MennoNet.com

MaxPC wrote:When I saw the title "Vatican Shakeup" I laughed so hard my wife came in to check on me.

Those personnel shifts and changes are always happening at the Vatican. The balancing act between conservatives and progressives is ongoing under every Pope. Nothing new, nothing worth working up a head of steam. It must be a slow news day at Fox.

Well, these things are going on everywhere all the time. I do see a real shift from Benedict to Francis. Francis is really working on opening things up and being inclusive as possible. This intrigues me. We will have to wait to see how it develops and if there becomes a major break, or just the chipping away at tradition. I have no big issue with what Francis is doing with inclusiveness. My concern is that he is too connected to liberation theology and it may be shading his view of some things. Those of us who are too connected with Anabaptist Theology often have that same issue with seeing past ourselves too.

Robert wrote:

MaxPC wrote:When I saw the title "Vatican Shakeup" I laughed so hard my wife came in to check on me.

Those personnel shifts and changes are always happening at the Vatican. The balancing act between conservatives and progressives is ongoing under every Pope. Nothing new, nothing worth working up a head of steam. It must be a slow news day at Fox.

Well, these things are going on everywhere all the time. I do see a real shift from Benedict to Francis. Francis is really working on opening things up and being inclusive as possible. This intrigues me. We will have to wait to see how it develops and if there becomes a major break, or just the chipping away at tradition. I have no big issue with what Francis is doing with inclusiveness. My concern is that he is too connected to liberation theology and it may be shading his view of some things. Those of us who are too connected with Anabaptist Theology often have that same issue with seeing past ourselves too.

None of our Catholic traditions nor our Traditions have been lost, nor will they be lost. They continue to be studied relative to their theological importance and so will wax and wane in that importance to meet the needs of the times. As I said, it's a slow news day. News organizations have to keep the audience tuning in/reading. I've learned in my lifetime that God cannot be stopped by such pettifogging political plays on the stage of life, whether at the Vatican, among other denominations, or other considerations. God knows about the limitations of man and manages to perfect such outcomes in spite of ourselves - Thanks be to God for that!

Robert, I, too, find the trend toward inclusiveness intriguing wherever it occurs. Some of the churches in our city are very concerned that unless they attempt somehow to accommodate various situations (living together, D&Rs, gay couples, woman in leadership roles, worldly involvements, etc) their church will fold as the younger generation often has a more open accommodating view of these things and do not take a hard line view of the scriptures as being the inerrant source of guidance or if they do, they believe some of it speaks to the immediate audience in that era only.

I am watching those who are tackling this and willing to be inclusive in the Anabaptist tradition like Greg Boyd (U.S.) and Bruxy Cavey (Canada). Some others are taking a hard line traditional view and outside of raising big families their churches have stagnant growth and many are not reaching very many outside their tradition. They hold to the 'narrow way' and 'little flock' view. As gay couples are accepted in some churches and society as already primarily accepted their way of life, just how will this next churched generation consider the scriptures to be applicable in their traditional application ?

Well, I'm wandering off here but I often wonder just how inclusive God will be at judgment day when many of us are sinning in various other areas. Areas spelled out like enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, idolatry, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, all those who practise falsehoods, etc are also areas described as those who will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

I just felt your list needed the missing ones to be complete

Some others are taking a hard line traditional view and outside of raising big families their churches have stagnant growth and many are not reaching very many outside their tradition

I would never say I'm in favor of a hard line stance on traditions, but in terms of what the Bible says, I'd prefer to attend somewhere that doesn't compromise what is clearly stated.

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

I will not eat with a known homosexual person, or with a known adulterer, or with a known lier if they claim to be a Christian.
To do otherwise would deny the truth of the Bible. Does this mean I wouldn't reach out to any of these sort of sinners? if they claim the name of Jesus, I would treat them as any other sinner but I would not invite them to my table. As for shunning/ban, I'll let the church figure that one out and I'll follow along. I think if you live in a pattern of sin regardless of the type, you should beware of the cost. I would take a completely different stance with someone who was struggling to overcome these sins... I refer to the defiant specifically.

The Vatican is political and as such would flow with the times like anything else.

i receive a mix of news from a few different Catholic sources in my news feed.
not a lot, enough to "shake me up" now+then!

not being Catholic, knowing almost nothing, i was optimistic when Pope Francis began as pope.
it's been a roller coaster (for me) since. i don't begin to claim understanding.
i read and wonder. i read a lot of strong opinions!

there are certain Catholic leaders i consistently enjoy. Cardinals Burke and Sarah. a few others.

i do believe Mr Jim was correct, years ago, when he stated (something like) .. "the Catholic Church is the big (Christian) target that activists are focused on bringing down." i do see evidence of this quite often.

overall, i see many more people thinking seriously about their faith.
this part is an improvement. apathy and lukewarmness are not pleasing to our Lord in heaven.

this link below is from 2014, i'm just beginning to read of this bishop who is not a great distance from me in Illinois. he is taking stands in a liberal state where it takes courage. (i read, elsewhere, his secretary was murdered by a homosexual after she asked if he would change for Jesus?)
maybe he did not realize, Jesus asks each of us to change for Him?
2014 / No communion for a pro-abortion state senator
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/illin ... o-abortion

MennoNet, your news aggregator for The Blaze and LifeSiteNews

Josh wrote:MennoNet, your news aggregator for The Blaze and LifeSiteNews

we're so unworthy, and you're so smart!

Josh wrote:MennoNet, your news aggregator for The Blaze and LifeSiteNews

I think MennoNet would look a lot more Mennonite if we didn't import so much from various media outlets. And I bet we would have a lot less fear, victimhood, outrage, and division here. It would also be a good way to make MN more Mennonite.

Sensationalism is how the media makes money.

temporal1 wrote:we're so unworthy, and you're so smart!

I don't think Josh was saying either of these things. Sometimes taking offense can turn something into an offense and shut down the conversation.

I really do think we need to be very aware of our relationship to the media. And in this thread, let's face it, none of us are insiders for what's going on in the Vatican, and it's very hard to read tea leaves by what gets reported in the media. I think Max is right to point out the sensationalism in some of these reports. And I bet nobody here really knows what is going on in the inner circles of the Vatican.

When admin+mods decide which sources are allowed and which are not, then, so be it.
This thread was started by Robert, discussion is invited.

If you boys want to become admin, to control wording, thoughts, sources, threads, topics, members, et al., let Robert know. you may just get your wish.

Until that time, we-odd-members will just continue to try to get along under guidelines outlined, and, adjust our sails as necessary. i'm not a "wagering man," myself, so i won't "bet" as to any outcomes.
thank you kindly, just the same.

temporal1 wrote:When admin+mods decide which sources are allowed and which are not, then, so be it.

Allowed isn't the issue. I suppose that if I wanted to, I could do the same thing and nobody would stop me. But it does tend to make the forum a whole lot less Mennonite.

But if we want to be less worldly, I think this is important to think about.