Couple questions about Christianity

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
and those suspected of heresy

[/ QUOTE ]

Whereas all you suspectors on the fringe think that good fruit can spring from disobedience and clever rationalizations.

[Peter666]

What you claim to be obedience, is really blind obedience. Obedience without rationality is simply idolatry.

JP II, not only in this case, but many others made statements contradicting the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Yet you would rather bow down to the authority of JP II when he contradicts Catholic doctrine, rather than the entire authority of tradition which includes all the Popes up to Him. In fact, not only did he contradict Catholic on dogma sometimes, but he would even contradict himself.

Idolatry of the Pope is Papalotry.



Yes, that is a Koran he is kissing, and NO, a Pope is not allowed to do that. It's called breaking the first commandment, and many Christians were martyred for refusing to do the same. Way to go Karol Wojtyla. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[BluffTHIS!]

JPII was one of the most theologically knowledgeable and profound popes in history. And even if you think he carried ecumenical activities too far, you cannot show that he was not 100% orthodox in his theological writings.

And since your group lacks all the marks of the true church, then opinions like the ones you express, or those of Archbishop Lefevre or Fr. Peter Scott, are nothing other than personal judgements, and not authoritative interpretations. The very basis of protestantism.

So again, just join the ranks of all the other protestant denominations and admit what you are. Just elect your own pontiff and make your defacto schism into the full blown heresy that it really is. And keep thinking that Benedict XVI is really different than JPII when he was his theological right hand man. If your group doesn't come back into the fold under him, it never will.

And all this because your founders refused to adapt to the Mass in the vernacular in a differnt form. Liturgical practices, not doctrinal/theological matters.

[RJT]

Bluff,

Sorry I got you involved here. I thought it was a simple matter of infallibility and all relative to Ecumenical Councils and the like. Hadn’t realized until these last few days, exactly where Pete was coming from. Got it now.

I think I’ll pass on the discussion. But, I will monitor it if he continues with his calumnies.

RJT

[Peter666]

"JPII was a highly regarded theologian long before he was named Pope. The thought of him making a statement contrary to doctrine is laughable at best."

No, he received a doctorate in Phenomenology. His writings as theologian are beyond suspect. He would have been condemned in Pope Pius XII's time without doubt. He did not come into prominence until after this.

To BluffTHIS: why bring the SSPX into the discussion? Who cares about them, you don't need them to show the dubiousness of JPII, he does that well enough himself. But since you brought it up, let us see what JP II has to say regarding development of doctrine in Ecclesia Dei (in which he is quoting Vatican II) "It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience" Now counter this with what St. Pius X had to say in his condemnation of the Modernists in Pascendi:

"In the religious sense one must recognize a kind of intuition of the heart which puts man in immediate contact with the reality of God, and infuses such a persuasion of God's existence and His action both within and without man as far to exceed any scientific conviction. They assert, therefore, the existence of a real experience, and one of a kind that surpasses all rational experience. If this experience is denied by some, like the Rationalists, they say that this arises from the fact that such persons are unwilling to put themselves in the moral state necessary to produce it. It is this experience which makes the person who acquires it to be properly and truly a believer."

No wonder JP II refused to take the oath against modernism in his coronation.

Finally to RJT: What calumny? I could not make this stuff up if I wanted too. I leave you with a pic of JP II at mass with a topless woman reading the Epistle. The inculturation of ethnicity at mass is bad enough, but are the breasts really necessary to compound the scandal?

[BluffTHIS!]

De Papa JPII, argumentum tuum et argumentum ad hominem et argumentum ad ignorantiam est.

[Peter666]

Come on, I am waiting for a theological dissertation trying to prove me wrong. I take no pleasure in condemning JP II as he seemed like an alright guy. But theologically the thing is a total disaster.

-Et tu, Karol Wojtyla!?!-

[RJT]

Petey,

I am only interested in your still unproven accusation of heresy of John Paul II relative to the limbo issue. You have not addressed any specific dogma that his CCC conflicts with. I don’t think that the Baltimore Catechism fits the definition. If that is your belief, then we can simply agree that one of us correct. Take your pick on who it is.


To go on tangents other than the limbo issue is not my interest.

RJT

[Peter666]

Back to limbo. I made my case above with all the dogmatic sources, so if you have any specific questions regarding those, I'll be happy to answer.

We don't know for certain if Limbo exists, as this is theological speculation. But it is de fide heresy to condemn anyone who holds this opinion. And we also know that salvation is impossible for the unbaptized (in one of the three forms). If they don't go to a type of "limbo" then the only alternative is a really mild Hell. That was St. Augustine's speculation. We will know for certain in the afterlife.

As for the last Pope, we do not know JP II's exact position on the salvation of unbaptized infants through the CCC. He did not write the CCC, although he authourized it. However, from his fairly vast theological writings, it appears he believes in a general efficacious salvation that was merited to man simply by the incarnation of Christ, thus elevating man's dignity. The sacrifice of Christ on the Cross was not in itself necessary, but an act of love. This helps us understand all of JP II's theology and it follows that this belief would bring about the other errors such as false ecumenism.

It will have to be a future Church Council and Pope that will go through the details in all their intricacy to make official pronouncements of condemnation. This is not unprecedented: it happened twice before in Church history with two other Popes. But they only had one little issue, where JP II engrosses all of Catholic thought with his errors.

[vulturesrow]

JPII was a highly regarded theologian long before he was named Pope. The thought of him making a statement contrary to doctrine is laughable at best.