Bunny Trails

[ohio jones]

I see no discussion about bunnies here… why drag politics into a perfectly good thread?

A group of posts (that didn't start out being about politics but quickly went there) has been moved to a different warren.

[RZehr]

I see no discussion about bunnies here… why drag politics into a perfectly good thread?

[MaxPC]

A group of posts (that didn't start out being about politics but quickly went there) has been moved to a different warren.

[JayP]

I mean this respectfully. The conversation is a bit of a moot point. We're reliving the horrors of Vatican II all over again, in that the Pope and others in the church hierarchy deliberately make statements, that while perhaps technically acceptable and correct, allow the vagueness such that each side can claim victory.

The liberal side looks for small holes in the language and tries to drive a Mack truck through the holes. Neo-cons find solace in the technical wording and use it to justify a bad Pope. Trads tried to walk a fine line that allows them to focus on their Latin Mass and narrowly avoid becoming Sedevacanists.

It's a terrible time. The truth simply is, there is a very bad Pope who is a die hard modernist. Not to mention probably part of the lavender church mafia.

Personally, I'm thankful as a practicing Catholic, who goes to Latin Mass 90% of the time, that I have Orthodox roots within our family as well.
Sometimes it is nice to just go a hide for the horrors you cannot influence.

[Josh]

I mean this respectfully. The conversation is a bit of a moot point. We're reliving the horrors of Vatican II all over again, in that the Pope and others in the church hierarchy deliberately make statements, that while perhaps technically acceptable and correct, allow the vagueness such that each side can claim victory.

The liberal side looks for small holes in the language and tries to drive a Mack truck through the holes. Neo-cons find solace in the technical wording and use it to justify a bad Pope. Trads tried to walk a fine line that allows them to focus on their Latin Mass and narrowly avoid becoming Sedevacanists.

It's a terrible time. The truth simply is, there is a very bad Pope who is a die hard modernist. Not to mention probably part of the lavender church mafia.

Personally, I'm thankful as a practicing Catholic, who goes to Latin Mass 90% of the time, that I have Orthodox roots within our family as well.
Sometimes it is nice to just go a hide for the horrors you cannot influence.

One of my friends has found a refuge in Greek Catholicism, which deftly avoids some of the problems that go along with enthusiasts for the Latin mass. Thanks for speaking plainly about these problems. I have found them very disheartening as well. One of the answers is to pray for the next pope.

[JayP]

I would say though, that 'refuge' in the Orthodox, is not equally easy for everyone.
Most of the Eastern Orthodox churches have a significant element of cultural/ethnic focus that is a reality.

I have also seen Orthodox congregations 'overrun' by Roman Catholics looking to hide. While I understand that, those congregations have been disrupted by too large an influx proportional to their base. THat's no one's 'fault'...but it's a reality.

Ironically, the cultural/ethnic divide that can be troublesome for some Catholics trying to find a home in Orthodoxy is really no different than why it's hard for folks to join Conservative Mennonite groups.
I've shocked some EPMC and Fellowship Bishops (whom I've known for a very long time and have long friendships with) by suggesting they should think long and hard about NOT accepting converts. That's a long story in itself.

You are correct. Not all problems have immediate solutions other than continued prayer and hope.
FWIIW, we are very fortunate to have a long time (over 20 years) Latin Mass available that is not associated with any group (i.e. we're not FSSP, etc.). Just the lucky (and rare) parish that was allowed to offer the Tridentine Mass. I particular appreciate that I can attend without the baggage of "neo-con versus trad versus Novus Ordo" fighting.

[MaxPC]

I mean this respectfully. The conversation is a bit of a moot point. We're reliving the horrors of Vatican II all over again, in that the Pope and others in the church hierarchy deliberately make statements, that while perhaps technically acceptable and correct, allow the vagueness such that each side can claim victory.

The liberal side looks for small holes in the language and tries to drive a Mack truck through the holes. Neo-cons find solace in the technical wording and use it to justify a bad Pope. Trads tried to walk a fine line that allows them to focus on their Latin Mass and narrowly avoid becoming Sedevacanists.

