Plug in the name of your own favorite liberal who has become infatuated with His Holiness after "the" interview.
The Catholic League's Bill Donohue summarized them as of Septmber 23rd:
If ever there were any doubt that the Catholic left and the secular left have much in common, it is doubted no more. Consider that Jane Fonda tweeted this weekend that Pope Francis “hates dogma,” and that today we learned from Fordham theologian Michael Peppard that while the pope “is a lover of traditional prayers and books,” the “old Q-and-A Baltimore Catechism is not among them.” Of course, neither quoted the pope as making these comments, and that’s because he never did.
Whoopi Goldberg, who has made a career criticizing the pope’s predecessors, loves Pope Francis because he said, according to her, that atheists are going to heaven. On the website of the New Republic, we find out that New York mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio, outed today in the New York Times as a former Marxist, shares with the pope a fondness for liberation theology (never mind that just last week it was reported that the pope’s exchange with the Peruvian father of liberation theology was “serious and sharp”).
Homosexual Catholics and secularists have never been happier about a pope. New York Times columnist Frank Bruni is literally screaming “Hallelujah.” Pundit Andrew Sullivan is “still reeling” about the pope’s published interview of last week, exclaiming this is “The Rebirth of Catholicism.” The Human Rights Campaign, a gay activist group, is heralding the “transformative change” that the pope is bringing. Perhaps they think the pope is going to host a gay dance in the Vatican.
Frances Kissling, the pro-abortion ex-Catholic, says “the bishops have been part of the problem.” What problem? Making the abortion debate “ugly.” James Salt of Catholics United, a dissident front group, is also trying to drive a wedge between the bishops and the pope. Sister Simone “Nuns-on-the-Bus” Campbell commends the pope for “saying that the Gospel cannot be used to benefit one political party.” This from the same woman who spoke at the Democratic National Convention.
I wonder when Fr Z and others will finally tire of telling us what he means to say and accept the fact that this is the VII crowds last hurrah. I`m almost finished reading Prof Roberto de Matteis book, The Second Vatican Council(an unwritten story), our Bishop of Rome quotes chapter and verse the modernists vision of the Church and the world that we`ve had shoved down our throats since 1965.
"One of my colleagues insisted again and again that the greatest challenge we face in the classroom is "Catholic fundamentalism...""
Oh dear Lord in heaven. At the risk of hi-jacking your train of thought here, Carol:
Really? In the "classroom"?
Nonsense.
I try to help those who are following the precepts and disciplines of Holy Mother Church, when they are being gigged by such "teachers", with the following:
There are those in the Church who believe that virtually anything "new" Mother Church (the Magisterium) proposes for us (either belief or discipline) is suspect and, oftentimes, will not follow them. (you know, the *only* valid Mass is the extra-ordinary form of the Holy Sacrifice and if you are *not* wearing a chapel veil, well, woe unto you)
Let's call them uber-traditionalist dissenters.
Then there are those who believe that Divine Revelation is ongoing and that it is through the experience of the faithful the Holy Spirit is still "revealing things." They believe that it is perfectly okay not to follow the Magisterium and they teach/encourage others to do so. (you know, the Sr. Chittister types - we need to "change" on abortion, contraception, homose*ual acts, etc.)
Let's call them uber-progressivist dissenters.
Then you have those Catholics who merely do the bare minimum and do not want change and want the "status quo." They complain about anything and everything regarding the disciplines handed down by the Magisterium. (much less do they have a clue about what the Church teaches on issues of faith and morals... and refuse to learn anything about those and often will not follow them [like being open to life]).
Let's call them minimalist or non-conformist dissenters.
Yet, when those Catholics who love the Church, and all of her treasures that is old and new (Mt. 13:52), if you simply want to be *obedient* to what Holy Mother Church teaches (and proposes for belief) on the issues of faith, morals, liturgical matters and discipline, etc. - to be virtuous in their obedience - the aforementioned three groups are quick to label these as "fundamentalists" or "neo-Cats" or "legalists" or some other degrading term!
I cannot speak for others but maybe this will help.
I choose to be "progressive" when the Pope and Mother Church "progresses."
I choose to be "traditional" when the Pope and Mother Church are "traditional."
I choose to "stand fast and hold firm to the traditions handed down by word of mouth, or by a letter" (2 Thes 2:15) when the Pope and Mother Church does so!
The reality is *they* are the fundamentalists, the legalists, etc., etc... because they refuse to think with the mind of Mother Church!
This, supposedly, is the "greatest challenge in the classroom"?
Yeah, right. And Pink Floyd's pigs are flying.
Good grief.
I may have been born at night, but I wasn't born last night.
Or, as we say out here in southern Indiana: "I didn't just fall off the 'tater truck yesterday."
why do atheists worry about going to a heaven that does not exist for them. Why do we in the church worry about their point of view. They have already made their views about Him made to Him. Let them work out thier own salvation and let God accept them when they change their mind.+
I often wonder when I read all the double talk and total double meanings of Vat2 if the true spirit of this council was the roman false god called Janus?
7 comments:
"Seeing Pope Francis through ----"
Plug in the name of your own favorite liberal who has become infatuated with His Holiness after "the" interview.
