The Pope to resign?!?! / Pope Benedict XVI resigns / Pope set to resign on Feb. 28th

[PJ]

Jokes aside, isn't this period of sedevacante does put into question many claims about the Papacy brought forward by the Roman Catholic Church?  Like my earlier comment about the Church being built on Peter and that Peter only has one successor, what now?  On whom is the Church built on?  And how are the Churches of the Catholic Communion in communion with one another?  How are they "in communion with Rome" if there is no Bishop of Rome?

1. Peter was the rock and he always will be
2. We are in communion with one another. The times in which there is no Pope are a clear indication that our communion is more fundamentally founded in our common faith in Christ. When there is a Pope, we must be in communion, but this necessity is less fundamental than our communion in the faith.  
You may not like that answer because it does not fit your "disaffected Catholic" narrative, but such is life. No one, not even the authors of Pastor Aeternus thought that the Church suddenly ceases to exist when there is no Pope.

But as pointed out earlier, isn't it a clear indication that the Papacy is indeed unnecessary?

Again we see the legalism of the Orthodox: we're without something for a couple weeks, so that's means it must be unnecessary.

 

[minasoliman]

As Pope Tawadros' cousin's cousin's cousin's son...I demand this side discussion on the theology of the Roman Papacy be held elsewhere!

 

[ialmisry]

As Pope Tawadros' cousin's cousin's cousin's son...I demand this side discussion on the theology of the Roman Papacy be held elsewhere!

no nepotism allowed.

 

[podkarpatska]

Jokes aside, isn't this period of sedevacante does put into question many claims about the Papacy brought forward by the Roman Catholic Church?  Like my earlier comment about the Church being built on Peter and that Peter only has one successor, what now?  On whom is the Church built on?  And how are the Churches of the Catholic Communion in communion with one another?  How are they "in communion with Rome" if there is no Bishop of Rome?

1. Peter was the rock and he always will be
2. We are in communion with one another. The times in which there is no Pope are a clear indication that our communion is more fundamentally founded in our common faith in Christ. When there is a Pope, we must be in communion, but this necessity is less fundamental than our communion in the faith.  
You may not like that answer because it does not fit your "disaffected Catholic" narrative, but such is life. No one, not even the authors of Pastor Aeternus thought that the Church suddenly ceases to exist when there is no Pope.

But as pointed out earlier, isn't it a clear indication that the Papacy is indeed unnecessary?

Again we see the legalism of the Orthodox: we're without something for a couple weeks, so that's means it must be unnecessary.

No. The point was,for lack of a loftier term, rather silly. Having had no Bishop for nearly two years our diocese can attest that while we were able to administer things without a Bishop certainly did not mean we could go on without one. I understand that the theology of the Papacy is distinct from that of a "mere" Bishop, but stripped of all excess, in the final analysis the Pope is but a Bishop.

 

[Shlomlokh]

Btw, I think this is St. Nicholas Cathedral in Cairo, just across from al-Azhar

The article does say it's in the "Patriarchal office in Cairo".

By the way...I just found out, I am the son of the Pope's cousin's cousin's cousin (my father)!!!  No joke...lol!

As they kids say, "That's pretty dope!"

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[biro]

Jokes aside, isn't this period of sedevacante does put into question many claims about the Papacy brought forward by the Roman Catholic Church?  Like my earlier comment about the Church being built on Peter and that Peter only has one successor, what now?  On whom is the Church built on?  And how are the Churches of the Catholic Communion in communion with one another?  How are they "in communion with Rome" if there is no Bishop of Rome?

1. Peter was the rock and he always will be
2. We are in communion with one another. The times in which there is no Pope are a clear indication that our communion is more fundamentally founded in our common faith in Christ. When there is a Pope, we must be in communion, but this necessity is less fundamental than our communion in the faith.  
You may not like that answer because it does not fit your "disaffected Catholic" narrative, but such is life. No one, not even the authors of Pastor Aeternus thought that the Church suddenly ceases to exist when there is no Pope.

But as pointed out earlier, isn't it a clear indication that the Papacy is indeed unnecessary?

No.

