German conservative Ratzinger is new Pope Benedict XVI

Meanwhile, Ratzi fired the American Jesuit editor of the Vatican press for being too liberal.

There's a self-validating statement coupled with an oxymoron.


Even paranoids can have real enemies. Don't let your guard down; the light you seem to think you see at the end of the tunnel is the headlamp of the oncoming train.


If its any consolation, in all likelihood there will be a successor pope in fairly short order; folks in their late 70s typically don't go on for decades. And just to make you feel better, the average tenure of the previous 7 Germanic Popes has been a bit over 2 years, with one lasting only a few weeks.



I appreciate the optimism there, but I must question the historic foundation of the premise, in that marriage is by Church dogma - dogma, mind you, not mere doctrine - the indissoluble bond of one consenting, eligible, baptized man and one eligible, consenting, baptized woman within the sacrament of Matrimony. It specifically is referenced as such by Paul in Ephesians 5: 31-32

.

According to the Council of Trent this dogma has always been taught by the Church, defined in canon i, Sess. XXIV (see below): "If any one shall say that matrimony is not truly and properly one of the Seven Sacraments of the Evangelical Law, instituted by Christ our Lord, but was invented in the Church by men, and does not confer grace, let him be anathema." The canons of marriage are elucidated unambiguously in the documents of the afore mentioned XXIV Session of The Council of Trent, wherein cited among other authority are the Apostolic Canons, as well as Paul's statement in Ephesians.

The principle further is quite firmly established under Canon Law, Book IV, Part 1, Title VIII,

Now, I may not be not a Canon Lawyer, but I can read, and I have read extensively concerning The Church. Nothing I ever have read lends any credence to your apparent suppositions as regards The Church's stance on morality, any possibility of change thereto, or to your implication things within The Church once were different as regards matrimony. Please, by all means, show where I am in error. I'm always willing to learn.

Oh, and Lash, Reese RESIGNED. The current issue of America has a STATEMENT from Fr. Drew Christiansen, S.J., formerly Deputy Director and Editor, now appointed Reese's successor. It would be more correct to say, in today's Correctspeak, that Reese "chose to avail himself of other career directions and opportunities" - in other words, he wasn't "fired", he "got quit". :wink:

He was quitted upon with great and abiding malice.

That he was. And there's more, much more, of the like to come, have no doubt. The train has left the station.

I really thought you were overstating when you predicted sort of a conservative revivalist era circa Ratzi--but he's swashbucklin' right out of the gate.

I think we're in for quite a show.

Specially in North America.

I don't know beans about the Catholic Church. If women aren't accepted in the pulpit, and birth control is still a no-no, and gays are verboten....what was in Vatican II? The use of soap...now permitted?

Well, might be.

It might be of minor interest here, and to none of the most here, but every German had to be a member of the Hitler Youth (and the eqivalent organisation for females), when he was 14 (the age went down in the last days of the war, since 14 years old had to became soldiers.) I doubt that this makes someone a lifelong Nazi.

Contrary to what many seem to think, Vatican II was not at all about "Liberalization" of The Church, but about aligning The Church to face and withstand the challenges of the new age of secular liberalism. Most visible of the changes brought about were those pertaining to the celebration of the mass; no longer was the mass to be exclusively a Latin-language rite, no longer was the celebrant to face away from the congregation, no longer was the altar to be set flush to the wall but rather it was to be situated as to permit the celebrant and acolytes to maneuver around it on all sides, contemporarary musical instruments and songforms were to be permitted insofar as they were consistent with the sacred solemnity of worship, and the mass itself was shortewned a bit. Less visible, but related, were decrees pertainining specifically to the rites and prayers reserved to the priesthood. Acknowledgement was made of the sanctity of other religions, though the position of The Roman Catholic Church as the sole perfect repository of Divine Truth was reaffirmed. There was some minor revision to the Liturgical year, some expansion of what was considered acceptable as regards sacred artforms other than music, and to the roll and enrollment of saints. Beyond that, the council essentially reaffirmmed The Church's traditional teachings regarding Faith and Morality, re-itterated the unchanging and unchangeable nature of Sacraments, and, in concert with the Patriarchate of The Eastern Orthodox Churches, expressed regret for the mutual excommunications each had served upon the other in 1054, with intent to begin the process of healing The Great Schism.

