Posted on 12/20/2004 5:45:44 PM PST by wagglebee
I personally have admired the Pope for many of his stands, but I may be guilty of grading on the curve based on the failings of many of the other "leaders" in Christianity today. Grading on the curve is usually a bad thing.
Please don't confuse me with someone who thinks anyone is above criticism. I just took issue with the language and approach. But, I have already said, maybe I was wrong.
BTW, loving the church isn't something I care a whit about. Loving God is what I think it's all about.
But I'm not here to debate my differences with Roman Catholicism.
Wagglebee, I've seen some outrageous and erroneous statements on FR before, but your denial of the historical existence of Joan of Arc is quite possible the most outrageous. What are you smoking?
It's ok. I admire him for his stands against the Soviet Empire, homosexuality, and abortion, but those are more humanitarian things than anything else. Before being a world leader, the Pope should be a leader of the Church.
Look. There it is again.
>>If someone argues that canonization is not infallible, there are other questions raised. For example, how could Catholics pray for intercession of someone who is not in heaven?<<
I think you've adopted the overly legalistic view of infallibility; if I could fault Vatican I, it would be that it encouraged legalism.
Just because a belief doesn't meet the Council-defined standard of infallibility does not mean that it is in question. Councils and Popes only declare something infallible once it has been questionned to an extent that there is question among the faithful whether it really is true.
For instance, the Bible went without infallible definition for 1500 years. That doesn't mean one could assert that "the Canterbury Tales" was sacred scripture before that time! But Martin Luther began to assert that books such as Revelations, Jude, Hebrews, Sirach, Eccleseasticus and Tobit were not cannonical. Then, and only then, did the Council of Trent define which books were canonical.
But such doctrines have the Tradition of the Church as their authority. There is no great tradition of the CHurch that the founding father of the EU is a Saint. I do greatly fear, however, that lowering the standards for sainthood so severly would call into question the Pope's authority on Sainthood. The miracles have stood for Heaven's affirmation of the sanctity of the deceased. Without that affirmation, how shall we know that the Pope isn't wrong?
Look, there is another undecipherable post.
I'm a saint.
Heh. You have to order the decoder.
Yes, but St. Christopher was never declared a Saint by the Pope. The traditions of various ancient areas are also preserved; St. Christopher was one such traditional Saint. IIRC, he was removed from the canon becuase there was suspicion he never existed.
I would. But like I said, I hope I'm wrong.
>>According to the bishops of South Africa, Bill Clinton was in full communion with all of the saints when he received Holy Communion a couple of years ago.<<
I asked St. Philomena, and she says you're full of nonsense and would like you to change your screen name.
I don't hate him, I disagree with him. In any event, my feelings for the Pope are irrelevant to my love of the Church.
Do you love him? If so pray for him and temper your language a tad. You can criticize without hyperbole.
Nevermind, it's none of my business how you show your love. Goodbye.
Temper my language? Hyperbole?
I used the term "koran-kissing". JPII has kissed the koran. I used the term "worships-with-animists". JPII has worshippped with animists. So, your view is that facts are "hyperbole" that needs to be "tempered"? You must get offended quite a bit on these boards!
As you stated, it's none of your business, but I pray for the Pontiff every day. I love him in the same way that I love all humans: with a full heart, and with my eyes wide open.
He also claims he doesn't have a dog in the race. If that's the case, I like to know the name of the animal that he does have in the race.
This is another typical and often used strategy. It's basically meant to get people to shut up while the Church plunges deeper and deeper. It's a yawner.
Christopher Hitchens is a Trotskyite and an athiest. He denounced her on MSNBC the other night. The main complaint against her is that she opposed aborting these little babies.
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.