Paul II at the panreligious meeting of Assisi. They were accorded the same treatment as the other confessions and were given a place to carry out their worship.
/171_JPII-VoodooHighPriest.jpg)
La Republica, February 5, 1993
ECUMENISM : POPE DIALOGUES WITH VOODOO SUPREME HIGH "PRIEST"GUEDEGUE
"Two monarchs, head to head, "One is John Paul II, the true Pope, head of the universal Catholic Church .... who traveled from the Vatican to Africa. The other is the 'high priest' Guedegue, the supreme head of Voodoo, which in Benin counts a quarter of the population, and the one who represents the spiritual point of reference for all the followers of the world of that religion of the Devil.
"At the meeting with the Pontiff, Guedegue was accompanied by a hundred 'priests' all proudly garbed in traditional 'vestments' and with their faces marked by long scars - a vestige of their initiations into the voodoo cult. The Pope received them with great respect and did not lose the opportunity to talk about dialogue, constructive relationships, and religious liberty."
---------------------------------------------
JPII Praises Voodoo Worship
Meeting with Guedegue of Benin, the Supreme Voodoo high-priest of the World, on February 4, 1993 during his visit to Benin, John Paul II gives the rationale to justify voodoo worship according to the principles of Vatican II.
From: John Paull II, Greeting to a Voodoo high-priest of Benin, published under the title "La libertà religiosa è un diritto inalienabile," in L'Osservatore Romano, February 6, 1993, p. 4:
Dear friends,
I am pleased to have this occasion to meet you, and I very cordially greet you. As you know, I came to Benin principally to visit with the Catholic community, to encourage it and confirm it in the faith. However, I have always thought that contact with persons who belong to other religious traditions is an important part of my ministry.
Indeed, the Catholic Church is favorable to dialogue: dialogue with Christians of other churches and ecclesial communities, dialogue with believers of other spiritual families, and dialogue even with those who do not profess any religion. The Church establishes positive and constructive relations with persons and human groups of other creeds for a reciprocal enrichment.
Vatican Council II …. recognized that there are truth and good, seeds of the Word, in the various religious traditions. …
These provide the foundations for a fruitful dialogue, as the Apostle Paul said to the first Christians: “Everything that is true, noble, just, pure, amiable, honorable, whatever is virtuous and deserves praise, let all these things be the object of your thinking.” From this comes our approach of respect [toward you]: respect for true values wherever they are, and overall respect for the man who looks to live these values that help him set aside fear.
You are strongly attached to the traditions which your ancestors transmitted to you. It is legitimate to recognize the ancestors who transmitted to you the sense of the sacral, faith in a one and good god, your tastes for celebrations, and consideration for moral life and harmony in society.
"You'll pardon me your Emminence, but you've either lost the Faith, or you've lost your marbles!"
That was one of the reasons I left the RCC.
I wrote a letter to David Reagan’s radio show about this and he read it on the air.
It's funny how things work. This was the reason why I came back to the Church, to fight all these novel anti-Catholic viruses. To fight all the effeminates who chased away the real men by making them sick and frustrated.
I recomend that you go to an SSPX chapel as I do, where you'll find like minded men, with large families. Real Catholics who live the faith. OR if you so wish, any other good traditinal mass community that lives the faith equally.
And role up your sleeves, and come join the fight for the Church, and the greater Glory of God. Do you know of a nobler cause?
+
AMDG
How many Gods are there?? Are all gods equal and true?
From what you and the SSPX group is saying, Saints Peter and Paul probably should have been excommicated.
After all they had dealings with Simon the Magician.
Simon the Magician was not rejected in terms of dealing with the Apostles, but the apostles did reject him being given any special power.
Pope John Paul II, as head of the Roman Catholic Church, had a right to be hospitable to people at meetings.
There have been enemies of the Church infiltrate the Church and the Vatican. They help to set up such meetings.
I have heard that some members of SSPX consider Pope John Paul II to be the anti-Christ. Of course, there are members of SSPX who openly accept abortion. I do not hear of any effort by SSPX members to get involved in Pro-Life activites.
As far as I am concerned, SSPX is becoming a more and more fruitless tree -- harboring old grudges as reasons to continue their split from the Roman Catholic Church.
It would be good to have more conservatives in the Church.
But then maybe SSPX members are false Catholic conservatives...
I would like to see the SSPX take on Pope John Paul II's miracle that has gotten him to the point of Beatification.
Or maybe SSPX contests this miracle on the grounds that they like to hold grudges...
