Sspx-Judgment Day, Sept 14

[dominicansoul]

no, emotional because they were receiving graces from the Almighty God... i mean, I know SSPXers tend to be stiff upperlipped and rigid, so you probably wouldn't understand what becoming emotional means...




just joshin'


As far as calling the other Pope wrong, no, I'm not calling any Popes wrong, I just believe the Pope follows where the Holy Spirit leads. It may be confusing at times, and something I probably wouldn't do, or wish he didn't do, but if he's doing it, I can only trust that God isn't abandoning the Church just because it seems his Pope makes a few mistakes...

Edited September 19, 2011 by dominicansoul

[vee]

God can write straight with crooked lines, so one interfaith meeting isnt the be all end all. Our current pope Benedict has had many wonderful meetings with leaders of other faiths where he exhorts them to respect life etc and teaches them about basic Catholic faith. If you read his speeches to these groups you would know. To not recognize him as a valid successor of Peter is really one's own loss as one can learn much from him. We must pray for him as well that the Holy Spirit continue to guide him. It is our duty as lay people to pray for the pope and priests not abandon them in their need.

[vee]

and if you think one or more lousy interfaith meetings are bad dont read about pope Alexander 6th!!! For 2000 years the Catholic Church has been attacked from within and outside but it stood and will continue to stand until the end of time. Get back on board!! Its a leaky ship but its Jesus' ship.


edited typos

Edited September 19, 2011 by vee8

[MithLuin]

There are aspects of our faith that have needed to be addressed more specifically over time. If something was confusing or leading people astray, it had to be clarified. The apostles probably wouldn't recognize the theological arguments for the doctrine of transubstantiation. Doesn't mean that the Church hasn't 'always taught that,' but it does mean that people within the Church held a variety of views, some of which were eventually identified as heresies. Lanfranc had to shoot down Berenger's ideas a millenium after Jesus said 'This is my body.' Origen's never gonna be canonized, not because he was a heretic, but because he held views that were later held by heretics (or led to...depends which ideas you want to assign as his). But he was not himself a condemned heretic, because the Church hadn't gotten around to defining those dogmas yet.

Eternal truth is just that...unchanging; the same yesterday today and tomorrow. The Church, however, being made up of people and existing in time, is constantly changing and growing under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. If someone were to try to 'freeze' the Church in one particular time, that remnant would die, because living things cannot be preserved like that.

[bernard]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1316407220' post='2306677']
There are aspects of our faith that have needed to be addressed more specifically over time. If something was confusing or leading people astray, it had to be clarified. The apostles probably wouldn't recognize the theological arguments for the doctrine of transubstantiation. Doesn't mean that the Church hasn't 'always taught that,' but it does mean that people within the Church held a variety of views, some of which were eventually identified as heresies. Lanfranc had to shoot down Berenger's ideas a millenium after Jesus said 'This is my body.' Origen's never gonna be canonized, not because he was a heretic, but because he held views that were later held by heretics (or led to...depends which ideas you want to assign as his). But he was not himself a condemned heretic, because the Church hadn't gotten around to defining those dogmas yet.

Eternal truth is just that...unchanging; the same yesterday today and tomorrow. The Church, however, being made up of people and existing in time, is constantly changing and growing under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. If someone were to try to 'freeze' the Church in one particular time, that remnant would die, because living things cannot be preserved like that.
[/quote]

So is interreligious worship ok or not?

[faithcecelia]

[quote name='bernard' timestamp='1316420416' post='2306752']

So is interreligious worship ok or not?
[/quote]

Jesus met people where they were, he didn't wait until they had converted to Judaism. I have prayed with friends of other faiths and it doesn't change the fact that I am praying to God, whoever they are praying to. So yes, I think it can be okay and beyond okay too. Meet people where they are, show respect for their beliefs (which is [i]not[/i] the same as accepting them as Truth) and then you may eventually find yourself in a position where you can aid them in their conversion. If you aren't the one to do it, there might not be anyone else.

[AccountDeleted]

I understand giving love to everyone, but not necessarily worshipping with everyone according to their own beliefs. I don't think Jesus worshipped with the pagans, even though He eventually had the gospel preached to pagans. He kept to the Jewish faith but was able to be friends and relate to those of other faiths. And he told the Jewish people to do as the Pharisees said (though not to do as they did). It is just my opinion, but I extrapolate this to mean that I should do as His Church teaches, and trust in Him to keep things holy. I don't see any reason to worship with other faiths, and I just don't feel comfortable with interfaith services anymore.

[Papist]

[quote name='bernard' timestamp='1316399042' post='2306580']
Regardless, we judge by outward actions and what he did was clearly condemned.
[/quote]
Jesus sat and ate with prostitutes.

[Papist]

[quote name='bernard' timestamp='1316420416' post='2306752']

So is interreligious worship ok or not?
[/quote]
Was it a worship or a praying meeting?

[bernard]

It's not me condemning interfaith prayer/worship it's Pope Pius Xi.

[MithLuin]

What Pope Pius XI condemned be this:

[quote]"This bein' so, it is clear that the Apostolic See cannot on any terms take part in their assemblies, nor is it anyway lawful for Catholics either to support or to work for such enterprises; for if they do so they will be givin' countenance to a false Christianity, quite alien to the one Church of Christ."

