Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Hardicanute on October 22, 2022, 09:58:24 PM
-
Benedict XVI: Vatican II was both meaningful and necessary
Pope emeritus Benedict XVI sends a letter to an international symposium on "The Ecclesiology of Joseph Ratzinger" held at the US Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, and upholds the importance and legacy of the Second Vatican Council.
By Deborah Castellano Lubov
As the Church recently celebrated the 60-year anniversary of the Second Vatican Council, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI said that Vatican II not only was "meaningful" but "necessary."
The Pope Emeritus did so in a letter he sent to Father Dave Pivonka, the president of the Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, which just hosted the 10th International Symposium, 20-21 October, on the theme 'The Ecclesiology of Joseph Ratzinger.'
The event at the US university was sponsored by the Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI Vatican Foundation. Fr. Federico Lombardi, President of the Ratzinger Foundation, read the letter at the event.
'A new council proved to be
necessary'
In the letter, Benedict said it was "a great honor and joy for me that in the United States of America, at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, an International Symposium is dealing with my ecclesiology, thus placing my thinking and effort in the great stream in which it has moved."
"When I began to study theology in January 1946," he said, "no one thought of an Ecuмenical Council. When Pope John XXIII announced it, to everyone’s surprise, there were many doubts as to whether it would be meaningful, indeed whether it would be possible at all, to organize the insights and questions into the whole of a conciliar statement and thus to give the Church a direction for its further journey."
“In reality, a new council proved to be not only meaningful, but necessary.”
For the first time, Benedict continued, "the question of a theology of religions had shown itself in its radicality."
The same is true, the Pope emeritus acknowledged, for the relationship between faith and the world of mere reason.
"Both topics had not been foreseen in this way before," Benedict acknowledged.
Working toward a right understanding of the Church
“This explains why Vatican II at first threatened to unsettle and shake the Church more than to give her a new clarity for her mission.”
The Pope Emeritus expressed his sincere hope that the International Symposium "will be helpful in the struggle for a right understanding of the Church and the world in our time."
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2022-10/benedict-xvi-letter-steubenville-pope-emeritus.html
-
Full letter: https://franciscan.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Benedict-XVI-Letter-to-Fr-Dave-Pivonka-TOR.pdf
-
I call Cardinal Siri Thesis and Nostra Aetate shilling on that. The shills today.
-
You have to marvel at the mental somersaults required for Benevacantists(Ann Barnhardt for example)
to believe that Ratzinger is any different than Bergoglio or JPII.
Passages from his countless books would probably make Bergoglio jealous in terms of how audacious
his heresies were....and apparently remain
-
V2 was more necessary at least than the rosary and hours of prayer in Latin. It's to say something "relative", something "pastoral". So on and so forth, alwaysthemore nevertheless, I mean they (the rosary and hours of prayer in Latin) should not enjoy any advantage over "progress", and should therefore also take a back seat to that "progress", that "progress" ipso facto, "in a certain sense".
Let's be honest. In Catholicism there has been the rosary, the Ave Marias, Pater Nosters, and Credos, and then the hours of prayer in Latin (even to include the mass) ... and then there has been the apparent and curious necessity of Vatican II. What a picture, what a painting, and then a thousand words.
-
V2 was more necessary at least than the rosary and hours of prayer in Latin. It's to say something "relative", something "pastoral". So on and so forth, alwaysthemore nevertheless, I mean they (the rosary and hours of prayer in Latin) should not enjoy any advantage over "progress", and should therefore also take a back seat to that "progress", that "progress" ipso facto, "in a certain sense".
Let's be honest. In Catholicism there has been the rosary, the Ave Marias, Pater Nosters, and Credos, and then the hours of prayer in Latin (even to include the mass) ... and then there has been the apparent and curious necessity of Vatican II. What a picture, what a painting, and then a thousand words.
I don't mean this nasty, but what in the world are you talking about?
I can't make any sense of it.
-
I don't mean this nasty, but what in the world are you talking about?
I can't make any sense of it.
You are not nasty. I too wonder what he said. It makes no sense to me.
-
You have to marvel at the mental somersaults required for Benevacantists(Ann Barnhardt for example)
to believe that Ratzinger is any different than Bergoglio or JPII.
Passages from his countless books would probably make Bergoglio jealous in terms of how audacious
his heresies were....and apparently remain
They'll just claim he didn't really write that letter. Any word from Brother Bugnolo?
-
I call Cardinal Siri Thesis and Nostra Aetate shilling on that. The shills today.
With some of your posts, I have to think that you’re sitting there with roscoe smoking some nice MJ.