The Catholic League's Bill Donohue summarized them as of Septmber 23rd:
If ever there were any doubt that the Catholic left and the secular left have much in common, it is doubted no more. Consider that Jane Fonda tweeted this weekend that Pope Francis “hates dogma,” and that today we learned from Fordham theologian Michael Peppard that while the pope “is a lover of traditional prayers and books,” the “old Q-and-A Baltimore Catechism is not among them.” Of course, neither quoted the pope as making these comments, and that’s because he never did.
Whoopi Goldberg, who has made a career criticizing the pope’s predecessors, loves Pope Francis because he said, according to her, that atheists are going to heaven. On the website of the New Republic, we find out that New York mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio, outed today in the New York Times as a former Marxist, shares with the pope a fondness for liberation theology (never mind that just last week it was reported that the pope’s exchange with the Peruvian father of liberation theology was “serious and sharp”).
Homosexual Catholics and secularists have never been happier about a pope. New York Times columnist Frank Bruni is literally screaming “Hallelujah.” Pundit Andrew Sullivan is “still reeling” about the pope’s published interview of last week, exclaiming this is “The Rebirth of Catholicism.” The Human Rights Campaign, a gay activist group, is heralding the “transformative change” that the pope is bringing. Perhaps they think the pope is going to host a gay dance in the Vatican.
Frances Kissling, the pro-abortion ex-Catholic, says “the bishops have been part of the problem.” What problem? Making the abortion debate “ugly.” James Salt of Catholics United, a dissident front group, is also trying to drive a wedge between the bishops and the pope. Sister Simone “Nuns-on-the-Bus” Campbell commends the pope for “saying that the Gospel cannot be used to benefit one political party.” This from the same woman who spoke at the Democratic National Convention.
I wonder when Fr Z and others will finally tire of telling us what he means to say and accept the fact that this is the VII crowds last hurrah. I`m almost finished reading Prof Roberto de Matteis book, The Second Vatican Council(an unwritten story), our Bishop of Rome quotes chapter and verse the modernists vision of the Church and the world that we`ve had shoved down our throats since 1965.
In the article posted by Fr. Z, Mr. Reno says:
"One of my colleagues insisted again and again that the greatest challenge we face in the classroom is "Catholic fundamentalism...""
Oh dear Lord in heaven. At the risk of hi-jacking your train of thought here, Carol:
Really? In the "classroom"?
Nonsense.
I try to help those who are following the precepts and disciplines of Holy Mother Church, when they are being gigged by such "teachers", with the following:
There are those in the Church who believe that virtually anything "new" Mother Church (the Magisterium) proposes for us (either belief or discipline) is suspect and, oftentimes, will not follow them. (you know, the *only* valid Mass is the extra-ordinary form of the Holy Sacrifice and if you are *not* wearing a chapel veil, well, woe unto you)
Let's call them uber-traditionalist dissenters.
Then there are those who believe that Divine Revelation is ongoing and that it is through the experience of the faithful the Holy Spirit is still "revealing things." They believe that it is perfectly okay not to follow the Magisterium and they teach/encourage others to do so. (you know, the Sr. Chittister types - we need to "change" on abortion, contraception, homose*ual acts, etc.)
Let's call them uber-progressivist dissenters.
Then you have those Catholics who merely do the bare minimum and do not want change and want the "status quo." They complain about anything and everything regarding the disciplines handed down by the Magisterium. (much less do they have a clue about what the Church teaches on issues of faith and morals... and refuse to learn anything about those and often will not follow them [like being open to life]).
Let's call them minimalist or non-conformist dissenters.
Yet, when those Catholics who love the Church, and all of her treasures that is old and new (Mt. 13:52), if you simply want to be *obedient* to what Holy Mother Church teaches (and proposes for belief) on the issues of faith, morals, liturgical matters and discipline, etc. - to be virtuous in their obedience - the aforementioned three groups are quick to label these as "fundamentalists" or "neo-Cats" or "legalists" or some other degrading term!
I cannot speak for others but maybe this will help.
I choose to be "progressive" when the Pope and Mother Church "progresses."
I choose to be "traditional" when the Pope and Mother Church are "traditional."
I choose to "stand fast and hold firm to the traditions handed down by word of mouth, or by a letter" (2 Thes 2:15) when the Pope and Mother Church does so!
The reality is *they* are the fundamentalists, the legalists, etc., etc... because they refuse to think with the mind of Mother Church!
This, supposedly, is the "greatest challenge in the classroom"?
Yeah, right. And Pink Floyd's pigs are flying.
Good grief.
I may have been born at night, but I wasn't born last night.
Or, as we say out here in southern Indiana: "I didn't just fall off the 'tater truck yesterday."
CKev
Woo-hooh!!
Amen brother. Amen.
If ten people have to jump in and explain what you meant to say then it's safe to assume that a verbal cow patty has been placed in the punchbowl.
why do atheists worry about going to a heaven that does not exist for them. Why do we in the church worry about their point of view. They have already made their views about Him made to Him. Let them work out thier own salvation and let God accept them when they change their mind.+
I often wonder when I read all the double talk and total double meanings of Vat2 if the true spirit of this council was the roman false god called Janus?
Post a Comment