|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 27, 2022 3:18:27 GMT
I don't know what you are referring to in Pope Francis's comments, I try to keep up with the news on what is going on in the Catholic Church today. I understand that His Holiness Pope Francis has declared that that cohabitating couples can be in a true marriage having the grace of marriage even though they are not officially married. "...e sono sicuro che questo è un matrimonio vero, hanno la grazia del matrimonio, proprio per la fedeltà che hanno." This is officially posted on the Vatican website page: press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2016/06/16/0447/01021.htmlYou say that they are in a state of mortal sin, but His Holiness the Pope says that there are cases where they have the grace of marriage even though they are not officially married, and this is because of their fidelity ? His Holiness says: "Eppure davvero dico che ho visto tanta fedeltà in queste convivenze, tanta fedeltà" I can hack my way through very basic Italian, but I had to cheat and run this through a translator. It appears that the translation software already had this entire discussion loaded into it, as the translation was very clean. It's just his opinion. Not every utterance from the mouth of the Holy Father is official Catholic teaching, and the perception among many that this is the case, is all the more reason for him to choose his words carefully, something that our Holy Father, and I say this with all the love and respect in the world, does not always do. I cannot say where grace is, and where grace is not. Very possibly Our Lord, in His mercy, does dispense graces to these cohabiting couples, and is gradually leading them to a regularized situation that is without sin. I hope this is the case. These are clearly people who do not think that the teachings of the Church, in their entirely, apply to them, or if they do, perhaps they think they just can't live up to them, and choose to live in a kind of "half-in-half-out" condition. Perhaps they are just that poorly catechized. Perhaps that love and devotion they feel towards their partner is more real to them than orthodox, traditional Catholic doctrine. I can't answer those questions. But neither can I say that this is okay, this is acceptable, there's no danger to the salvation of their souls here. "Meeting people where they are" is all well and good, but "bringing them to where they should be" goes in tandem with this.
|
|
alng
Full Member
Posts: 240
|
Post by alng on Jan 27, 2022 4:13:33 GMT
It's just his opinion. Not every utterance from the mouth of the Holy Father is official Catholic teaching,.. I would expect that a statement on faith and morals officially posted on the Vatican website as a declaration from His Holiness, the Vicar of Christ, would carry a certain amount of weight, even though it may not be infallible. Do you think that something that was contrary to faith and morals would not be censored and but would be approved to appear on an official papal document posted on the Vatican website? So if I read you correctly, you disagree with the official Winnipeg statement and now you disagree with a statement of His Holiness the Pope of the Catholic Church which is officially posted on the Vatican website? And i suppose also that you disagree with the support of His Holiness for the work of the New Ways Ministry?
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 27, 2022 4:42:44 GMT
It's just his opinion. Not every utterance from the mouth of the Holy Father is official Catholic teaching,.. I would expect that a statement on faith and morals officially posted on the Vatican website as a declaration from His Holiness, the Vicar of Christ, would carry a certain amount of weight, even though it may not be infallible. Do you think that something that was contrary to faith and morals would not be censored and but would be approved to appear on an official papal document posted on the Vatican website? So if I read you correctly, you disagree with the official Winnipeg statement and now you disagree with a statement of His Holiness the Pope of the Catholic Church which is officially posted on the Vatican website? And i suppose also that you disagree with the support of His Holiness for the work of the New Ways Ministry? Nowadays, there is just so much out there, and this Pope says so much, often in a fairly informal manner to boot, that no, regardless of whether they appear on a Vatican website or not, such statements don't carry the teaching authority of the Church, least of all if they indicate a point of departure from that teaching. Prior to John Paul II, Popes just didn't constantly issue forth commentary such as this. They took a much more circumspect approach, precisely because they realized that anything a Pope might say, would be seen by many as law and gospel. So, yes, I disagree with the approach taken by the Winnipeg Statement, and as far as what the Pope said, I do not so much "disagree" with these comments, as I find it reckless for him to have spoken of a "true marriage". I know what he meant, that "these people are so united with bonds of love and commitment, that they might as well be married" --- I've known of common-law couples of whom I've commented similarly --- but his comments could be interpreted as the Pope having redefined marriage at a doctrinal level. He did not do that, but it could be taken that way. Likewise, the Pope's support of New Ways Ministry in no way constitutes "teaching of the Church". If he simply supports efforts to welcome LGBTQ people to the Church, and to treat them with compassion, dignity, and respect, I couldn't agree more. To the extent that NWM does this, I am entirely in favor of it. If they, however, enable, encourage, or even fail to discourage people to enter same-sex "marriage" or to continue to live a sodomitical lifestyle, then I part company with them. If, God forbid, the Pope is "okay" with their work in regard to the latter --- and I would encourage anyone not to read any more into his letters than is actually there --- then that is very wrong, even if he is the Pope. Pope John XII's scandalous lifestyle makes Pope Francis look like St Jean Vianney by comparison. We have had some very bad Popes.