[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19280106_mortalium-animos_en.html"]Mortalium animos[/url][/quote]

If you matey read the document, it's very clear what he's condemnin'. He's condemnin' a 'Pan-Christian' theology that suggests thar are many different brand aarrrs of Christianity, all with some truth, but none with the full truth. thar is a hope for Christian unity, but an assumption that it does not yet exist. This approach reduces Catholicism to a denomination of Christianity, so that if Catholics were to participate it would suggest that we are one among many 'churches'.

What Pope Pius XI taught regardin' the place of the Catholic Church is still held to be true. I have no argument with his teachin'...nor does the current pope. I know of no Church document that contradicts Pope Pius' teachin' that the one, holy, catholic, apostolic faith that we profess is what unites Catholics. Ecumenism doesn't mean 'all religions are the same.' The Catholic Church would not become a member of an organization that would treat her in such a way. For instance, the Catholic Church is not (has never been) a member of the World Council of Churches. She will not join, because to do so would be to be treated as merely another 'flavor' of Christianity - compromises would be expected.

Pope Pius warned against participation in ecumenical efforts that would require compromises of the Truth; certainly thar can be no benefit to doin' such a thin'. Ecumenical efforts that work towards unity while ignorin' disparity of faith or belief would be rather shallow. However...brin'in' others into the Church is what the end of Matthew's gospel is all about:

[quote] [color=maroon]"Go therefore a.n.d make disciples of all the nations, baptizin.g them in the name of the Father a.n.d the Son a.n.d the Holy Spirit,[/color] [color=maroon]teachin' them to observe all that I comma.nded y.o.u; a.n.d lo, I be with y.o.u always, even to the end of the age." [/quote][/color]

Ecumenism that has this as its goal and aarrr does not compromise the eternal Truth of Jesus Christ is [i]wholly[/i] in line with what Pope Pius XI taught. It's workin'. The relationships with the Orthodox churches is such that unity is a real posibility in the near future. The Anglicans are respondin' to the invitation to come home to Rome. The SSPX has been invited to take part in talks to be regularized as well. Pope Benedict XVI desires that all people will be part of the Church established by Jesus Christ. he's willin' to do the work to make that possible...without compromisin' the Truth of our faith. I do not see Pope Piux XI condemnin' his actions in any way.

Edit: I'm sooooo sorry for the 'talk like a pirate' edit....it's not me fault!!!

Edited September 19, 2011 by MithLuin

[vee]

[quote name='bernard' timestamp='1316440919' post='2306941']
It's not me condemnin' interfaith prayer/worship it's Pope Pius Xi.
[/quote]

psst

[img]http://www.tldm.org/News14/PopeBenedictCross.jpg[/img]

is pope now. We arent in 1939.

some of his address to various religious leaders.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/benedict_xvi_lauds_religious_freedom_interreligious_dialogue/

[bernard]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1316450914' post='2307023']
What Pope Pius XI condemned be this:



If you matey read the document, it's very clear what he's condemnin'. He's condemnin' a 'Pan-Christian' theology that suggests thar are many different brand aarrrs of Christianity, all with some truth, but none with the full truth. thar is a hope for Christian unity, but an assumption that it does not yet exist. This approach reduces Catholicism to a denomination of Christianity, so that if Catholics were to participate it would suggest that we are one among many 'churches'.[/quote]

And if he condemns pan-Christianity what would would would be his opinion of the interfaith prayer meetin' at Assisi where the Dalai Lama puts a Bhudda statue on top of the tabernacle?

But anyway in the same document Pius Xi writes.

[color=#000080]...Such undertakin's cannot, in any way, be approved by Catholics, since they be based on the erroneous opinion that all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy, in the sense that all equally, although in different ways, manifest and signify the natural and innate sentiment that carries us towards God and pushes us to recognize with respect His power. In truth, the partisans of this theory fall into a complete error, but what is more, in pervertin' the notion of the true religion, they repudiate it, and they fall step by step into naturalism and atheism.[/color]

IF you matey don't see the problem with these interfaith meetin's, where nobody is encouraged to convert but rather "live more deeply in their own faiths" and where each faith is (to anyone viewin') is on an equal footin' then I don't think thar is anythin' I or Pius XI could say to make you matey think otherwise.

how do I get this pirate talkin off?

Edited September 19, 2011 by bernard

[bernard]

Here is a Ukranian Orthodox Bishop who accepts papal authority, he addresses the pope "Your Holiness." He is also scandalized by the Assisi meetin's. So you matey have to ask how many faithful are we losin' because of these events.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfe-3di7Nd0&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLF189E5D4886340D2

[Papist]

benard, the Church has had many popes that have said many thin's. Have you matey gone back and researched each pope's statements, writin's, etc. and compared them with other popes' with the same scrutiny you matey be doin' with the post-VII popes? Or you matey just cherry-pickin' certain popes statements to justify your hatred of the Second Vatican Council?

I highly suggest you matey reflect on the consequences if you matey be wrong.