|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Two new saints
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
It's just been announced on World at One that Popes John Paul II and John XXIII are to be canonised.
What are shipmates reactions? Joyful, excited, grateful, horrified, can't see what the fuss is about, 'what is canonisation anyway?', 'why can't I be one?'
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicodemia
WYSIWYG
# 4756
|
Posted
quote:
It's just been announced on World at One that Popes John Paul II and John XXIII are to be canonised.
What are shipmates reactions? Joyful, excited, grateful, horrified, can't see what the fuss is about, 'what is canonisation anyway?', 'why can't I be one?'
I definitely come in the 'what is all the fuss about' section. If the Catholic church (or any other church, for that matter) want Saints, then let them have Saints.
Won't make any difference in the end - God loves us all equally. And its the inside of us that counts, and the reason for our deeds, not our deeds.
Posts: 4544 | From: not too far from Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
Don't know much about John XXII so can't really comment on him. As for John Paul II, well, I'm not surprised (given the cult of personality which surrounded him) even if I don't quite understand it. There are a number of things he did which really made me dislike him, but, at the end of the day, it's not my problem really no longer being an RC. I shan't be asking him to pray for me.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
Horrified by JP II and pleased with J XXIII.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
How come only Catholics are saints? I can think of several people I've come across in my lifetime whom I would consider to be saints, but they aren't Catholics.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
The Episcopal Church (U.S.) has had John XXIII commemorated in our calendar for several years now. I somehow doubt that John Paul II will ever make it on the Episcopal calendar.
Oddly, both NPR and the BBC sent me "breaking news" emails this morning with John Paul II in their headlines, but not John XXIII. (NPR mentioned John XXIII as sort of an afterthought in the body of their email; the BBC made no mention. I did not read the linked articles in either.)
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
How come only Catholics are saints? I can think of several people I've come across in my lifetime whom I would consider to be saints, but they aren't Catholics.
My understanding is except in the case of martyrdom (all Christian Martyrs are saints by virtue of their martyrdom) the Roman Catholic Church only wishes to speak for its faithful. Even so it only indicates those that it after quite extensive investigation finds fulfil quite strict criteria. Therefore at best this can be seen as a minimal set of people to be saints, not everyone who is.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
'why can't I be one?'
I wouldn't want to be. I'd prefer my bones to lie in peace once I'm dead rather than being dug up, split up and sent off to various churches and shrines.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
How come only Catholics are saints? I can think of several people I've come across in my lifetime whom I would consider to be saints, but they aren't Catholics.
My understanding is except in the case of martyrdom (all Christian Martyrs are saints by virtue of their martyrdom)
Really? So the RCC considers Charles I to be a saint?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Horrified by JP II and pleased with J XXIII.
I must agree with this one. I agree that JPII has a cult following which seeems to over-ride the Church's careful raking through his life and death.
As for my beloved John XXIII - ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
How come only Catholics are saints? I can think of several people I've come across in my lifetime whom I would consider to be saints, but they aren't Catholics.
My understanding is except in the case of martyrdom (all Christian Martyrs are saints by virtue of their martyrdom)
Really? So the RCC considers Charles I to be a saint?
Whether Charles I was martyred for his faith or whether he was assassinated or executed for political reasons is a question that I suspect nobody will answer in this age.
I'm curious about the timing. I had the vague impression it was best practice to wait a couple of generations after someone's death. JP2 seems very soon.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
Two men who were saints finally get it made offical . John XXIII iniated changes ov Vatican one John Paul II helped the fall of communism.
As for King Charles I he was execured as a political act not a religous act.
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulBC:
Two men who were saints finally get it made offical . John XXIII iniated changes ov Vatican one John Paul II helped the fall of communism.
Then they better make Martin Luther and Lech Walesa saints as well!
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulBC:
Two men who were saints finally get it made offical . John XXIII iniated changes ov Vatican one John Paul II helped the fall of communism.
As for King Charles I he was execured as a political act not a religous act.