|
|
alng
Full Member
Posts: 240
|
Post by alng on Jan 27, 2022 6:21:42 GMT
Likewise, the Pope's support of New Ways Ministry in no way constitutes "teaching of the Church". OK. Not a teaching but support for their work. What about praying to a pagan Pachamama god. Do you think it is all right to pray to the pagan Pachamama god in the interest of inculturation and an attempt to incorporate the values of the Pachamama religion into Catholicism? Preghiera Pachamama di ques t i luoghi, bevi e mangia a volontà ques ta offerta, affinché sia frutt uosa ques ta terra. Pachamama, buona Madre Sii propizia! Sii propizia! Fa’ che i buoi camminino bene, e che non si s tanchino. Fa’ che la semente spunt i bene, che non le succeda nulla di male, che il gelo non la dis trugga, che produca buoni aliment i. A te lo chiediamo: donaci t utto. Sii propizia! Sii propizia? The English translation is roughly: Pachamama prayer of these places, drink and eat at will this offering, so that this land may be fruitful. Pachamama, good Mother Be propitious! Be propitious! Grant that the oxen walk well, and that they do not tire. Make sure that the seed grows well, that nothing bad happens to it, that the frost does not destroy it, that it produces good food. We ask you: give us everything. Be propitious! Be propitious! The amazon synod booklet has some nice references to Catholicism also. For the prayer to the good Mother Pachamama goddess please see page 17: cloud.3dissue.com/77366/77720/110027/Sussidi-Amazzonia/index.html?r=22
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 27, 2022 14:24:44 GMT
Likewise, the Pope's support of New Ways Ministry in no way constitutes "teaching of the Church". OK. Not a teaching but support for their work. What about praying to a pagan Pachamama god. Do you think it is all right to pray to the pagan Pachamama god in the interest of inculturation and an attempt to incorporate the values of the Pachamama religion into Catholicism? Preghiera Pachamama di ques t i luoghi, bevi e mangia a volontà ques ta offerta, affinché sia frutt uosa ques ta terra. Pachamama, buona Madre Sii propizia! Sii propizia! Fa’ che i buoi camminino bene, e che non si s tanchino. Fa’ che la semente spunt i bene, che non le succeda nulla di male, che il gelo non la dis trugga, che produca buoni aliment i. A te lo chiediamo: donaci t utto. Sii propizia! Sii propizia? The English translation is roughly: Pachamama prayer of these places, drink and eat at will this offering, so that this land may be fruitful. Pachamama, good Mother Be propitious! Be propitious! Grant that the oxen walk well, and that they do not tire. Make sure that the seed grows well, that nothing bad happens to it, that the frost does not destroy it, that it produces good food. We ask you: give us everything. Be propitious! Be propitious! The amazon synod booklet has some nice references to Catholicism also. For the prayer to the good Mother Pachamama goddess please see page 17: cloud.3dissue.com/77366/77720/110027/Sussidi-Amazzonia/index.html?r=22Is this book saying to do this, or is it merely illustrating what the Amazonian pagan people believe? In our homeschool history class, when we studied about Muhammad and Islam, I read my son some passages from the Koran (yes, I have a copy). I was not encouraging him to believe in Islam, I was merely showing him how Muslims hold Our Lady in a place of honor, in fact, the Koran says more about Mary than the Bible does. No, it's not "all right" to pray to the pagan Pachamama goddess, but one might look at their religion and see what about it is not incompatible with Catholicism. That has been the standard missionary practice of Catholicism almost from its very beginning --- take what people already believe, and, to use the word that is currently in vogue, "accompany" them, to show how they may find the full truth of Catholic Christianity. Catholicism took the classical Roman virtues and made them her own, and later, Aquinas "baptized" Aristotelian philosophy. So it's nothing new.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Jan 27, 2022 14:28:21 GMT
Not clear whether you were intending to make a comment or not, though one is really not necessary, the matter speaks for itself. I would certainly hope that no one would excuse this as having been done by a duly authorized priest of the diocese, using texts approved by the diocese. Nor would I want to see anyone excuse this as reflecting the mindset of many Catholics whom, I am charitably willing to assume, are acting in good faith, albeit with malformed consciences and a flawed understanding of the binding force of this teaching. There's no way we can say it is okay, to leave people in ignorance about this, or to have them think this is one teaching they don't have to accept or live by. And they shouldn't be receiving communion or failing to mention it in confession (assuming anyone actually does that). And priests need to be asking, if they have reason to suspect it's not being volunteered. As I've alluded to before, some people get posterior-hurt at the thought of being asked about unconfessed sins in confession. Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm grateful when the priest does that. It shows he cares about whether I make a good confession or not. Why on earth would this offend anyone? I did not make a comment. I posed a question. Why it has disappeared into the ether I have no idea. My question was what you meant by writing that at a Catholic school you had been taught by a female priest? I suspect there was something obvious I missed so please bear with me and explain what it was you meant.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 27, 2022 15:29:35 GMT