-
I don't mean this nasty, but what in the world are you talking about?
I can't make any sense of it.
I made my earlier comment before I saw this response.
-
You have to marvel at the mental somersaults required for Benevacantists(Ann Barnhardt for example)
to believe that Ratzinger is any different than Bergoglio or JPII.
Passages from his countless books would probably make Bergoglio jealous in terms of how audacious
his heresies were....and apparently remain
I wrote an email to Ann about this matter, but she did not respond.
Father Kramer is the one I marvel at. He does good work showing the heresy of Bergoglio, but ignores the fact that Ratzinger held the exact same heresies.
-
You have to marvel at the mental somersaults required for Benevacantists(Ann Barnhardt for example)
to believe that Ratzinger is any different than Bergoglio or JPII.
Passages from his countless books would probably make Bergoglio jealous in terms of how audacious
his heresies were....and apparently remain
I wrote an email to Ann about this matter, but she did not respond.
Father Kramer is the one I marvel at. He does good work showing the heresy of Bergoglio, but ignores the fact that Ratzinger held the exact same heresies.
I have always found that strange about Anne. She has no qualms about declaring Bergoglio a heretic, and therefore outside of the Church..yet insists in the valid papacy of Ratzinger, even though you could compile a list of his heresies that would likely equal those of Bergoglio.
I do remember her saying that she will hold the sedevacantist position after Ratzinger dies, though
-
Let me fix this for all of you. They all were sodomite priest enablers.
To cover up such heinous scandals is mortal sin.
Too much talk and too much leftist actions.
Vatican II church let the smoke of satan take over says Paul VI.
Look at the bad fruit of Vatican II.
-
Ann needs to wake up.
Ratzinger was major lukewarm. He never spoke up against Bergolio. Did he say anything publicly to denounce pachimama scandal??
-
They'll just claim he didn't really write that letter. Any word from Brother Bugnolo?
LOL...so predictable:
https://www.fromrome.info/2022/10/22/pope-benedict-xvis-letter-to-conference-at-stuebenville-oh-usa-oct-21/
Editor’s Note: Letters alleged to be by Pope Benedict XVI by Father Lombardi are not with all certitude to be taken to be authentic. But, I share the news here anyhow, so that readers may judge for themselves. As Frank Walker of Canon 212.com was first to point out, just when Bergoglio needs some help, a communication is claimed to come from Pope Benedict XVI which appears to do that. At the same time, as reported by Andrea Cionci, the Holy Father, Pope Benedict, is kept completely unaware of world events, by those persons who are guarding him.
From my reading of the letter, the wording is more Bergoglian than Ratzeringian. So I entirely doubt the authenticity of the letter, except perhaps the signature. If the letter is authentic, it was either dictated in part or the Holy Father has begun to lose his clarity of thought. And if any one thing would make me side on the opinion that the letter is a complete forgery, which Benedict did not even sign, it is the signature, which lacks the P. P., which he always uses.
-
They'll just claim he didn't really write that letter. Any word from Brother Bugnolo?
Are we really supposed to believe that these Benevacantists have discovered a papal imposter starting in 2013? With every ounce of charity that I can muster I still can not believe that these people are mentally defective. I see their writing; it’s delusional exclusively to time before 2013. When something doesn’t make sense it just may not be quite true. I just don’t believe they are sincere. I think they run interference for the New Order.
-
Are we really supposed to believe that these Benevacantists have discovered a papal imposter starting in 2013? With every ounce of charity that I can muster I still can not believe that these people are mentally defective. I see their writing; it’s delusional exclusively to time before 2013. When something doesn’t make sense it just may not be quite true. I just don’t believe they are sincere. I think they run interference for the New Order.
Well, I happen to believe the whole Rat resignation was to create this very situation.
-
Well, I happen to believe the whole Rat resignation was to create this very situation.
Yeah, I’m with you. These people live and breath scheming and deceiving and being sneaky little sons of guns. I am so disgusted with these scuм of the earth between the New Order hoax and the Plandemic. We made a big huge mistake ever believing we could live and let live. No, the enemy won’t just leave you alone, they will yoke you and make you slaves eating worms if you allow it.
-
You have to marvel at the mental somersaults required for Benevacantists(Ann Barnhardt for example)
to believe that Ratzinger is any different than Bergoglio or JPII.
Passages from his countless books would probably make Bergoglio jealous in terms of how audacious
his heresies were....and apparently remain
Yes, Ratzinger poo-pooed the Resurrection in one of his books in the '60's and again in his more recent book "Jesus of Nazareth".He is just another modernist student of Rahner.