Finally, you might want to explain why Pope John Paul II attempted assassination was on May 13, 1981 by a KGB associated operated.
As Jesus said in the Bible: "You shall know a tree by its fruits".
By that measure, clearly Pope John Paul is of the tree of good fruit.
SSPX is of the tree of despair and grudges and attacks on the Church. A tree of good fruit or bad fruit?
Also, when Pope John Paul said no to ordaining the bishops that resulted in the ex-communication of the Archbishop, and the cause of a schism, the archbishop had three choices.
The archbishop chose the absolutely worst choice:
Ordaining the bishops in direct disobedience to the Pope, which he had pledged obedience.
He had three optsions:
(1) Delaying the ordinations until he could have an interview with the Pope directly, and explain the situation, and argue his case. This might have drawn out the process, but it seems that the Archbishop did not have trust in God or trust in anything but his actions.
(2) Not pursuing the ordinations in obedience to the Pope.
(3) Or the act he followed: Direct disobedience of the Pope against a vow he had taken as bishop of the church. How can such a person become a saint if he is a bad example.
But SSPX considers disobedience to be a good thing...
So that is why they are promoting the canonization of the Archbishop...
Pope John Paul has been dead but a few years -- since April 2005.
The late archbishop of SSPX has been dead much longer. Where is his miracle to prove that he is worthy of sainthood.
How? By promoting schisms and splits within the Church?
SSPX, from what you are writing, wants to continue old grudges and continue their schism. Pope Benedict is a conservative Pope. Yet SSPX does not want to have dealings with a conservative Pope.
At the time that Pope Pius X was elected pope, he was not the first choice for Pope. There is a story that a freemason was elected pope and a monsignor had the King of Austria intervene under some archaic rules of the Roman Catholic Church.
Pope Paul VI, whom I have heard a lot of hateful venom from SSPX, stated that the smoke has entered the Church.
SSPX should focus first on rejoining the Church and being in good standing, and then join the fight with other Catholics.
What you are stating is meant to split Catholics and tear the Church apart. For me, that is the tree of bad fruit.
In some respects, she tried vainly to correct Bill Clinton.
That was a man whom the KGB tried to kill (in a KGB) and failed that was released from the Soviet Union at the request of Pope John Paul II, President Mitterand of France and President Ronald Reagan.
I consider President Reagan and Pope John Paul II to be of the same caliber. Those had attempted assassinations in 1981. And both are people who are hailed by most conservatives.
Can't you come up with a better defense of the Assisi ecumencial sacrilage than that? She didn't pray with Clinton, she didn't offer Clinton a Catholic church to do his worship to the devil.
Any Catholic that defends Assisi, has lost the faith or their marbles.
Subject: ECUMENISM
Solemn Pronouncements from Dogmatic Counsels, and Papal Encyclicals:
III Council of Constantinople, 680
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.
Council of Carthage, 418
One must neither pray nor sing psalms with heretics, and whosoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the communion of the church, whether clergy or layman; let him be excommunicated.
Code of Canon Law, 1917
#1258 - 1. It is not permitted at all for the faithful to assist in any active manner at or to have any part in the worship of non-Catholics.
Excerps from "Mortalium Animos", Encyclical of Pope Pius XI, On Religious Unity, January 6, 1928.
2. A similar object is aimed at by some, in those matters which concern the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little. turn aside to naturalism andatheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.
3. But some are more easily deceived by the outward appearance of good when there is question of fostering unity among all Christians. 4. Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples might be "one"[1]. And did not the same Christ will that His disciples should be marked out and distinguished from others by this characteristic, namely that they loved one another: "By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another"[2]? All Christians, they add, should be as "one": for then they would be much more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. These things and others that class of men who are known as pan-Christians continually repeat and amplify; and these men, so far from being quite few and scattered, have increased to the dimensions of an entire class, and have grouped themselves into widely spread societies, most of which are directed by non-Catholics, although they are imbued with varying doctrines concerning the things of faith. This undertaking is so actively promoted as in many places to win for itself the adhesion of a number of citizens, and it even takes possession of the minds of very many Catholics and allures them with the hope of bringing about such a union as would be agreeable to the desires of Holy Mother Church, who has indeed nothing more at heart than to recall her erring sons and to lead them back to her bosom. But in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a mostgrave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed.