 

[ialmisry]

Jokes aside, isn't this period of sedevacante does put into question many claims about the Papacy brought forward by the Roman Catholic Church?  Like my earlier comment about the Church being built on Peter and that Peter only has one successor, what now?  On whom is the Church built on?  And how are the Churches of the Catholic Communion in communion with one another?  How are they "in communion with Rome" if there is no Bishop of Rome?

1. Peter was the rock and he always will be
2. We are in communion with one another. The times in which there is no Pope are a clear indication that our communion is more fundamentally founded in our common faith in Christ. When there is a Pope, we must be in communion, but this necessity is less fundamental than our communion in the faith.  
You may not like that answer because it does not fit your "disaffected Catholic" narrative, but such is life. No one, not even the authors of Pastor Aeternus thought that the Church suddenly ceases to exist when there is no Pope.

But as pointed out earlier, isn't it a clear indication that the Papacy is indeed unnecessary?

Again we see the legalism of the Orthodox: we're without something for a couple weeks, so that's means it must be unnecessary.

That's only because you insist that, allegedly by necessity, there must always be a supreme pontiff.

We've done fine without one for nearly two thousand years.

 

[PJ]

Jokes aside, isn't this period of sedevacante does put into question many claims about the Papacy brought forward by the Roman Catholic Church?  Like my earlier comment about the Church being built on Peter and that Peter only has one successor, what now?  On whom is the Church built on?  And how are the Churches of the Catholic Communion in communion with one another?  How are they "in communion with Rome" if there is no Bishop of Rome?

1. Peter was the rock and he always will be
2. We are in communion with one another. The times in which there is no Pope are a clear indication that our communion is more fundamentally founded in our common faith in Christ. When there is a Pope, we must be in communion, but this necessity is less fundamental than our communion in the faith. 
You may not like that answer because it does not fit your "disaffected Catholic" narrative, but such is life. No one, not even the authors of Pastor Aeternus thought that the Church suddenly ceases to exist when there is no Pope.

But as pointed out earlier, isn't it a clear indication that the Papacy is indeed unnecessary?

Again we see the legalism of the Orthodox: we're without something for a couple weeks, so that's means it must be unnecessary.

That's only because you insist that, allegedly by necessity, there must always be a supreme pontiff.

That's part of the reason for the .

 

[minasoliman]

As Pope Tawadros' cousin's cousin's cousin's son...I demand this side discussion on the theology of the Roman Papacy be held elsewhere!

no nepotism allowed.

meh...I tried...

 

[Fr.Aidan]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

 

[Alpo]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Pope Benedict´s books?

 

[choy]

Again we see the legalism of the Orthodox: we're without something for a couple weeks, so that's means it must be unnecessary.

So why all the fanfare about the conclave and the next Pope?  If its unnecessary, then just have someone appoint a diocesan Bishop of Rome

 

[choy]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Ratzinger´s books?

What significance does it have to what has been taught about the Papacy over the last Millennium?

 

[Alpo]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Ratzinger´s books?

What significance does it have to what has been taught about the Papacy over the last Millennium?

What that has to do with my question? Being fascinated over pope emeritus and his books and believing in RC errors on papacy are two different things. For me the pope emeritus of Rome does carry a sort of signification of enchantment and wonder and I was saddened to hear that he will resign.

 

[PJ]

Again we see the legalism of the Orthodox: we're without something for a couple weeks, so that's means it must be unnecessary.

So why all the fanfare about the conclave and the next Pope?  If its unnecessary, then just have someone appoint a diocesan Bishop of Rome

"Unnecessary" was your word, I just repeated it.

Jokes aside, isn't this period of sedevacante does put into question many claims about the Papacy brought forward by the Roman Catholic Church?  Like my earlier comment about the Church being built on Peter and that Peter only has one successor, what now?  On whom is the Church built on?  And how are the Churches of the Catholic Communion in communion with one another?  How are they "in communion with Rome" if there is no Bishop of Rome?

1. Peter was the rock and he always will be
2. We are in communion with one another. The times in which there is no Pope are a clear indication that our communion is more fundamentally founded in our common faith in Christ. When there is a Pope, we must be in communion, but this necessity is less fundamental than our communion in the faith. 
You may not like that answer because it does not fit your "disaffected Catholic" narrative, but such is life. No one, not even the authors of Pastor Aeternus thought that the Church suddenly ceases to exist when there is no Pope.