In short, Vatican II was like a pre-game pep rally to fire up The Church and The Faithful for the contest with "Today's World" - to get the team ready to fight and win against a redoubtable foe, not to get along with The Other Team.

Vatican II in a nutshell

A timberprediction "Overstated"?!?!?! Come, now

re Vatican II: this is seen some (=most within the Catholic Church) as the one with the most far-ranging consequences, namely resulting in the
"Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation", "Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today" and "Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation" as timber already noted.

Thanks, guys.

I'm not up on my Cathol.

Most Holy Redeemer is still kicking. I was invited today to join the choir which is a REALLY big deal since almost everyone in the choir is or has been a professional musician of some sort. The violinist who performed today is the second violinist for the San Francsico Symphony Orchestra.

Enjoy whatchya got while ya got it. I expect it won't be long before specific cause for great dismay visits MHR.

You seem to be wishing for this. If this is the case, it is truly sad.

The spirit and family of MHR cannot be torn apart. Not by any human being, even someone who calls himself Pope. This too shall pass.

I would worry about making order in your own house and leaving ours to us.

I "wish" for nothing of the sort, Chrissee, and have said before that in this instance my sympathy lies with you and yours. I am however a realist. I see no possibility of Vatican accommodation concerning the permissive and accommodative nature of the ministry provided by MHR to its openly-practicing GLBT parishoners. It may be sad, but its real, and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous at best.

I will take you for yoiur word but

1) Please define the "permissive and accommodative nature of the ministry"

2) What exactly it is that Rome is going to do to end it or even retard it.


BTW the Archbishop is celebrating the 10:00 am Mass this Penteost Sunday.

1) The "permissive and accommodative nature of the ministry" refers to not standing firmly against the lifestyle practices of the GLBT community. For instance, offering The Eucharist to persons known by the celebrant of the mass to be openly and habitually in defiance of Church Teachings regarding chastity and celibacy outside the sacrament of Matrimony, homosexual practice, and/or advocacy thereof, is a direct contravention of doctrine. As stated in Canon 915: "Those [...] who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion."

2) What Rome will do is to excise any defiant cleric and/or congregation from The Church - restrict or remove that indivisual's or institution's accredidation as a Catholic entity. For the parishoners, the laity of that congregation, that may amount to a "So what". For the clergy of that congregation, it is a very much more serious matter, with consequences ranging from admonition or censure through reassignment to defrocking. Even an Archbishop is subject to such sanction. It is reasonable to conclude The Church will look for a very visible example through which to send its message.

Vatican focus at the moment is strongly on political developments in Spain, almost to the exclusion of all else. Don't look for North America to avoid attention long, however; The Vatican is very Media Savvy, and may be expected to "Go for the big headline" just to reassure the world it "means business". Among other considerations, The Church wishes to distance itself from the recent sexual abuse scandals. A draconian, unflinching campaign of internal enforcement of moral teachings is inevitable. The recent case of Fr. Reese, formerly of the Jesuit weekly America, holds a lesson for all who would think to stand at variance with Official Vatican Position. That lesson is "The hammer's comin' down - don't be under it if you wish to avoid being smashed".

Believe me, Chrissee - I very much wish this wasn't so - I have freinds and family who happen to be of "alternative sexual orientation". They're all good people, many in honorable, stable, caring relationships. I figure what goes on privately between responsible, consenting adults is purely their business - whoever or however many happen to be in that bedroom at any given time. I don't think either The Church or The Government has any business in The Bedroom. I happen, you may be interested to know, to be very opposed to The Church's stance on the role of condoms as disease control. I disagree with the position on stem cell research. I wish it were not so.

However, I know The Church well enough to not harbor any delusion it will not be so. There is a glimmer of hope on the condom-as-disease-control issue, but I really don't even have much hope there. The Church is likely to remain much as it is, much as it has been for over 2 millenia. Its sad, but its so. Thats The Church - in its own words, "Divine, eternal, and unchanging".

