Posted on 11/13/2013 3:34:41 PM PST by NYer
Ultra-traditionalist Catholics have openly challenged Pope Francis by disrupting one of his favorite events, a ceremony that he and Jewish leaders led in the Metropolitan Cathedral each year to promote religious harmony on the anniversary of the beginning of the Holocaust.
The annual ceremony brings together Catholics, Jews and Protestants to mark Kristallnacht, the Nazi-led mob violence in 1938 when about 1,000 Jewish synagogues were burned and thousands of Jews were forced into concentration camps, launching the genocide that killed 6 million Jews.
A small group disrupted Tuesday night’s ceremony by shouting the rosary and the “Our Father” prayer, and spreading pamphlets saying “followers of false gods must be kept out of the sacred temple.”
Buenos Aires Archbishop Mario Poli, named by Francis to replace him as Argentina’s top church official, appealed for calm as others in the audience rose up to repudiate them, and the protesters were soon escorted out by police.
“Let there be peace. Shalom,” Poli then said, urging everyone to take their seats for a ceremony that was also led by Rabbi Abraham Skorka, a close friend of the pope who co-wrote a book of dialogue seeking common ground between Judaism and Catholicism.
“Dear Jewish brothers, please feel at home, because that’s the way Christians want it, despite these signs of intolerance,” Poli said. “Your presence here doesn’t desecrate a temple of God. We will continue in peace this encounter that Pope Francis always promoted, valued and appreciated so much.”
The Rev. Christian Bouchacourt, the South America leader of the Society of Saint Pius X, said Wednesday that the protesters belong to his organization and that they have a right to feel outraged when rabbis preside over a ceremony in a cathedral. “I recognize the authority of the pope, but he is not infallible and in this case, does things we cannot accept,” Bouchacourt said in an interview with Radio La Red.
“This wasn’t a desire to make a rebellion, but to show our love to the Catholic Church, which was made for the Catholic faith,” Bouchacourt added. “A Mass isn’t celebrated in a synagogue, nor in a mosque. The Muslims don’t accept it. In the same way, we who are Catholics cannot accept the presence of another faith in our church.”
The Buenos Aires Herald has this account:
“A group of them attempted to spill their poison on the victims of the Holocaust,” said DAIA Jewish community group head Julio Schlosser, who was present at the meeting. “It’s very dangerous if we do not all publicly condemn acts like these, everyone, Jews, Catholics and Muslims.”
As the incident developed and the Lefebvrists, mainly youths, were insulted for their actions, Father Fernando Giannetti requested they leave in the name of Buenos Aires Archbishop Mario Poli, calling for those in attendance not to submit to “an act of provocation.”
After some minutes of tension, police officials arrived at the Cathedral, although they did not intervene, while Giannetti prayed Saint Francis of Assisi’s Prayer for Peace.
But it was YOU who claimed that Bergoglio (Pope Francis) said it. or more precisely perhaps, that "Pope Francis" believed it --- which understandings can only come about by him having said in effect, as much.
Which is why is put it as being an alleged-almost quote in the first place.
So now you know -- more than you once did. Help the freepathon out if you can, would you?
Last I heard, "those who do not believe in God", call themselves atheists. What say you?
So now you're a mind reader? Aren't you getting a little personal?
I don't believe that. Those who understand the Roman Catholic faith "well enough" are called converts.
I'm sorry, I thought that you could read and understand the answers to the questions which you asked. Did I go too far in assuming that you would understand?
I am becoming more convinced of that all the time...or else there is something else afoot as to motivations, which I should not openly speculate upon...
Is this some sort of game to you? Or do you prefer honest "discussion"?
Note: -- "honest" does not need equate to "agreeing".
Last chance.
I’ve been honest through out this thread. Please tell me where you think I was dishonest.
Source? But then again I have no need at this time for it...for what I was driving at was for statements such as that to be viewed in context.
I saw it a while ago. Saw more than a few FRomans here become upset, with them saying that the press was deliberately misconstruing his remarks (one of that nature, along with a few others). I was accused (by a FRoman -- a RCIA instructor no less) of not understanding/taking it literally/ etc., something along those lines, concerning this new "pope's" remarks, and how they have been covered in the press, repeated here and there, and so on, generally.
Now, it is as if another FRoman (you are a [Roman] Catholic freeper, are you not?) seems to be telling me to take it literally -- even out of context, ascribing to statements such as the above, perhaps even the interpretation as to Begoglio's intended meaning, such as you have previously supplied, to whit;
It never ceases to amaZE me, how both sides of a coin can be so often argued on these pages, depending upon which FRoman is talking about what.
If (or better said -- when?) there was such a wide gulf of disagreement between comparative, other-than [Roman] Catholic ecclesiastical community, such is pointed at as serious dis-union, and further alleged "proof" that those are not "churches", "in the formal sense".
If it were not for double-standards, some would be without one of their most basic of standards.
I thought you wanted an honest discussion. I should have known better.
I think the “issue” I have with saying praying “to” a crucifix is that it helps to give life to the “Catholics worship graven images!” lie. Perhaps you might like to use the phrase praying “before” the Crucifix.
Yes, there are many Catholics on this forum who have gotten all up in arms concerning the media misquoting, taking out of context, etc; however, ebbtide and myself are not among them. In fact, those same Catholics take issue with us as well. I, for one, don’t care what they think of me. I care more about the Truth...sometimes that means I agree with them; other times not.
It would seem that many here would say the Church was anti-Semitic for 1960 years. Individual Catholics may have been, but they would even deem the teachings prior to VII as anti-Semitic. Hmmmm.....
The pagan dancing around the stick may not know Jesus Christ, but most Jews and Muslims do know about Him; and they have rejected Him.
The Jews have rejected certain truths about God, but they did not create a new God and worship him. This is what is in question, not whether they have the fullness of faith. Though they have denied the revelation of God in his Son, and therefore have an insufficient knowledge of God now, they still undeniably look to and worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They just don't know him as well as they should. That is not the same thing as worshiping a different god.
So why join them in their error?
I may be misunderstanding you here, but if you mean this generally, and I will assume you do, then I would say that I think it all depends on what impact such a thing would have and how it was handled. I don't think by simply engaging in some sort of interfaith event we are necessarily "joining them in their errors," though if handled poorly scandal could definitely arise. I have neither supported nor attacked the concept personally, and really don't know enough about this particular event to make an informed comment. It was, rather, the intellectually dubious claim by some that the Jews actually worship a different god than we do which I felt compelled to respond to and to which I directed my comments. The worthiness of this particular event I will leave to others more informed than myself to debate.
How can you say that after they rejected God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost?
[23] That all men may honour the Son, as they honour the Father. He who honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father, who hath sent him. John; Chapter 5
Better than what? I did answer the last question, though admittedly not documenting every instance which you sought be pointed out to you.
Can you not see even that single, solitary one? There are more, but why should I bother?
I've been forthright with you, all along. No game playing, here, well except for the little song, which carried along within it, links as answer to the question you asked.
That makes it to be an honest reply...
So take your groundless insinuations, and "project" them in some other direction -- perhaps back to whatever dark place it was which they were brought forth from. They will most assuredly fit there, better than apply to ME.
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.