But as pointed out earlier, isn't it a clear indication that the Papacy is indeed unnecessary?

 

[ErmyCath]

Peter J - I like your "Faith" description in your profile.  Clever! 

I think this is the time for everyone to go to pre-1955 Masses since everyone is a sedevacantist now!

 

[Papist]

Again we see the legalism of the Orthodox: we're without something for a couple weeks, so that's means it must be unnecessary.

So why all the fanfare about the conclave and the next Pope?  If its unnecessary, then just have someone appoint a diocesan Bishop of Rome

Yes, let's just get rid of all the fanfare. In fact, let's get rid of any unnecessary tradition, like the weird hats that Orthodox Bishops wear.  : <moderators,please note the sarcasm. I do not actually think EO bishop's hats are "weird">

 

[Alpo]

In fact, let's get rid of any unnecessary tradition, like the weird hats that Orthodox Bishops wear. 

Oh you juridical Latins. Always spoiling all the mystery.

 

[Schultz]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

His resignation isn't as foreboding and creepy as all the conspiracy theories (and theorists, but the two go hand-in-hand) that have sprung up because a sick 85 year old bishop wants to retire to a monastery and not have the office he occupies become perceived as a joke as often happened when his sick predecessor took the stage to mumble a few words and break everyone's heart by having to watch said ill man being carted around like the showpiece he became.

Just a few loose and not-so-cryptic thoughts.

 

[Papist]

Peter J - I like your "Faith" description in your profile.  Clever!   

I think this is the time for everyone to go to pre-1955 Masses since everyone is a sedevacantist now!

Agreed! I was going to change mine, but I didn't want to be a copy-cat.

 

[dzheremi]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

His resignation isn't as foreboding and creepy as all the conspiracy theories (and theorists, but the two go hand-in-hand) that have sprung up because a sick 85 year old bishop wants to retire to a monastery and not have the office he occupies become perceived as a joke as often happened when his sick predecessor took the stage to mumble a few words and break everyone's heart by having to watch said ill man being carted around like the showpiece he became.

Just a few loose and not-so-cryptic thoughts.

This is absolutely spot-on and reasonable. Now let us watch as somebody finds a reason to doubt it in favor of believing there's something fishy going on just because it's been a few hundred years since a Pope last resigned.

 

[J Michael]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean. 

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

 

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.   

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

 

[J Michael]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

His resignation isn't as foreboding and creepy as all the conspiracy theories (and theorists, but the two go hand-in-hand) that have sprung up because a sick 85 year old bishop wants to retire to a monastery and not have the office he occupies become perceived as a joke as often happened when his sick predecessor took the stage to mumble a few words and break everyone's heart by having to watch said ill man being carted around like the showpiece he became.

Just a few loose and not-so-cryptic thoughts.

This is absolutely spot-on and reasonable. Now let us watch as somebody finds a reason to doubt it in favor of believing there's something fishy going on just because it's been a few hundred years since a Pope last resigned.

There's your cue, Choy  ;D.

 

[J Michael]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.   

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Yes to all that!

 

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

His resignation isn't as foreboding and creepy as all the conspiracy theories (and theorists, but the two go hand-in-hand) that have sprung up because a sick 85 year old bishop wants to retire to a monastery and not have the office he occupies become perceived as a joke as often happened when his sick predecessor took the stage to mumble a few words and break everyone's heart by having to watch said ill man being carted around like the showpiece he became.

Just a few loose and not-so-cryptic thoughts.

Just to add, a bishop who never wanted the promotion in the first place not wanting to cling to it when he is no longer up to it.

I look at the resignation as complimentary to the refusal of his predecessor (who considered it).  The one affirmed that when one became a shell of a former self, he remains a self and not refuse for gabbage disposal (like the fans of euthanasia would have it), the other affirmed that one does not have to cling to a role to remain a self.

 

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.   

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Especially when the Vatican has mandated a retirement age for everyone else.