1) OMG, what an intolerant and judgemental attitude. Just becasue we are gay, or lesbian, or transgendered we are assumed... by the judgemental like YOU anyway... we are assumed I guess to be fornicators? If the Catholic Church were to exclude all who do not follow the letter of the law, there would be NO CATHOLIC CHURCH in America. And I guess you never heard of the Christian tenet of forgiveness and do unto others. You are obviously not a follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ and you are trying to tell me what is happening or going to happen at MY church? As far as grave sin goes, formation of conscience trumps everything, this adccording to my pastor who is a Canon lawyer.

2) There are not any defiant clergy or congregation. You are not dealing with reality. You are basing your views on selected Church Doctrine and ideals that do not exist in the real world. You are not even a practicing Catholic.

The Church has to tread carefully when dealing with the gay issue as a large portion of the clergy is gay. The new Pope will do little to change the Catholic Church in America as much as timberlandko would like him to. He does not have and will never have the influence John Paul did.

PART THREE
LIFE IN CHRIST

SECTION ONE
MAN'S VOCATION LIFE IN THE SPIRIT

CHAPTER ONE
THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON

ARTICLE 6
MORAL CONSCIENCE

1776 "Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man's most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths."47

I. THE JUDGMENT OF CONSCIENCE

1777 Moral conscience,48 present at the heart of the person, enjoins him at the appropriate moment to do good and to avoid evil. It also judges particular choices, approving those that are good and denouncing those that are evil.49 It bears witness to the authority of truth in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn, and it welcomes the commandments. When he listens to his conscience, the prudent man can hear God speaking.

1778 Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law:


Conscience is a law of the mind; yet [Christians] would not grant that it is nothing more; I mean that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of responsibility, of duty, of a threat and a promise. . . . [Conscience] is a messenger of him, who, both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by his representatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ.50
1779 It is important for every person to be sufficiently present to himself in order to hear and follow the voice of his conscience. This requirement of interiority is all the more necessary as life often distracts us from any reflection, self-examination or introspection:


Return to your conscience, question it. . . . Turn inward, brethren, and in everything you do, see God as your witness.51
1780 The dignity of the human person implies and requires uprightness of moral conscience. Conscience includes the perception of the principles of morality (synderesis); their application in the given circumstances by practical discernment of reasons and goods; and finally judgment about concrete acts yet to be performed or already performed. The truth about the moral good, stated in the law of reason, is recognized practically and concretely by the prudent judgment of conscience. We call that man prudent who chooses in conformity with this judgment.

1781 Conscience enables one to assume responsibility for the acts performed. If man commits evil, the just judgment of conscience can remain within him as the witness to the universal truth of the good, at the same time as the evil of his particular choice. The verdict of the judgment of conscience remains a pledge of hope and mercy. In attesting to the fault committed, it calls to mind the forgiveness that must be asked, the good that must still be practiced, and the virtue that must be constantly cultivated with the grace of God:


We shall . . . reassure our hearts before him whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.52
1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters."53

II. THE FORMATION OF CONSCIENCE

1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.

1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.

1785 In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord's Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.55

III. TO CHOOSE IN ACCORD WITH CONSCIENCE

1786 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.

1787 Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law.

1788 To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted by the virtue of prudence, by the advice of competent people, and by the help of the Holy Spirit and his gifts.

1789 Some rules apply in every case:

- One may never do evil so that good may result from it;

- the Golden Rule: "Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them."56

- charity always proceeds by way of respect for one's neighbor and his conscience: "Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ."57 Therefore "it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble."58

IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."60


The more a correct conscience prevails, the more do persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and try to be guided by objective standards of moral conduct.61
IN BRIEF

1795 "Conscience is man's most secret core, and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths" (GS 16).

1796 Conscience is a judgment of reason by which the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act.

1797 For the man who has committed evil, the verdict of his conscience remains a pledge of conversion and of hope.

1798 A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. Everyone must avail himself of the means to form his conscience.