When someone's political actions are a result of their faith, how do you unpack the distinction? Heck, by that measure you could say that the Crucifixion happened for political rather than religious reasons.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulBC:
Two men who were saints finally get it made offical . John XXIII iniated changes ov Vatican one John Paul II helped the fall of communism.
As for King Charles I he was execured as a political act not a religous act.
One could say that JP2's helping the fall of communism was a political. And King Charles wasn't Roman Catholic so obviously the Vatican isn't going to canonize him.
I was very pleasantly surprised to hear than John 23 is being canonized.
[ 05. July 2013, 18:05: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ronald Binge
Shipmate
# 9002
|
Posted
Delighted by John XXIII's impending canonisation. I studied Jewish-Catholic relations during my most recent Open University course and as Archbishop Roncalli saved thousands of lives through astute diplomacy and willingness to ensure the rules were sufficently bent in several countries to save those lives.
Axious. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
--------------------
Older, bearded (but no wiser)
Posts: 477 | From: Brexit's frontline | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
John 23...it's about time!
JP2...I often wonder whether the public outcry for sainthood should have been rationale to lengthen, rather than shorten, the five years. I suppose it would have stood the test of time, anyway.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
Do you think that by taking the two causes forward together Pope Francis is saying something ?
In our politically-minded age, John 23 is often seen as progressive and JP2 as conservative. Are we to read from this that holiness is orthogonal to political conviction ?
Best wishes,
Russ
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Having your name put into the list of canonised saints simply means that the RC church considers that person to be a good model for other Christians.It has to do with the perceived love of God and neighbour as practiced by the individual. It has nothing to do with the person's political activity or lack of it.
The RC church in general puts into the list of canonised saints only those whose virtue it can investigate,but that is not to say that there are not many,many saints who are not on the list,who were never Catholics or even Christians.
Incidentally King Charles the First is not a saint canonised by the RC church.That however does not necessarily mean that he was not a saint.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mary LA
Shipmate
# 17040
|
Posted
I've read John XXIII's 'Journey of a Soul' several times. Never thought he would be recognised as a saint.
Posts: 499 | From: Africa | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
Where on earth does this idea that John XXIII was a liberal come from? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Where on earth does this idea that John XXIII was a liberal come from?
By comparison to Paul VI and JPII perhaps?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fineline
Shipmate
# 12143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
What are shipmates reactions? Joyful, excited, grateful, horrified, can't see what the fuss is about, 'what is canonisation anyway?', 'why can't I be one?'
My reaction was 'what is canonisation anyway?' I googled it and discovered what it was. I would not like to be one. I would not like to be recognised for having exceptional virtue and holiness, because it wouldn't be true. Although if I could inspire people in some way to deepen their knowledge of God and have a positive influence in the world, I would like that. But not to be canonised for it. And in many ways, what the world sees as a positive influence will vary from culture to culture, from time period to time period.
Posts: 2375 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478
|
Posted
Perhaps "progressive" would be a better term than "liberal" to describe John XXIII, but I suspect CL won't care for that description either...
--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson
Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Speaking of 'liberal/progressive' popes, I found this week's blog post by Leonardo Boff, one of the most prolific proponents of Liberation Theology, interesting. I'm not sure if it isn't wishful thinking though.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Where on earth does this idea that John XXIII was a liberal come from?
By comparison to Paul VI and JPII perhaps?
I think that it was by comparison to Pius XII, his predecessor.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
I hope Pio XII's cause for canonisation stalls. His wartime record remains extremely dodgy, IMO, all the recent spin notwithstanding. I feel almost quite the same way about the late pope, but his is a political canonisation to help make his groupies happy.
John XXIII, on the other hand, although pretty much the same era and formation as Pio XII, rose above his innate conservationism and let loose a flood of change with the calling of Vatican II. Pio just fiddled about the edges. YMMV, but this is one Catholic's view.
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
I hope Pio XII's cause for canonisation stalls. His wartime record remains extremely dodgy, IMO, all the recent spin notwithstanding. I feel almost quite the same way about the late pope, but his is a political canonisation to help make his groupies happy.
