VATICAN CITY (AP) - Next up for Pope Benedict XVI: a welcoming nation that wants to get to know him.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Jacquelyn Martin)In preparation for Pope Benedict XVI's upcoming visit to Washington, banners have been hung at the Catholic University of American, which is adjacent to the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, at right, in Washington on Monday April 14, 2008.
Benedict's first trip to the United States as pope begins Tuesday — a five-day visit to Washington and New York, including a speech at the United Nations. Anyone expecting strident speeches from the man once called "God's rottweiler" for his role defending Roman Catholic doctrine will be disappointed.
Benedict will deliver an unwavering message that society needs religious values, but this intellectual pontiff will do it in the most positive way possible. After making relatively little headway in his efforts to re-ignite the faith in Europe, America's roughly 65 million Catholics seem anxious to hear him.
"He has a way of helping us see what the Gospel and what the Catholic faith tradition asks of us that is challenging and not frightening," Washington Archbishop Donald Wuerl, Benedict's host in the first leg of the five-day trip, told The Associated Press.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state, notes that "religion is deeply rooted in American life despite the separation of church and state."
A March poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found nearly three-quarters of U.S. Catholics viewed Benedict positively. Among the U.S. public at large, 52 percent viewed the pope favorably, but about one-third said they didn't know enough about him to answer.
Nearly three years after he assumed the papacy following the death of John Paul II, the pope's trip to America will change that.
"The intention behind my visit ... is to reach out spiritually to all Catholics in the United States," Benedict said in a video greeting to the U.S. ahead of the trip.
Catholic leaders say any perception of Benedict as a mirthless scold is unfair — a hangover from his long tenure as head of the Vatican office that enforces orthodoxy. Bishops and others describe him as a shy, humble man with a keen sense of humor and a love of teaching. Long before he went to the Vatican, Benedict, a theologian, was a university professor.
The Rev. David M. O'Connell, president of the Catholic University of America, noted that John Paul emerged on the world scene at the relatively young age of 58 when he was elected pope. He eventually became a grandfather figure for the church as his pontificate stretched to 26 years.
Benedict was already 78 when he was elected in 2005, and has been perceived as a "wisdom figure" for Catholics from the start, O'Connell said.
"This pope, without in any way trying to be critical of his predecessor, has emphasized Jesus Christ, not the person of the pope, as critically significant," O'Connell said.
"The other pope used his personality to spread the Gospel and the Gospel message, and he did it very effectively. This pope knows he doesn't have a rock star personality and he's using what his greatest gifts are to get the message out there. And his greatest gifts are intellectual and pastoral."
Benedict has struggled against the tide of secularism, but may see the United States — which he visited five times as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — as a chance to gain ground.
In recently receiving the new U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, Harvard law professor Mary Ann Glendon, Benedict welcomed what he called the American people's "historic" appreciation of the role of religion in shaping public policy.
He used the occasion to condemn abortion, euthanasia and gay marriage, praising "the efforts of so many of your fellow citizens and government leaders to ensure legal protection for God's gift of life from conception to natural death." Continue >>
RSS
Online4Him-
He who does not eat the son of god has no life. :P
The ten commandments are our guidelines toward salvation. I would like to point out that the first three of the ten commandments (nine if you are protestant :D) Are about your relationship with God. The last seven are about how you act. So seventy percent of what you do for salvation is about what you DO! Just throwing that out there.
This article “What Divides Catholics and Protestants?” along with “The Pope come to America: Evangelical Thoughts” have brought to the forefront what some of us have been debating here for months. How does one obtain salvation is the real question. Salvation is receiving Jesus Christ period; depending on him alone for our daily spiritual needs. It is not through any church denomination, priest/pastor, or ritual that one becomes saved. It is surrendering to the Holy Spirit and standing on God’s promises by faith.
Simply put, Jesus ALONE saves!
He that HATH the SON hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life – 1John 5:12.
Therefore if any man BE IN CHRIST, he is a NEW CREATURE: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new – 2Corinthians 5:17.
And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that LOVED US, and WASHED us FROM OUR SINS in his own blood, - Revelation 1:5.
Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious PROMISES: that BY THESE ye might be PARTAKERS of the DIVINE NATURE, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust – 2Peter 1:4.
tliml,
If I remember correctly, there were many people chiming in all at once and discussing various topics. I also remembering asking you to repeat your orininal question; so if it took two days later to answeryour question, perhaps it is in the same time frame that you repeated it. Anyways, it was answered; taj never answered my question at all.
Online-
You eventually answered it, however, it took about two days to get it out of you.
tliml,
That is untrue; if there was a continual question that I avoided, it could not be that difficult to remember and ask again.
Online-
Of course I did, I am not an elephant. However, I remember getting extremely aggravated that you could not say yes or no. I would post things like "Online- Give me a 'Yes' or a 'No' nothing else! This isn't really that hard a concept here!"
tliml,
Did you forget the question?
Online-
Because it was in like... two threads ago.
tliml,
That is not true; if it were, why not re-post it?
Online,
Don't you talk about yes or no questions. You dodged one of mine for... like 12 posts.
taj,
Should you really be trying to prove a point after your unwillingness to answer a simple Yes or No question?
online,
how did you justify the teachings of Ellen White, soul sleep, etc. against scripture when you joined the seventh day adventists??
EvanCal,
Who is the one overly concerned with their ego here?
“it does not sound like you have formally studied in seminary,” “Unlike you, I have participated in many ecumenical dialogues with Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelicals, Catholic and Orthodox for twenty years,” “I am a Pastor of a Reformed Christian Church,” and “This year I will be meeting with leaders from the United Methodist Church.”
Really, this is not the place to toot your own horn; am I supposed to be impressed or overwhelmed by these self indulged statements?
Seriously, let’s discuss the real issues here; you stated, “You have reached some very odd conclusions in scripture.”
Care to elaborate on my odd conclusions?
You refer to my scriptural posts as ANTI-Catholic shenanigans; it seems that your real objective is to placate Catholicism by neglecting to proclaim the true gospel of Christ. You seem to be well settled in the ecumenical camp, this explains much; let me guess, are you a member of the liberal WCC?
Irenaeus,
On Mary:
“Do you not see the Biblical basis for this?”
No. There are many text that specifically discuss the title of “Queen Heaven” and all of them portray this title in a negative manner, see - Jeremiah 7:18, 44:17, 18, 19, 25.
Truly, all generations should call her blessed, as a great example of faith and obedience but applying anything more than what the scriptures say is inappropriate. For example, the Immaculate Conception, her perpetual virginity, bodily assumption, etc. are all unbiblical.
Irenaeus,
Why were Timothy and Titus obliged to be faithful Paul's teaching? How did they know that Paul's teaching was true? Why did Paul even find it necessary to appoint Timothy and Titus as bishops if they had no more authority than the average pew-sitter?
Timothy was Paul’s chief associate in the ministry and was called by Paul a “beloved and faithful son in the Lord” – 1Corinthians 4:17. Paul trusted Timothy to proclaim his teachings, and what were his teachings? We do not have to guess here, both Timothy and Titus’ epistles can be read today by simply opening up one’s bible. Paul declares what teaching Timothy should proclaim, it was the Word of God –
I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry. For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand – 2Timothy 4:1-6.
Bishop/Elders naturally emerged in the church through the process of time. They were not appointed to an external office. Instead, they were recognized by virtue of their seniority and spiritual service to the church. According to the New Testament, recognition of certain gifted members is something that was instinctive. Three passages in the New Testament tell us that elders were publically recognized. Elders were acknowledged in churches in Galatia (Acts 14:23). Paul had Timothy acknowledged elders in Ephesus (1Timothy 3:1). He also told Titus to recognize them in the churches in Crete (Titus 1:5). The word “ordain” in these passages does not mean to place into office. It rather carries the idea of endorsing, affirming, and showing forth what has already been happening.
We have already exhaustively discussed this topic in the article – “The ‘Roman’ in Roman Catholic” – see for reference; I agree that we should stick to one topic at a time, so let’s move forward to discuss Mary as Queen of Heaven.
