Posted on 06/04/2002 3:03:30 AM PDT by maryz
Wow, did a Catholic say this, did you say this Bellarmine? WAY TO GO!!! (applause, applause)
The author of this piece knows that there are many homosexually-oriented men in the priesthood who are celibate. There just are. And one might guess who they are, but, because they are celibate, one will never know.
That's why a blanket policy against admitting homosexuals to the priesthood will never work. First, if they're celibate, you'll never know.
And, if they're celibate, why not admit them?
It is the Mass available to virtualy ALL the Catholics on this Planet. In what WAY is it "an interesting question" as to whether or not one should attend?
BTW, where does your authority derive from so you can render judgements about which Liturgy of the Mass is acceptable according to the strictures of "justice" as understood by yourself and your personal opinions of Church Fathers? Us lesser lights need to know...
Try to imagine for one-half of one nano-second Aquinas or Bellarmine thinking that Holy Mother Church could promulgate an invalid or defective or illicit Mass?
The Mass is the Mass is the Mass. Liturgy changes the Mass does not. The Mass is the ACTION OF JESUS OFFERING HIMSELF THROUGH THE PRIEST.
Good grief. I lived long enough to hear Nixon tell Republicans "We are all Keynesians now," and I half expect some SSPX devotee or some other self-appointed authority to declare to Catholics, "We are all Protestants now."
Agreed, by your definition of unjust. It certainly clarifies the original post.
I have been so fortunate in my life - I have never attended a Mass where the priest was a dissenter in The Real Presence. Cardinal Law is pretty orthodox, and therefore, aside of the "normal" things that priests/bishops have done (removing altar kneelers, placing tabernacles on the side altars), I haven't come across a priest who teaches anything other than Christ is Present in the Eucharist. I would walk out if I did encounter that.
No! I love the Orthodox. I think you guys have a lot to add (most of the time) to these discussions. You aren't in here calling the Catholic Church the "whore of Babylon" or anything like that!
Well there is a middle ground, and we have it.
Agreed, by your definition of unjust. It certainly clarifies the original post.
Do you think it possible Holy Mother Church/ The Pope could promulgate a Liturgy of Mass opposed or contrary to God's law?
Did the Holy Spirit die? If so, why wasn't I informed?
There is the right path of reunion. As this Great Shepherd has said, "We need to breathe with both lungs," in referring to a hoped for reunion of East and West.
There will come a time when even the East will Bless this Holy man and all he did in an attempt to clear away obstacles that opened the path to reunion
Dream on. He has done more to alienate us than any other pope. My spiritual father has a very hard time discussing it with me at all. Most Orthodox I know consider JP2 to be the worst pope you have had, and he wins the contest of most-disliked pope, hands down.
Would you like to me spell it out for you? Start with Ziggy Brzezinski, Ukraine, kissing the Koran, and all the outright proselytizing. Patriarch Alexi II won't even reply to this pope. The Georgian Patriarch greeted JP2 at the airport and failed to show up for the meeting later to discuss "things". Just couldn't make it.
Keep dreaming, but take my word for it. We can't wait for this pope to move on. And we can't wait to forget about him either.
ThHis was the third time - on this particualr thread -where you "confessed" your dislike of the Pope. Do you have a compulsion or do you think our memories so faulty you have to continually tell Catholics how much you dislike our Pope?
Your next post (#72) brings the count to four, the number of times you have told us you don't like the Pope. Mar Mena, believe me; we KNOW you dislike the Pope.
If you do desire to take on that burden, be prepared to cite Aquinas and Bellarmine in support of such apostate inanity
"Just as it is licit to resist the Pontiff who attacks the body, so also is it licit to resist him who attacks souls or destroys the civil order or above all, tries to destroy the Church. I say that it is licit to resist him by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will. It is not licit, however, to judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior." - St. Robert Bellarmine
Everyone is a Pope EXCEPT the Pope, I guess. And I guess it is "Catholic" to think the Pope COULD promulgate a Liturgy of the Mass that is contrary to the Faith.
Again see the quote above. You should know your church history a little better before you start accusing people of not being Catholic.
Can the Bishops Heal the American Church?
What is the church without the trust of people to become or remain parishioners? How can the bishops regain lost trust and those "parishioners" that fled the church? How can bishops stem the tide of parishioners sitting on the fence poised to jump ship?
I doubt this will enable the bishops to "heal" the church. Albeit it is what the parishioners, those that have fled and those on the fence, want from the bishops. They want the bishops to be completely honest and come completely clean about the scandal. However, if the bishops do that it will most likely cause even more parishioners to flee the church than already have. Apparently the bishops, facilitated by the church, have dug their own Catch 22 demise.
As I understand it the church has been sick almost since since it's inception. Or is it that priests sexually abusing people a recent occurrence with a short history?
To me it is an interesting question based on my experience as a Catholic. I have attended the Novus Ordo my entire life. I had no idea until a year or so ago that the entire liturgy of the church had been changed so radically just before I was born. I remember once attending an Anglican service and commenting to my Anglican friend who was considering converting to Catholicism that the Anglican service was nearly identical to the Catholic mass so that he wouldn't notice any difference. Little did I know at the time that his liturgy was 400 years old and mine was 30. Also, I was unaware that his liturgy was made the way it was by people who despised the Traditional Catholic Mass. So exactly what am I supposed to think Cathilocguy? I will still attend the Novus Ordo, and I don't doubt it's validity, but as far as my own salvation goes, I feel much safer going to the Traditional Mass.
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.