Not clear whether you were intending to make a comment or not, though one is really not necessary, the matter speaks for itself. I would certainly hope that no one would excuse this as having been done by a duly authorized priest of the diocese, using texts approved by the diocese. Nor would I want to see anyone excuse this as reflecting the mindset of many Catholics whom, I am charitably willing to assume, are acting in good faith, albeit with malformed consciences and a flawed understanding of the binding force of this teaching. There's no way we can say it is okay, to leave people in ignorance about this, or to have them think this is one teaching they don't have to accept or live by. And they shouldn't be receiving communion or failing to mention it in confession (assuming anyone actually does that). And priests need to be asking, if they have reason to suspect it's not being volunteered. As I've alluded to before, some people get posterior-hurt at the thought of being asked about unconfessed sins in confession. Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm grateful when the priest does that. It shows he cares about whether I make a good confession or not. Why on earth would this offend anyone? I did not make a comment. I posed a question. Why it has disappeared into the ether I have no idea. My question was what you meant by writing that at a Catholic school you had been taught by a female priest? I suspect there was something obvious I missed so please bear with me and explain what it was you meant. No, he was a male priest. A very bad priest. Handsome, charismatic, athletic, outstanding people skills, had everyone eating out of the palm of his hand. He told an entire high school religion class that they did not have to accept Humanae vitae if their "conscience" told them that contraception was okay. I was in that class. I told the pastor and the bishop, and nobody would listen to me. He was later put out of the priesthood in disgrace after grave indiscretions with a female came to light, and became a matter of interest both for the courts and the local media. I really hope my classmates took this to heart, and realized that what he taught them was false. However, I wouldn't hold my breath, as it was precisely what they wanted to hear. He gave them the easy way out.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Jan 28, 2022 15:44:15 GMT
I did not make a comment. I posed a question. Why it has disappeared into the ether I have no idea. My question was what you meant by writing that at a Catholic school you had been taught by a female priest? I suspect there was something obvious I missed so please bear with me and explain what it was you meant. No, he was a male priest. A very bad priest. Handsome, charismatic, athletic, outstanding people skills, had everyone eating out of the palm of his hand. He told an entire high school religion class that they did not have to accept Humanae vitae if their "conscience" told them that contraception was okay. I was in that class. I told the pastor and the bishop, and nobody would listen to me. He was later put out of the priesthood in disgrace after grave indiscretions with a female came to light, and became a matter of interest both for the courts and the local media. I really hope my classmates took this to heart, and realized that what he taught them was false. However, I wouldn't hold my breath, as it was precisely what they wanted to hear. He gave them the easy way out. It is this sentence you wrote that confused me, especially the part I have emphasised:
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 28, 2022 20:18:47 GMT
No, he was a male priest. A very bad priest. Handsome, charismatic, athletic, outstanding people skills, had everyone eating out of the palm of his hand. He told an entire high school religion class that they did not have to accept Humanae vitae if their "conscience" told them that contraception was okay. I was in that class. I told the pastor and the bishop, and nobody would listen to me. He was later put out of the priesthood in disgrace after grave indiscretions with a female came to light, and became a matter of interest both for the courts and the local media. I really hope my classmates took this to heart, and realized that what he taught them was false. However, I wouldn't hold my breath, as it was precisely what they wanted to hear. He gave them the easy way out. It is this sentence you wrote that confused me, especially the part I have emphasised:
I was trying to be as discreet as I could, about what he actually did.