John XXIII, on the other hand, although pretty much the same era and formation as Pio XII, rose above his innate conservationism and let loose a flood of change with the calling of Vatican II. Pio just fiddled about the edges. YMMV, but this is one Catholic's view.
Utter rubbish.
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
So tell us what you think...
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bernard Mahler
Shipmate
# 10852
|
Posted
I believe John 23's first address to the assembled Cardinals began, "Well, brothers, here We are at the end of the road and the top of the dung heap."
If true, it was surely the utterance of a saint.
--------------------
"What does it matter? All is grace" Georges Bernanos
Posts: 622 | From: Auckland New Zealand | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Where on earth does this idea that John XXIII was a liberal come from?
By comparison to Paul VI and JPII perhaps?
I think that it was by comparison to Pius XII, his predecessor.
Pius XII was an archreformer.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Pius XII was an archreformer.
Please do elaborate.
[ 07. July 2013, 00:34: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
Like St Francis, people tend to superimpose on to Blessed John, what they "wish" he stood for
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Pius XII was an archreformer.
Please do elaborate.
The Holy Week rites and Divino Afflante Spiritu, for example.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
How come only Catholics are saints? I can think of several people I've come across in my lifetime whom I would consider to be saints, but they aren't Catholics.
The RCC does not create saints. Everybody who has died and gone to heaven is a saint, and ultimately it is up to the individual and God whether that will be the case. The RCC canonises saints, which means that she allows a particular saint to become venerated as part of her official liturgical worship. Your grandma may be just as much a saint in heaven as JPII, but when he gets canonised, he can be mentioned for example in the Litany of the Saints at Easter Vigil, unlike your grandma.
This is then about an official liturgical recognition. It's a bit like being knighted by the Queen. And in a similar way that most people who have an OBE are British nationals, it's not surprising that almost all canonised RC saints were RCs (or members of the Church pre-great-schism). Just like for the OBE, there are a few "outsiders" that ended up becoming RC saints (for example the very Eastern Orthodox St Gregory Palamas, or the the Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, as St Josaphat...), but there is nothing sinister about this being restricted to RCs in general. It is mostly an internal recognition of achievements.
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
I must agree with this one. I agree that JPII has a cult following which seeems to over-ride the Church's careful raking through his life and death.
Having a cult following has always been the primary way for any saint to become canonised! Prior to the establishment of an official and centralised procedure, becoming a "canonised" saint basically amounted to amassing enough spiritual "groupies" among the faithful to sway some bishop to rubber-stamp that groundswell of enthusiasm. It's hence particularly ironic for a progressive type to whine about the lack of Vatican red tape in the canonisation progress. And of course, the sum total of evidence that you have that the RCC has not carefully raked through JPII's life and death is zilch.
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Then they better make Martin Luther and Lech Walesa saints as well!
As for every heresiarch, the best one can hope for Martin Luther is that he's in purgatory now (rather than in the deepest pit of hell, which is a rather more likely). After all, every additional Protestant (or at least every additional Lutheran) is another millstone around his neck. So in order to canonise Luther, one first would have to get rid of Protestantism, at which point he could possibly get to heaven. That will take a few more hundred years, I would say. In the meantime, you could try to make Arius a canonised saint of the RCC. The Arians have been dealt with successfully, there is a theoretical possibility that Arius made it to heaven since, and clearly Arius had a great and positive impact on the Church (by virtue of the Church fighting his abject heresy, but still...) - all that would be a perfect precedent for Martin Luther. So get some people together to pray for two miracles from Arius?
Lech Wałęsa is not as silly a suggestion, since he appears to be a staunch RC. Except, well, he isn't particularly dead yet...
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
From IngoB
As for every heresiarch, the best one can hope for Martin Luther is that he's in purgatory now (rather than in the deepest pit of hell, which is a rather more likely).
Don't forget though, that Luther achieved what none before could do - the reform of the RC Church. Before him, and especially in the previous 150 years or so, there had been very many bad popes. Luther's actions led directly to the Council of Trent, with its thorough reforms. It's hard to think of any bad popes since.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Don't forget though, that Luther achieved what none before could do - the reform of the RC Church. Before him, and especially in the previous 150 years or so, there had been very many bad popes. Luther's actions led directly to the Council of Trent, with its thorough reforms. It's hard to think of any bad popes since.