5. Admonished, therefore, by the consciousness of Our Apostolic office that We should not permit the flock of the Lord to be cheated by dangerous fallacies, We invoke, Venerable Brethren, your zeal in avoiding this evil; for We are confident that by the writings and words of each one of you the people will more easily get to know and understand those principles and arguments which We are about to set forth, and from which Catholics will learn how they are to think and act when there is question of those schemes which have for their end the union in one body, whatsoever be the manner, of all who call themselves Christians.
8. This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See cannot on any terms take part in their assemblies, nor is it anyway lawful for Catholics either to support or to work for such enterprises; for if they do so they will be giving countenance to a false Christianity, quite alien to the one Church of Christ.
9. These pan-Christians who turn their minds to uniting the churches seem, indeed, to pursue the noblest of ideas in promoting charity among all Christians: nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment "Love one another," altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ's teaching: "If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you"[18]. For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. 10. So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it.
Good for the man that he was released. Who knows why they released him? As for taking the credit for his release, who knows if it really was JPII? Here's another JPII "anti-communist" story, that can be verified:
"Double Standard" Update - Vatican Coddles Schismatic Chinese "Bishops"
It took the Vatican about 72 hours to declare excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the four bishops he consecrated without a papal mandate on June 30, 1988. Whether one agrees with his decision or not, Lefebvre acted for what he thought was the best interest of the faithful, consecrating four bishops to preserve the traditional Mass and sacraments in a time of "diabolical disorientation" in the Church, to recall Sister Lucy’s memorable phrase.
Indeed, the Church’s Code of Canon Law exempts from penalties such as excommunication one who acts out of what he believes is necessity, even if his good faith belief might be mistaken. (Can. 1323 (4), (7)). And, moreover, Lefebvre and the four bishops declared sincerely that they accept the legitimate authority of Pope John Paul II.
Compare the Vatican’s treatment of the schismatic bishops of the so-called "Patriotic Catholic Association" (PCA) of Red China, created by Mao Tse-Tung in 1957 to replace the true Catholic Church, which that monster had driven underground. Since 1957 the PCA has consecrated not four, but one hundred bishops without a papal mandate, many of these during the reign of John Paul II. These schismatic prelates are required by the regime in Beijing explicitly to renounce any allegiance to Rome and to promote the Red Chinese population control policy of compulsory contraception and, when that fails, forced abortion. These illicit bishops thus promote mortal sins and gross deviations from the infallible teaching of the Church on faith and morals.
What do we find but that, far from declaring these "bishops" excommunicated, the Vatican apparatus has recognized about two-thirds of them as legitimate. This according to an article in the journal Civilta Cattolica, which is vetted by the Vatican Secretary of State — "Pope" Sodano I — before publication. According to CWNews.com (March 5, 2004) "of the 79 bishops [still] serving the ‘official’ [PCA] Church, 49 have at least de facto recognition from the Vatican."
CWNews further reports that "Informed Vatican officials have indicated that many bishops of the ‘official’ Church have quietly established contacts with the Holy See. The Civilta Cattolica report now indicates that the clear majority have been recognized by Rome." At the same time, however, the loyal Catholic bishops of the underground Church "reproach the Patriotic Catholic Association for its dependence on the government, and its failure to maintain ties with the universal Church."
So, the Vatican recognizes the same schismatic (not to mention heretical) pro-abortion "bishops" which the loyal Catholic bishops driven underground in China refuse to join because these schismatic prelates have sworn their allegiance to a government-controlled, communist pseudo-Church.
Marcel Lefebvre and four traditional Catholic bishops were pronounced excommunicated within 72 hours, while at least 49 pro-abortion schismatic bishops, hand-picked and totally controlled by a communist regime, are recognized by the same Vatican apparatus that declared Lefebvre excommunicated. Such is the state of the Catholic Church today.
By the way, only five days after the reports of Vatican recognition of the schismatic PCA bishops surfaced, Bishop Wei Jingyi, of the "underground" Diocese of Qiqihar — that is, the true Catholic diocese of that region — was arrested by communist thugs. In response, "the Holy See expressed its ‘concern and sadness’ … and requested explanations from the authorities." (Zenit, March 10, 2004)
Concern and sadness, you say! Explanations, you say? And what possible "explanation" could the Vatican be expecting from "the authorities" in China? The Red Chinese have arrested another loyal Catholic prelate as part of their continuing persecution of the true Catholic Church in China. That is the explanation.