-
Ann needs to wake up.
Ratzinger was major lukewarm. He never spoke up against Bergolio. Did he say anything publicly to denounce pachimama scandal??
No, and why would he? Both he and JPII committed the same, if not worse, acts of apostasy during their "papacies"
-
Vatican II: We knew that the relationship between the Church and the modern period had been slightly fraught, beginning with the Church’s error in the case of Galileo Galilei. We were looking to correct this mistaken start and to rediscover the union between the Church and the best forces of the world, so as to open up humanity’s future, to open up true progress [with Vatican II].
Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation speech, Feb. 11th, 2013.
-
Absurd Original Sin
Having quoted Genesis 3:1-12, 17-19, 23-24; Cardinal Ratzinger continues his homilies to give us a Big Bang understanding ‘On the Subject of Sin.’
‘The account [in Genesis] tells us that sin begets sin, and that therefore all the sins of history are interlinked. Theology refers to this state of affairs by the certainly misleading and imprecise term ‘original sin.’ What does this mean? Nothing seems to us today to be stranger or, indeed, more absurd than to insist upon original sin, since, according to our way of thinking, guilt can only be something very personal and since God does not run a cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρ, in which one’s relatives are imprisoned, because he is a liberating God of love, who calls each one by name. What does original sin mean, then, when we interpret it correctly?.... Sin is a loss of relationship,…therefore it is not restricted to the individual. At the very moment that a person begins human existence, he or she is confronted by a sin damaged world.’ Consequently, each person is, from the very start, damaged in relationships. (p, 72.)
The traditional teaching of Genesis is that Adam and Eve committed the first sin of mankind called the Original Sin, a sin that is directly passed on to all their descendants, that is, the whole human race, the sin that necessitated God become man to die on the cross to open access to heaven once again. But now it undergoes modernisation. Never mentioned in this chapter was the sacrament of Baptism, necessary to rid the soul of Original Sin, and the means to enter heaven. Nor is there any reference to the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception wherein the mother of God was conceived in God’s love and without Original Sin. There followed in this homily, Ratzinger’s version of sin being something to do with the network of human relationships damaged from the beginning.
-
It was necessary to serve the Jews, the Jews of the worldwide communist conspiracy and the Bank of England and the Feral Rezerve Bank, to be subservient to the demands of the diabolical Jews and all that money power they have.
... and to expel Latin. The elimination of Latin has helped that progress. There were the Pater Nosters, Credos, and Ave Marias, and I forget the Glorias and words like benedicere et vobiscuм et ite et missa est. Now they have street talk and V2 talk-shop and fake trips to the Moon and Mars ...
The circle of society has been ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic poisoned from the money from the bank to the collection baskets and Pat Robertson TV. Besides the course of the stars and fate, V2 became "necessary" back then, and it must still be necessary now, of course, or even one could say the necessity has increased.
However, this is an interesting example of Latin that still can be found on the worldwide internets today. Of course, it's not necessary, but rather strictly potential as Aristotle would say, and Zeno of Elea still can't leave his room not for problems of infinity but for fear of the Jews and the Big Bank.
https://www.maranatha.it/MobileEdition/T15-MissaleRomanum1962/varie/ORDINARIO%20DELLA%20MESSA%20(Romano).pdf
As (((Walter Rathenau))) wrote many years ago, little more than 100, "only 300 men, each of whom knows all others, govern the fate of Europe. They select their successors from their own entourage. These men have the means in their hands of putting an end to the form of the State which they find unreasonable."
-
VII was necessary in the same way that Bergoglio was necessary, so that more Catholics would start to realize how bad things really are.
-
Are we really supposed to believe that these Benevacantists have discovered a papal imposter starting in 2013? With every ounce of charity that I can muster I still can not believe that these people are mentally defective. I see their writing; it’s delusional exclusively to time before 2013. When something doesn’t make sense it just may not be quite true. I just don’t believe they are sincere. I think they run interference for the New Order.
Yes, these Trad Inc podcasters who promote this garbage appear to have too much intelligence and knowledge to remain completely ignorant about these blatant heresies.
It appears they are setting Benedict to be the "Bishop in White" in the fake third secret.
-
Which modernist theologian is the Holy Father again?
(https://i.imgur.com/Uave5E3.png)
-
Which modernist theologian is the Holy Father again?
(https://i.imgur.com/Uave5E3.png)
Neither?
-
VII was necessary in the same way that Bergoglio was necessary, so that more Catholics would start to realize how bad things really are.