Beyond the silly (St Luther) and counter-silly (St Arius), this is indeed a serious point for consideration. I'm not sure that the RCC could have been shaken out of her deep rut then without something as catastrophic as the Reformation. Perhaps, perhaps not. But I don't think that we can simply attribute these changes to Luther (or Calvin etc.), as pivotal as he may have been in bringing them about. It seems to me that history has a tendency to come to a head, and sometimes that head is just one individual. But just because a lever needs a pivot point does not make the lever arm itself unimportant, nor the forces working on it. The question how much one man or woman can shape history by virtue of being the eye of the storm is really interesting. But I don't really have a well formed and informed opinion about that...
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Don't forget though, that Luther achieved what none before could do - the reform of the RC Church. Before him, and especially in the previous 150 years or so, there had been very many bad popes. Luther's actions led directly to the Council of Trent, with its thorough reforms. It's hard to think of any bad popes since.
Beyond the silly (St Luther) and counter-silly (St Arius), this is indeed a serious point for consideration. I'm not sure that the RCC could have been shaken out of her deep rut then without something as catastrophic as the Reformation. Perhaps, perhaps not. But I don't think that we can simply attribute these changes to Luther (or Calvin etc.), as pivotal as he may have been in bringing them about. It seems to me that history has a tendency to come to a head, and sometimes that head is just one individual. But just because a lever needs a pivot point does not make the lever arm itself unimportant, nor the forces working on it. The question how much one man or woman can shape history by virtue of being the eye of the storm is really interesting. But I don't really have a well formed and informed opinion about that...
Re attributing the Reformation to Luther, I agree. If anything, I'd attribute the Reformation to the invention of the printing press...
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
the best one can hope for Martin Luther is that he's in purgatory now (rather than in the deepest pit of hell, which is a rather more likely).
How utterly ridiculous. Luther was a catholic who urged the RCC to reform itself for the sake of true catholicism.
Nonsense. No one who doesn't believe in either Pope or Council (which Luther didn't) is Catholic
[ 07. July 2013, 17:04: Message edited by: SeraphimSarov ]
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
No one who doesn't believe in either Pope or Council (which Luther didn't) is Catholic
Luther obviously had, shall we say, misgivings about much of what the Church of his time was doing, but AIUI his aim (at least initially) was to reform the Church, not to start a new one. Hence the epithet 'Magisterial Reformation', in contrast to the 'Radical Reformation' efforts to break away from the whole institutional church.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
the best one can hope for Martin Luther is that he's in purgatory now (rather than in the deepest pit of hell, which is a rather more likely).
How utterly ridiculous. Luther was a catholic who urged the RCC to reform itself for the sake of true catholicism.
Nonsense. No one who doesn't believe in either Pope or Council (which Luther didn't) is Catholic
Not ROMAN catholic perhaps.
Luther's appeal to the RCC was based catholic doctrine and on how the RCC had departed from it.
As to popes, if a pope says/teaches something contrary to the teaching of previous popes, surely his authority is questionable?
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
the best one can hope for Martin Luther is that he's in purgatory now (rather than in the deepest pit of hell, which is a rather more likely).
How utterly ridiculous. Luther was a catholic who urged the RCC to reform itself for the sake of true catholicism.
Nonsense. No one who doesn't believe in either Pope or Council (which Luther didn't) is Catholic
Not ROMAN catholic perhaps.
Luther's appeal to the RCC was based catholic doctrine and on how the RCC had departed from it.
As to popes, if a pope says/teaches something contrary to the teaching of previous popes, surely his authority is questionable?
No, you are missing the point. He also rejected Councils which meant he departed from the teaching of both East and West. Dissenter or heretic , yes but not Catholic
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
OK - heretic as far as the RCC is concerned.
Not heretical as a Christian.
So the person above who said he was most likely to be Hell is not proclaiming RC doctrine since the RCC doesn't regard protestants as non-Christians.