It's a terrible time. The truth simply is, there is a very bad Pope who is a die hard modernist. Not to mention probably part of the lavender church mafia.

Personally, I'm thankful as a practicing Catholic, who goes to Latin Mass 90% of the time, that I have Orthodox roots within our family as well.
Sometimes it is nice to just go a hide for the horrors you cannot influence.

I completely understand your concerns. Nevertheless, I find that we cannot categorise all Catholics so neatly. If it is of help, remember St. Catherine of Siena who lived in just such a troubled time as this. She continued writing the Pope with encouragements, entreaties and yes, even some forceful language to move the Papacy back to Rome and out of Avignon. In the end, he did.

We as Catholics, are called to first of all form a relationship with Jesus Christ; to listen to and to trust the Holy Spirit; to be faithful in our daily devotions and responsibilities; and to serve God in whatever state and place He has put us. This has been our calling for 2000 years.

Personally, I stopped reading the politicised articles about the Church decades ago. The headlines do not affect my relationship with Christ nor my faith life. Now at age 94, I can honestly say that God corrects and perfects the mess that men make of the Church and after 2000 years of history in which we have seen periods in which there was a real dogs' breakfast of bodged management, the Church has been directed and corrected by God. Saints have arisen in times of chaos. Families have raised children faithfully. You and I can do that as well: "pray, hope and do not worry". Build that relationship with Jesus. Be faithful in prayer, in devotions, and in responsibilities.

[Ken]

I mean this respectfully. The conversation is a bit of a moot point. We're reliving the horrors of Vatican II all over again, in that the Pope and others in the church hierarchy deliberately make statements, that while perhaps technically acceptable and correct, allow the vagueness such that each side can claim victory.

The liberal side looks for small holes in the language and tries to drive a Mack truck through the holes. Neo-cons find solace in the technical wording and use it to justify a bad Pope. Trads tried to walk a fine line that allows them to focus on their Latin Mass and narrowly avoid becoming Sedevacanists.

It's a terrible time. The truth simply is, there is a very bad Pope who is a die hard modernist. Not to mention probably part of the lavender church mafia.

Personally, I'm thankful as a practicing Catholic, who goes to Latin Mass 90% of the time, that I have Orthodox roots within our family as well.
Sometimes it is nice to just go a hide for the horrors you cannot influence.

If you are Catholic there is no such thing as a "bad" Pope. That notion goes against Catholic doctrine.

There is a word for people who disagree with or protest against the Pope's teachings. "Protestants".

[ohio jones]

If it is of help, remember St. Catherine of Siena who lived in just such a troubled time as this. She continued writing the Pope with encouragements, entreaties and yes, even some forceful language to move the Papacy back to Rome and out of Avignon. In the end, he did.

If you are Catholic there is no such thing as a "bad" Pope. That notion goes against Catholic doctrine.

Well yes, he did move back to Rome, but the result was a schism that eventuated in, at one point, three competing popes. No matter which you choose as the "good" pope, that leaves two "bad" ones.

There is a word for people who disagree with or protest against the Pope's teachings. "Protestants".

Actually the label comes from those who protested against, or appealed, the Edict of Speyer (1529), in which Charles V (represented by his brother, Archduke Ferdinand) undid some of the tolerance granted by the first Diet of Speyer (1526) which had temporarily suspended the Edict of Worms (1521). They were protesting against the emperor, not the pope.

[JayP]

Ken,

how should I descdribe you...deluded neo-con? you have another term?

Sorry, there have been bad Popes. "Bad" in human descriptive terms. The Pope is only infalable in matters of doctrines when speaking Ex Cathedra.

Neo-Cons blindly justifying each bad pope is just delusional.

Pope Benedict issued a Moto Propio on the Latin Mass saying NO POPE could limit it. That popes don't have the power to do so, restoring the right of any parish to hold one.

Then Francis issues another and says "nope". You tell me which one was wrong? oh, sorry, they are both right.

I don't say a Pope being 'bad' makes him NOT a Pope. Will you tell me if this Pope approved Gay Marriage it'll then be okay?