Agreed. God allowed V2 as a purification. Catholics in the 1940s and 1950s ... except for Father Feeney and his group ... were complacent that all was well, even though Modernisms had been festering among Catholics for decades and (to some extent) for centuries.
-
Agreed. God allowed V2 as a purification. Catholics in the 1940s and 1950s ... except for Father Feeney and his group ... were complacent that all was well, even though Modernisms had been festering among Catholics for decades and (to some extent) for centuries.
So you don’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches on Baptism of Desire and Blood to begin with and think a fraudulent council, mass and claimants to the throne are Her just deserts and maybe now She’ll see it your way? Baptism of Desire and Blood effects you in absolutely no way, assuming you are Baptized with water. If someone happens to sneak into Heaven in this way that you find illegitimate, why don’t you just mind your own business?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/82orKM0.png)
"Benedict XVI" at Revolution Palace in Havana (V2 necessities)
The surrealistic photo above shows Pope Ratzinger at the Palácio de la Revolución, the Palace of the Revolution in Havana, made to boast the Communist victory over Catholicism in Cuba.
He easily could have avoided going to that symbolic place, but he deliberately did so to show his respect for Cuban Communism and its dictator Raul Castro, whom he met there. The sun, in the stainglass window behind them, symbolizes the "light" of Communism spreading over the world ...
https://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A463-RevPalace.htm
(https://i.imgur.com/KX8i7K1.png)
-
Agreed. God allowed V2 as a purification. Catholics in the 1940s and 1950s ... except for Father Feeney and his group ... were complacent that all was well, even though Modernisms had been festering among Catholics for decades and (to some extent) for centuries.
You say that Catholics in the 1940s and 1950s were complacent with modernism. I posit another theory. How do you think that the papacy was able to be taken in 1958 without anyone in power really batting an eyelash. It is because the Church was being infiltrated for years. This is not God allowing V2 as purification of Catholics. The people He would be 'purifying' have no intention on being Catholics and only have intentions on destroying our Church. I don't think Catholics need to trick themselves into believing that we deserve this. It is one thing to acknowledge our faults to learn from them, and another to blame ourselves when an enemy is obviously attacking us.
-
You have to marvel at the mental somersaults required for Benevacantists(Ann Barnhardt for example)
to believe that Ratzinger is any different than Bergoglio or JPII.
Passages from his countless books would probably make Bergoglio jealous in terms of how audacious
his heresies were....and apparently remain
This is true, but I can see how some can be duped into feeling that they are avoiding being in schism by the need to accept anyone dressed in white including Ratzinger.
-
In a departing speech to the parish priests and clergy of Rome by Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) on the occasion of his resignation from the papacy in February of 2013, the retiring pope gave an insight to his part in the Second Vatican Council, and the reasons why the Council was called:
‘For me it is a particular gift of Providence that, before leaving the Petrine ministry, I can once more see my clergy, the clergy of Rome. It is always a great joy to see the living Church, to see how the Church in Rome is alive; there are shepherds here who guide the Lord’s flock in the spirit of the supreme Shepherd. It is a body of clergy that is truly Catholic, universal, in accordance with the essence of the Church of Rome… For today, given the conditions brought on by my age, I have not been able to prepare an extended discourse, as might have been expected; but rather what I have in mind are a few thoughts on the Second Vatican Council, as I saw it... Cardinal [Frings] invited me [Fr Joseph Ratzinger] to go with him to the Council, firstly as his personal advisor; and then, during the first session in November 1962, I was also named an official peritus of the Council. So off we went to the Council not just with joy but with enthusiasm. There was an incredible sense of expectation. We were hoping that all would be renewed, that there would truly be a new Pentecost, a new era of the Church, because the Church was still fairly robust at that time – Sunday Mass [that is the Tridentine Latin Mass] attendance was still good, vocations to the priesthood and to religious life were already slightly reduced, but still sufficient. However, there was a feeling that the Church was not moving forward, that it was declining, that it seemed more a thing of the past and not the herald of the future. And at that moment, we were hoping that this relation would be renewed, that it would change; that the Church might once again be a force for tomorrow and a force for today. And we knew that the relationship between the Church and the modern period, right from the outset, had been slightly fraught, beginning with the Church’s error in the case of Galileo Galilei; we were looking to correct this mistaken start and to rediscover the union between the Church and the best forces of the world, so as to open up humanity’s future, to open up true progress. Thus we were full of hope, full of enthusiasm, and also eager to play our own part in this process.’ (L’Osservatore Romano, Feb 14, 2013, page 4, and Libreria Editrice Vaticana website.)