 

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

 

[PJ]

His resignation isn't as foreboding and creepy as all the conspiracy theories (and theorists, but the two go hand-in-hand) that have sprung up because a sick 85 year old bishop wants to retire to a monastery and not have the office he occupies become perceived as a joke as often happened when his sick predecessor took the stage to mumble a few words and break everyone's heart by having to watch said ill man being carted around like the showpiece he became.

What I can't understand is why the Mormons, the NSF, and Dick Cheney each paid JPII thousands of dollars a day for doing that.

 

[PJ]

Peter J - I like your "Faith" description in your profile.  Clever!   

I think this is the time for everyone to go to pre-1955 Masses since everyone is a sedevacantist now!

Agreed! I was going to change mine, but I didn't want to be a copy-cat.

Thanks.

Actually, I'm surprised someone else didn't do it before me.

 

[PJ]

Just to add, a bishop who never wanted the promotion in the first place not wanting to cling to it when he is no longer up to it.

I look at the resignation as complimentary to the refusal of his predecessor (who considered it).  The one affirmed that when one became a shell of a former self, he remains a self and not refuse for gabbage disposal (like the fans of euthanasia would have it), the other affirmed that one does not have to cling to a role to remain a self.

And complementary.

 

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D
As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

 

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).  You guys have a knack for putting up scaffolding of false timber, and then leaving the facade it has erected up once the timber has rotted enough that even you guys have to take it down.

 

[podkarpatska]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Ratzinger´s books?

What significance does it have to what has been taught about the Papacy over the last Millennium?

How about he is one of the great academic scholars of the Patristic era of the 20th century,a keen student of liturgy and he possessed the broadest knowledge of, and appreciation for, Orthodox teachings and spirituality of any Pope in say , the past thousand years or so for starters.

 

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

 

[J Michael]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Now boys...play nice, or I'm gonna have to send you both to your rooms.  .

 

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Haven't we already dealt with this?

But take Pastor Aeternus, laying aside the tautology that it is infallible because it says he speaks infallibly: as Fr. Ambrose has actually posted, the Anglo-Irish Catechism of 1870, with its imprematur, states that "infallibility is a Protestant lie" claiming that it was a caricuture and slur that Protestants made against the papacy.

Because of my Irish background Keenan's Catechism fascinates me.

Keenan's Catechism was used throughout England and Ireland and parts of the United States.  It used to be published n the UK by Burnes and Oates, the UK publishers to the Holy See.

The Irish and the English were taught to explicitly deny papal infallibility.

This Anglo-Irish Catechism contained the following question:

.......... (Q) Must not Catholics believe the Pope in himself to be infallible?
.......... (A) This is a Protestant invention: it is no article of the Catholic faith.

Every little Catholic boy and girl learnt this by heart. The Pope is not infallible.
--------------------------------

In 1826, in the time of Pope Leo XII, the Bishops of Ireland wrote to the faithful Catholics of Ireland a "Declaration of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland" :

"The Catholics of Ireland declare their belief that it is not an article of the Catholic faith, neither are they required to believe, that the Pope is infallible."

Of course 40 years later in 1870 when the Pope was declared infallible, the poor Irish bishops, probably now in some sort of material heresy, had to hastily backtrack and try to forget that they had ever taught their people that he was not.


They were also obliged to change Keenan's Catechism and its teaching. What was Catholic teaching in 1869 had become heresy in 1870.

After Vatican I and 1870, the question was omitted from the Catechism, but 26 years later in 1896, the following was added:

.......... "Q: Is the Pope infallible?
.......... A: Yes, the Pope is infallible.

.......... Q: But some Catholics, before the Vatican Council, denied the infallibility of the Pope, which was impugned by this very Catechism.
.......... A: Yes, they did so under the usual reservation, insofar as they then could grasp the mind of the Church, and subject to her future definitions, thus implicitly accepting the dogma."

Does anybody other than me have to smile at the logic of that last answer?  Declaring that the Pope is not infallible is an implicit assertion that he is!  :laugh:


God bless,
Fr Ambrose  o..o~

I thought so.

 

[PJ]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

 

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Haven't we already dealt with this?

No, you just made a Lutheran assertion that has no foundation in the real of experience of real Catholics.

 

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  ;D

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

well done!