Posted on 06/21/2014 5:38:39 AM PDT by piusv
It is not remotely surprising that the Archbishop of Canterbury should desire to bless the Pope of Rome, but the humble attitude of His Holiness in accepting it has caused something of a stir among Roman Catholic traditionalists:
(Excerpt) Read more at archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com ...
“How charitable of you.”
I don’t confuse charity with “being nice”. You shouldn’t either.
I think what people need to ask themselves is whether Pope Leo XIII would have allowed himself to be blessed in such a way.
Anyone who says yes is a loony. Beyond that I have to keep this secret from my children because they would be scandalized... and outraged.
You’re problems are with the Church’s canon laws and the Catholic Encyclopedia (I’ve quoted both), not with me. But then again, all protestants have problems with the Catholic Church’s canons.
Is that still the head Druid?
The thing is Francis apparently has problems with Catholic teaching too. It’s no wonder. He’s Vatican II personified.
And you haven't heard him talk much about the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham or the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution 'Anglicanorum coetibus' of Pope Benedict XVI, have you?
For many Roman Catholic traditionalists, this is one hell of an ecumenical mess, sending out confusing messages about the Faith, the (Roman) Catholic Church and the uniqueness of ministry of the Vicar of Christ. They may think this a false expression of showman humility — a theatrical performance; a patronising gesture of genuine compassion but counterfeit ecclesiology. But His Grace detects a spiritual, doctrinal and moral shift in ecumenical relations. Pope Francis is more Anglican than many believe, or would find it possible to admit.
Before anyone goes any nuttier, the author of the article is apparently a member of the CofE and NOT a Catholic. So no matter his intention the pope is causing confusion.
I disagree. I think you're confused about many things, especially Catholic matters.
(1) Not loony, but ignorant of Traditional Catholic teaching. Some are intentionally so; others not.
(2) Funny how the kids get it.
Here, let's try an experiment: I just asked my 13 year old daughter how she'd respond to the pope being blessed by the archbishop of Canterbury. She said "I'd probably vomit, why, is this true? where's the bin, that's so stupid." I didn't guide her reaction by my question either.
Wow, Protestants are fast running out of people they can count on.
Yes, this was the blessing he made "silently".
Those same popes also didn't accept blessings from heretics. I guess they weren't humble enough.
No replies to your post 89?
Of course not.
” So no matter his intention the pope is causing confusion.”
I’m not confused so apparently the problem is you.
“I disagree. I think...”
Apparently you don’t. Not much at least.
R-I-G-H-T; I don't believe you.
As I've said before your problems are with the Catholic Church, not me. If you have complaints about Catholic canons or the Catholic Encyclopedia, take it up with Rome.
If you really are Catholic, you need some serious catechesis. In that case, don't turn to Rome but look for a traditional priest, e.g. FSSP.
Of course you aren't, I haven't heard of any protestant complaining about a Catholic pope seeking a public blessing from one of their own. They love it.
It seems that only a few traditional Catholics are upset by this stunt.
Again from the Council of Laodicea:
Canon 32
>>It is unlawful to receive the “blessings” of heretics, for they are rather “follies” than “blessings”. .<<
Once again, your problem is with the Catholic Church. Good luck in your catechesis!
>>No replies to your post 89?<<
Yes, there have been no replies. Typical of Cafeteria Catholics/Protestants.
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.