There's more to the story than I have discussed, and it is public knowledge, but I don't think it serves any purpose to share it.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Jan 29, 2022 15:54:41 GMT
It is this sentence you wrote that confused me, especially the part I have emphasised:
I was trying to be as discreet as I could, about what he actually did.
There's more to the story than I have discussed, and it is public knowledge, but I don't think it serves any purpose to share it.
I beieve it would be better not to start something you feel cannot be shared. Nor does speaking in riddles help. I shall at least now completely forget this topic and no longer allow it to niggle me.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 29, 2022 16:37:39 GMT
I was trying to be as discreet as I could, about what he actually did.
There's more to the story than I have discussed, and it is public knowledge, but I don't think it serves any purpose to share it.
I beieve it would be better not to start something you feel cannot be shared. Nor does speaking in riddles help. I shall at least now completely forget this topic and no longer allow it to niggle me. I have shared enough to convey the idea that he was a bad priest whose advice should not be followed, and moreover, that his evil lifestyle was exposed to the public in such a way, that those who were taught bad moral theology and dissent from an authoritative, unchanging moral teaching of the magisterium, backed up by 2000 years of tradition, have to ask themselves the question "am I willing to follow the advice of a bad priest because I think he was right about this matter regardless of his lifestyle, or am I am willing to ignore his lifestyle because he told me what I wanted to hear?".
The girl was underage (though not a child), and that is the extent to which I am willing to elaborate. That is quite enough to describe the situation.
|
|
alng
Full Member
Posts: 240
|
Post by alng on Jan 29, 2022 20:20:42 GMT
The age of consent varies from country to country. For example, in Italy and Portugal the age of consent is 14, but in Angola the age of consent is 12.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 30, 2022 2:12:30 GMT
The age of consent varies from country to country. For example, in Italy and Portugal the age of consent is 14, but in Angola the age of consent is 12. She was under 18. I'm not well-versed enough in the laws of that particular state at that time, to know whether this was a criminal act or not, but the stalking certainly was.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 11, 2022 1:14:52 GMT
Not clear whether you were intending to make a comment or not, though one is really not necessary, the matter speaks for itself. I would certainly hope that no one would excuse this as having been done by a duly authorized priest of the diocese, using texts approved by the diocese. Nor would I want to see anyone excuse this as reflecting the mindset of many Catholics whom, I am charitably willing to assume, are acting in good faith, albeit with malformed consciences and a flawed understanding of the binding force of this teaching. There's no way we can say it is okay, to leave people in ignorance about this, or to have them think this is one teaching they don't have to accept or live by. And they shouldn't be receiving communion or failing to mention it in confession (assuming anyone actually does that). And priests need to be asking, if they have reason to suspect it's not being volunteered. As I've alluded to before, some people get posterior-hurt at the thought of being asked about unconfessed sins in confession. Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm grateful when the priest does that. It shows he cares about whether I make a good confession or not. Why on earth would this offend anyone? Quoting one's own post, yes, tacky, tacky, tacky. I went to confession today and the priest asked me about an area of sin (one of the seven capital sins, to be more precise). I wasn't guilty of it, but I had no issue with him asking. Again, I don't understand why it disturbs people for a priest to ask about an unconfessed sin. If I were a priest, I would. And this particular priest is known for being no-nonsense when it comes to sin. He is also the one who spoke out against contraception from the pulpit and told people they shouldn't be receiving communion if they were committing this sin. (Granted, it was a TLM community.) We need thousands more like him.
