Posted on 11/10/2004 12:59:06 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
Earlier in the thread you wrote that the pope had said and written some heretical things. Sinkspur asked if you actually believed this. Your answer implied that "sheer volume" necessitates heresy. I am reminded of the play "Amadeus" in which at one point, the composer Salieri criticizes Mozart for "too many notes". Maybe that's not quite what you meant, but, if not you didn't answer Sinkspur's question.
Of course the pope is the most prodigious in history. I would expect him to be in this information age we live in. His longevity also accounts for his enormous output.
You say buried, I would say enriched, not under a mountain, but rather with a treasure chest. It's one thing to criticize the volume, quite another to justify a charge of heresy by citing volume.
Even JPII is now realizing that the Catholic Church has made itself entirely irrelevant (i.e. his recent comments on the EU).
First of all the Church is emminently relevent to practicing Catholics who believe in the efficacy of the sacraments, cherish Her historical patrimony, and are edified by Her eternal wisdom.
Secondly, I would tell the pope and anyone else that suspects the Church is irrelevent in the political and cultural sense to buck up and not be discouraged. President Bush doesn't think the Church is irrelevant, as he has met with the pope three times in his first term. The left wing media doesn't think the Church is irrelevant. Last night on "Now with Bill Moyers" a story on the religious right insinuated that Mr. Bush had pressured the Vatican to prod American bishops to do more to aid Mr. Bush's pro-life agenda, citing Archbishop Chaput's words and deeds specifically, as an example of the Church's alliance with the Bush agenda.
Furthermore, the phrase "culture of life" has become part of our political and moral lexicon. This also speaks to the enormous relevancy, not only of the Church, but to his Holiness, John Paul the Great. The Church is relevant. Don't doubt it for a minute.
Bump to 221
It's John Paul II. Not "John Paul the Great". Maybe the Pope would be "greater" if he denounced the U.N.'s policy regarding "reproductive health" and critcize Liberalism and Modernism with the vigor of St. Pius X.
*Good grief. What total nonsense.
Hey, no fair making sense :)
can you prove it's nonsense? novusordians (new word here lol) have, in the past, demanded proof, so I think its perfectly logical to explain your comment.
Can't prove a negative. The original poster should prove that JPII has written and spoken heresy.
does action come into this as well? The Assisi incident and the kissing the Koran was particulary offensive, but was it heresy or just plain stupidity (not stupidity, but another word I cant think of right now)?
Here's just a few of them:
Buddhism is a religion of salvation.
Crossing the Threshold of Hope, by John Paul II, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 1994
84-85, 1994
Outside the Church there is remission of sins.
L'Osservatore Romano, Vatican City, Italy, English edition 11/20/89
The UN is the supreme forum of peace and justice.
Path to Peace: A Contribution. Liturgical Publications Inc., Brookfield, WI, 1987
112, 10/02/1979
Goodness and truth are found in false religions.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, of John Paul II, 1992, Liguori Publications
842, 10/11/1992
Muslims worship the One True God.
Crossing the Threshold of Hope, by John Paul II, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 1994
141, 1994
Assisi and kissing the Koran were neither. I know both of those get the traddie panties in a wad, but they were just occurrences.
LOL. That's a doozy. If that ain't heresy then nothing is.
Quotes and links are proof. Your post is not.
Was Judas betraying Jesus, just an occurrence?
He cited the publications and page numbers. Just because you have probably never owned or read a book in your life doesn't mean the only form of acceptable proof is a link to a web site.
It's my understanding that he has fought against the UN's "reproductive health" policies. As for modernism, calling its consequences a "culture of death" seems pretty gosh awful vigorous to me. I agree the pope could be greater as you suggest, who couldn't be? Nonetheless, I am grateful for God having put Karol Wojtyla where He did.
"Quotes and links are proof."
“We shall praise St. Gregory the Great who expressly testifies that this indeed is the teaching of the Catholic Church. He says: "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved."
The Papal Encyclical
"Summo Iugiter Studio"
Given by His Holiness Pope Gregory XVI
May 27, 1832
http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/summoiugiterstudio.html
Huh-huh. Without a link, there's no way to verify that LOI is giving us the correct information.
What I've read and not read is not relevant, nor is your snottiness.
But what does that mean? Even Pius IX taught that actual membership in the Catholic Church is not the only way to salvation.
Gosh LOTI, you, or your sources are so diengenuous....and error prone. It's 843, not 842, of the catechism that says "Thus the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as " a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens men that they may at length have life." You may be susceptible to half-truths, out-of-context quotes, and pure imaginings of your marionette masters but most won't be fooled by your cut and pastes. Please, verify what you read on those consistently debunked sites you frequent and think about it before you post.
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.