-
"And we knew that the relationship between the Church and the modern period, right from the outset, had been slightly fraught, beginning with the Church’s error in the case of Galileo Galilei; we were looking to correct this mistaken start and to rediscover the union between the Church and the best forces of the world, so as to open up humanity’s future, to open up true progress. Thus we were full of hope, full of enthusiasm, and also eager to play our own part in this process.’ (L’Osservatore Romano, Feb 14, 2013, page 4, and Libreria Editrice Vaticana website.)
It was bad enough that they ruined the liturgy, architecture, and music but I believe the single
thing that drove MILLIONS away from Catholicism forever was the scale of sɛҳuąƖ abuse of children by the clergy, then the way the hierarchy facilitated it and covered it up.
I don't think there was one novus ordo church in my area that didn't have either a sodomite or kid toucher for a pastor. In fact, during the 80's and 90's a Catholic priest was practically synonymous with child molester.
JPII and Benny share the most guilt for complicity in these crimes against humanity. It was like they were in a competition to see who could promote the most corrupt and perverted bishops and cardinals.
-
"And we knew that the relationship between the Church and the modern period, right from the outset, had been slightly fraught, beginning with the Church’s error in the case of Galileo Galilei; we were looking to correct this mistaken start and to rediscover the union between the Church and the best forces of the world, so as to open up humanity’s future, to open up true progress. Thus we were full of hope, full of enthusiasm, and also eager to play our own part in this process.’ (L’Osservatore Romano, Feb 14, 2013, page 4, and Libreria Editrice Vaticana website.)
It was bad enough that they ruined the liturgy, architecture, and music but I believe the single
thing that drove MILLIONS away from Catholicism forever was the scale of sɛҳuąƖ abuse of children by the clergy, then the way the hierarchy facilitated it and covered it up.
I don't think there was one novus ordo church in my area that didn't have either a sodomite or kid toucher for a pastor. In fact, during the 80's and 90's a Catholic priest was practically synonymous with child molester.
JPII and Benny share the most guilt for complicity in these crimes against humanity. It was like they were in a competition to see who could promote the most corrupt and perverted bishops and cardinals.
Yes, and this one is no mystery as Bella Dodd admitted her efforts on behalf of the Communist Party to place in the ballpark of 1200 sodomites in Catholic seminaries. As those fellas worked their way up the ranks it is entirely possible for them to virtually eliminate any straight males. In the fist place males don’t want to be around them and flee and in the second place they can find any manner of excuse to wash them out. I actually read a book long ago called Goodby Good Men about this very thing. But, it’s funny we have members of this very forum telling us how wonderful the Communists are today because they won’t have any truck with this whole sodomy nonsense. Riiiight. They must have sent them all here I suppose.
-
Rognvald: I agree, even the bible, Chapter 12 of Daniel states the Holy Sacrifice will be gone for 3 and a half years. Christ directed the apostles, Matthew 24, to the prophet Daniel, when you see the abomination desolation. Nothing happens over night, and Pope Leo XIII and Cardinal Manning and others knew what was coming. Pope Pius V, he too knew what was coming.
We must know what the world would be like with out the Precious Blood, I guess. Fr. Faber states the Precious Blood is in all the sacraments. Get it while the getting is still good.
-
You say that Catholics in the 1940s and 1950s were complacent with modernism. I posit another theory. How do you think that the papacy was able to be taken in 1958 without anyone in power really batting an eyelash. It is because the Church was being infiltrated for years. This is not God allowing V2 as purification of Catholics. The people He would be 'purifying' have no intention on being Catholics and only have intentions on destroying our Church. I don't think Catholics need to trick themselves into believing that we deserve this. It is one thing to acknowledge our faults to learn from them, and another to blame ourselves when an enemy is obviously attacking us.
Sure, that's HOW they did it. What I meant with "complacent with Modernism", just take a look at some of the stuff you see being spouted by Catholic bishops and priests in the 1940s and 1950s. It was every bit as Modernist and heretical as what the Novus Ordites think / say / believe today.
But people were like, "churches full, seminaries full, convents full, schools flourishing, lots of conversions, etc." Bishop Sheen said that the projections were before V2 that the US would become a majority Catholic country within a couple decades, given the birth and the conversion rates.
So everybody thought that Cushing and these other Modernist heretics were "what the Church teaches and believes". But God allowed V2 to expose it all. Catholics who remained had to figure out what happened and why.
Bergoglio is yet another shakeup ... another call out to those who remain in the Conciliar Church ... to think through what Catholicism really is by contrast with Bergoglio.