1799 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.

1800 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience.

1801 Conscience can remain in ignorance or make erroneous judgments. Such ignorance and errors are not always free of guilt.

1802 The Word of God is a light for our path. We must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. This is how moral conscience is formed.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

47 GS 16.
48 Cf. Rom 2:14-16.
49 Cf. Rom 1:32.
50 John Henry Cardinal Newman, "Letter to the Duke of Norfolk," V, in Certain Difficulties felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching II (London: Longmans Green, 1885), 248.
51 St. Augustine, In ep Jo. 8, 9: PL 35, 2041.
52 1 Jn 3:19-20.
53 DH 3 # 2.
54 Cf. Ps 119:105.
55 Cf. DH 14.
56 Mt 7:12; cf. Lk 6:31; Tob 4:15.
57 1 Cor 8:12.
58 Rom 14:21.
59 GS 16.
60 1 Tim 5; cf. 8:9; 2 Tim 3; 1 Pet 3:21; Acts 24:16.
61 GS 16.




If someone wants to argue that love between two people in a committed relationship is immoral, let's have at it.

We don't agree on much, Lash, but we do agree on this-we are indeed in for quite a show.

For once our perspectives are the same.

See, America is the largest financial contributor to the Catholic Church. Only 25% of Americans are Catholic, but we are wealthier than many places which are almost 100% Catholic, like Latin America.

But then there is the child molesting business over here. Yes, despite the best efforts of the mainstream American press to downplay it's significance, (how do you downplay something like this?-well, they accomplished it), the child molesting scandal finally broke large upon the headlines. Obviously,the American Catholic Church is in trouble.

Now remember, unlike other large financial contributors to the Catholic Church, America is a place where if a Catholic doesn't like what he sees, he can simply walk down the block and go to a different denomination with no social stigma whatsoever. In fact, it really wasn't until JFK was elected in 1960 that the Catholic Church was even considered fully mainstream in America-before that, it was looked upon as some kind of foreign controlled cult by many Americans. So if the Catholic Church doesn't do something quick about all this molesting going on, it can easily lose a big proportion of it's largest cash cow-the American Catholic Church.

When a Pope dies, there is much attention focused on the Catholic Church and it's process of replacement. Writers devote whole columns to the "challenges" the new Pope faces, ("challenge" is a sympathetic word-we cheer for people facing challenges), TV news recounts the new Pope's first visit here and there, etc. It's really a year long free infomercial for the Roman Catholic Church.

So the Catholic Church hit upon a plan. How to explain the child molesting scandal? Blame it on the liberals in the church. Yeah! Without all this liberal permissiveness coming into the church, we wouldn't have all this scandal. So we replace the old Pope with the most conservative guy out there, who's also 78. Remember,this guy's last post used to be named the Office of the Inquisition, (seriously!). He's there to clean out all the liberals in the place, thereby "doing something" about the child molesting scandal, and best of all, if what he does alienates anybody it's no big deal because he's 78 and going to have to be replaced himself in a few years.

If he goes a little too far, the next Pope after Benedict comes in with a lighter touch, praising Benedict for doing what had to be done while subtly dropping hints that he could have gone a little easier.

Benedict is the Crackdown Pope, there to offer an explanation to American Catholics about the child molesting scandals in an effort to keep them in the fold. Get the liberals!

The next Pope, in a few years, will be a Nice Guy.

Not my attitude, Chrissee, and not my argument. Its The Church's attitude, and The Church's argument. And trust me, The Church is gonna cop a real hard attitude and get real argumentive about it, with no concern whatsover for treading lightly around anyone - gays, politicians, clergy or laity.

Highlighted in red are the points of the bit of catechism you've quoted which invalidate your argument.



I suggest you read the entire catechism, its references and marginals, and consider its glossology. I have. Once again, I remind you The Church is all or nothing; it must be taken as a whole. The Church is what it is, not what you wish it to be. That one may choose to interprate something ex-context to suit an invalid argument in no way validates the argument. It is at best merely sophistry.