|
|
|
Post by StellaMaris on Apr 11, 2022 1:28:18 GMT
Not clear whether you were intending to make a comment or not, though one is really not necessary, the matter speaks for itself. I would certainly hope that no one would excuse this as having been done by a duly authorized priest of the diocese, using texts approved by the diocese. Nor would I want to see anyone excuse this as reflecting the mindset of many Catholics whom, I am charitably willing to assume, are acting in good faith, albeit with malformed consciences and a flawed understanding of the binding force of this teaching. There's no way we can say it is okay, to leave people in ignorance about this, or to have them think this is one teaching they don't have to accept or live by. And they shouldn't be receiving communion or failing to mention it in confession (assuming anyone actually does that). And priests need to be asking, if they have reason to suspect it's not being volunteered. As I've alluded to before, some people get posterior-hurt at the thought of being asked about unconfessed sins in confession. Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm grateful when the priest does that. It shows he cares about whether I make a good confession or not. Why on earth would this offend anyone? Quoting one's own post, yes, tacky, tacky, tacky. I went to confession today and the priest asked me about an area of sin (one of the seven capital sins, to be more precise). I wasn't guilty of it, but I had no issue with him asking. Again, I don't understand why it disturbs people for a priest to ask about an unconfessed sin. If I were a priest, I would. And this particular priest is known for being no-nonsense when it comes to sin. He is also the one who spoke out against contraception from the pulpit and told people they shouldn't be receiving communion if they were committing this sin. (Granted, it was a TLM community.) We need thousands more like him. If he is a TLM priest he is probably aware of the problems of lust related sins in the movement as exposed by Fr Ripperger here. Perhaps the TLM priests are being asked to address it more aggressively? 2.) IMPURITY
Every Gnostic movement always suffers from grave problems of the impurity and so is the traditionalist movement. This is a serious problem. I'm not saying this as my own perception, although it is true that I noticed this some time ago. This is something that traditional priests are starting to discuss because it's becoming a serious problem. Why is this? Well it's pride. Pride is the vice in which a person judges himself greater than he is. So what does God do? He allows you to lapse into the lowest, basest, vulgarest forms of sins in order to lower your estimation of yourself. Well what's happening is, because traditionalists are so proud, they're really following into serious problems regarding the sixth commandment and it's across the board.
3.) GENERATIONAL SPIRITS
The second problem is it’s becoming a generational spirit. What's a generational spirit? It's one in which if parents commit particular kinds of sins, they open the door to demons inserting themselves into their family life, and it gets passed from generation to generation. Now my own estimation of this is, is that the generational spirit is pride. But it's also becoming a generational spirit of impurity, because you're seeing it almost it's across the board, where the parents had a problem with the impurity, they haven't gotten it under control, or they've never done anything to undo this the generational spirit in their family or some spirit of pride.
And it's getting passed from generation to generation. What’s this mean? It means that kids that are coming up who are normally good kids, who are doing what they normally do (okay they might be disobedient here and there what-have-you), but they're getting to be 10, 11, 12 years of age and they're seriously struggling with impurity when they shouldn't be. There's nothing in the family other than the externals of the family life, but then you find out the father has a problem of pornography or self-abuse or they're doing other things or what-have-you. And this is where it's becoming a serious problem. If you look at the number of sins against the sixth commandment, sins like self-abuse, pornography, fornication, among traditionalists, they are not any better than the people who go to the New Mass. In fact, there's some estimates by some priests that it's worse than is among the New Rite people.
This is a serious problem. It's going to drag us down. Why? Because if we're not careful, we're going to end up suffering what St. Paul says which was “and God gave them over to their lusts and they started sleeping men with men and women with women.” It's already happening among the youth of the traditional movement, because of this generational spirit. If parents don't want this problem among their children, they've got to get their act together. If they've started stuff in the past they've got to get this generational line straightened out and cleaned up.
|
|