We would agree there (miracle of miracles !)
but I think what Ingo was getting at was his role as a promoter of schism and I can sort of see that but church authorities in Germany (I can't fault Leo X seeing it as a local German problem at the beginning) were just as at fault and if they had listened to Luther's early objections about the abuse of indulgences , I don't think he would have expanded to really going beyond and against Catholic teaching ans yes, into schism
[ 07. July 2013, 20:17: Message edited by: SeraphimSarov ]
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
...to sway some bishop to rubber-stamp that groundswell of enthusiasm...
Circa these parts, rubber-stamp has the air of thoughtless approval. This doesn't speak well of the conciliarity of the clergy and the laity. Perhaps you meant something closer to ratify.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
Nonsense. No one who doesn't believe in either Pope or Council (which Luther didn't) is Catholic
That is to understand 'Catholic' in the sense it was defined after Luther and as a result of changes he triggered.
Luther would have known he was taking risks, but it's clear that to start off with, he thought he was trying to reform the Catholic Church. In light of the failed reform 100 years previously, how that had played out, and the period when there had been up to three simultaneous popes, it was reasonable for him to sit looser on the strict meaning of Catholic than the sort of meaning it has acquired in the Roman church since the Council of Trent.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
I don't know why we are discussing Luther now. But anyway...
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
OK - heretic as far as the RCC is concerned. Not heretical as a Christian. So the person above who said he was most likely to be Hell is not proclaiming RC doctrine since the RCC doesn't regard protestants as non-Christians.
It is not RC doctrine that all non-Christians go to hell. It is not RC doctrine that all Christians go to heaven. It is RC doctrine that heresy is grave matter (and obviously we are talking there about heresy according to the RCC). To turn this into mortal sin, full knowledge and complete consent is required. But unlike for latter day followers of a heresy, this can be presumed for heresiarchs (originators of heresy). Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not excuse in this context, but condemn further. So it is likely that heresiarchs commit mortals sins in establishing their heresies, and unless they repent of them (which does not seem to have been the case for Luther), they will go to hell. That very much is RC doctrine, even though it is not something much stressed in these days of ecumenical appeasement...
This RC doctrine is reflected in canon law, which threatens automatic excommunication for heresy (canon 1364), putting it on par with abortion and breaking the confessional seal. And historically speaking our times are as mild as can be concerning heretics. The Church Fathers were rather clear on what fate awaits the heretic, and back then there was little distinction between the originator and later followers.
Says Origen: "So let no one persuade himself, let no one deceive himself: outside this house, that is, outside the church, no one is saved. For if anyone goes outside, he is responsible for his own death." (Homiliae in Jesu Nave 3.5, PG 12:841-42) Says Cyprian of Carthage: "Neither baptism of public confession [of the faith under torture], nor of blood [shed for the faith], can avail the heretic anything toward salvation, because there is no salvation outside of the church. Nay, even though they should suffer death for the confession of the Name, the guilt of such men is not removed even by their blood; the grievous irremissible sin of schism is not purged even by martyrdom." (Epist 73.21; CSEL 3,2:795; FC 51:282) Says Augustine: "Outside the Church he can have everything except salvation. He can have honor, he can have sacraments, he can sing alleluia, he can respond with Amen, he can have the gospel, he can hold and preach the faith in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit: but nowhere else than in the Catholic Church can he find salvation." (Sermo ad Caesariensis ecclesiae plebem 6; CSEL 53:174-175)
We are interpreting things a bit more generously these days. But part of that is exactly to shift blame from the present day heretics to their heresiarch. So Martin Luther himself remains firmly up shit creek without a paddle, even by modern RC teaching. He is someone RCs should pray for, not to.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Pius XII was an archreformer.
Please do elaborate.
The Holy Week rites and Divino Afflante Spiritu, for example.
Oh brother! Calling for some new translations of the scripture based on increased knowledge of the origina texts, and calling for letting there be a time of day change for the Holy Week rites along with a few other non-radical changes makes Pius XII anarchreformer. That is flat-out weird. I can't find the "rolls eyes" emoticon so
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) will have to do.
[ 07. July 2013, 22:09: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