The Vatican Press Office added this ringing defense of the arrested bishop: "Whatever accusations there might be against the arrested bishop, they should be made public, as happens in every State of law …"
Good grief. A loyal bishop is arrested by communist goons and the Vatican demands, not his immediate release, but only publication of the charges? What sort of limp-wristed nonsense is this? And since when is Red China a "State of law" as opposed to a brutal, utterly lawless dictatorship?
What an utterly nonsensical — no, utterly obscene — situation this is. The Vatican recognizes 49 communist-controlled schismatic bishops, even as the loyal Catholic bishops of the underground Church in China are being persecuted. The Vatican thus makes a mockery of the martyrdom of these loyal prelates. For what reason have they suffered, if the false prelates of the false church they refuse to join are granted Vatican recognition? They have suffered, of course, because they would rather die than join the schismatic communist-controlled bishops of the CPA—even if certain Vatican bureaucrats no longer seem to know what real schism and heresy consist of. The same bureaucrats declare excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the four staunchly traditional bishops he consecrated, even as they recognize the legitimacy of bishops illicitly consecrated for a "church" created by the devil himself through Mao Tse Tung.
If what we are seeing today is not the great apostasy foretold in Sacred Scripture, then what would be? Now we can see why Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi said that "In the Third Secret (of Fatima) it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top." What we see around us, dear reader, must be precisely what the Third Secret of Fatima foretold. And that, we can be sure, is why the Vatican apparatus of "Pope" Sodano I has yet to reveal the words of Our Lady which follow Her fateful phrase: "In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved, etc."
This needs to be taught in Catholic schools. [ /sarcasm off ]
Is this the new Gospel of the followers of SSPX?
Additionally, Jesus said: Love your enemy.
If Pope John Paul II is guilty of showing love for his enemies, then Jesus must have been wrong.
The disobedient archbishop was far wiser than Jesus.
And it is far more important to say rituals in dead languages than to have the faithful be involved in Divine Rituals? Right?
Latin was the common language of the Roman Empire. That was why it was used then. Greek was also used for the writing of scripture, as many educated people knew Greek.
Maybe the SSPX believes in promoting the Gospelof Hate. That is what is evident in this thread. The hate that is in the hearts of SSPX.
The hate that appears to be in hearts of those in SSPX. The grudges that SSPX carries in their hearts.
Someone who causes a schism: is that a good thing? Then maybe Martin Luther should be declared a saint for his causing a schism.
Where was the effort on the disobedient archbishop to rectify the schism?
Why were the four candidates for Bishop qualified? Because they were 30 years old? Known of them that I am aware of had much experience. I doubt if any of the four were Canon Lawyers and held a JCL.
It is where Bishops attacked the Pope. They abandoned the Pope and joined the enemy.
Sounds like what the disobedient archbishop did.
I guess SSPX will now teach that it is good to be disobedient now... The end justifies the means. Side with Adolf Hitler if that will help you achieve your end...
My simple take on Pope John Paul II:
When he became Pope, there was a functional majority of bishops in the world, and a near unanimity of bishops in the United States who were in outright disobedience, and the gravest of heresies. The Soviet Union was seeming triumphant, and the Curia’s method of handling them was ostpolitick. And priests raping children was practically par for the course, but the laity were too ashamed and frightened to speak out. Vocations had dropped 90%, and most of the Catholic world outside Europe was dependent on Marxist missionaries for their sacraments.
By midpoint in his papacy, the rate of sexual abuse was down 97%. No bishop in America dared defend birth control, let alone homosexuality or abortion. The Soviet union was on the ash-heap of history. The decline of vocations had stabilized in the first world, and third-world nations were sending missionaries into America and Europe to spread the gospel.
I think Assissi was a tragic mistake. I’d like to imagine that St. Paul would have called him out on the carpet, as he did St. Peter when St. Peter was tolerating the Judaizers. But on the balance, I think John Paul II did an amazing job. Let’s not forget that St. Peter is regarded as among the greatest of saints, not a heretic; his misjudgment does not provide evidence against his infallibility. And if I were a tiny fraction the great man John Paul was, spiritual pride would endanger my soul.
Verdugo, I think the word you are looking for in the title is “syncretistic” not whatever the title says. Syncretism is an amalgam of various religious beliefs in an attempt to make one coherent belief. I don’t thing the term in the title is actually a word.
I wouldn’t brush all of SSPX with the same stroke. They, too have done much good by winning back for us the Latin Mass. I think the ones who have come back are greater than the ones who haven’t, but the ones who haven’t have yet a role to play in God’s design. Yes, there are some stark raving madmen in their number, but many were driven to it.
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.