O4H,
"On Mary:
Sorry, I cannot accept Catholicism’s Mary as being – 'Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.' "
Again, like we did on the topic of apostolic succession, let's narrow the focus. I asked that we simply start with the queenship of Mary. Do you not see the Biblical basis for this?
O4H,
"In Sum, although Timothy and Titus were certainly ministers appointed by an inspired apostle, and though we might loosely refer to them as “successors” to Paul, it is more than abundantly demonstrated that their authority over their respective churches was derived from their faithfulness to Paul’s teachings."
Why were Timothy and Titus obliged to be faithful Paul's teaching? How did they know that Paul's teaching was true? Why did Paul even find it necessary to appoint Timothy and Titus as bishops if they had no more authority than the average pew-sitter?
Pimp My Religious Leader
http://poleblog.polemos.net/2008/04/pimp-my-religious-leader.html
A benefit to being agnostic is one does not get caught up in the silly religious squabbles that I see on these posts about whose religious views are correct. Its interesting though to sit back and read the various biased views that are held.
Irenaeus,
On Mary:
Sorry, I cannot accept Catholicism’s Mary as being – “Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; - 1Timothy 2:5.
Irenaeus,
Does that preclude the apostles or their first delegates (bishops and presbyters) from having ‘authoritative preeminence’ over other believers?
Surely, we both have discussed this at length already –
In Sum, although Timothy and Titus were certainly ministers appointed by an inspired apostle, and though we might loosely refer to them as “successors” to Paul, it is more than abundantly demonstrated that their authority over their respective churches was derived from their faithfulness to Paul’s teachings. In no way did their authority stand alone, as something inherent in their “office”. Paul’s express command was that the teachings – not the office – had been entrusted to them by him himself and were to be passed on to other faithful men. In the following passage; Paul does not seem to be passing on an office:
I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry. For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand – 2Timothy 4:1-6.
taj,
I am sure that evancal appreciates your comment but he can speak for himself. You state that your church is the only true church and then call me arrogant, how ironic.
Taj,
It seems that our feelings are mutual; you feel that I am attacking or taunting you by merely highlighting what Catholicism teaches and questioning whether those teachings are really supported by scripture. Now if you feel that is an attack, well, I can’t help that. You can testify here that I have openly apologized to you when you felt otherwise. The 50, 000 + claims are irrelevant; as if any church affiliation can actually save someone. The real issue is this; do we know Jesus Christ for ourselves.
At the same time, Catholics declare that their church is the only true church and their official position anathematizes those who to trust Christ alone for their salvation, well, not only do I disagree with that from a biblical position but it is also a direct attack upon Protestant Christians. Now, I do not believe that Catholicism will retreat from these teachings but know that many Protestants will not retreat from proclaiming salvation through Christ alone. Hence the debates continue.
At any rate, these debates will definitely help us all to become more acquainted with the issues and help us all become better apologists.
Online,
I just read your response to Evan cal, do you even realize anymore how condescending you are to people? What does it matter if the person in a newcomer? the person is respectfully making a comment. "Perhaps you should have taken this into consideration before speaking presumptuously!" You are so unbelievably arrogant at times.
"Hopefully, you do not believe in a false dichotomy between the clergy and the laity". Wow the old bait and switch technique you use a million times. Get the person defending a position they never held in the first place. "You speak of your position (pastor) as if you have preeminence over other believers"...I didn't get that and he also mentioned he has theological differences with Catholic teachings, but he did it in a way you never do....respectfully. Then you ended your comments by once again putting yourself on your little comment throne with the thumbs up you probably give yourself and point out differences you have with the Catholic Church. Personally I don't mind defending Church teachings because you have encouraged me to read things I probably wouldn't have previously read...so thank you online even if you are incredibly arrogant at times.
O4H,
“You speak of your position (pastor) as if you have preeminence over other believers; I pray that is not the case. Surely, you believe in the priesthood of all believers, right? Hopefully, you do not believe in a false dichotomy between the clergy and the laity.”
That does not necessarily preclude one from having legitimate authority above another. Surely, you believe in the priesthood of all believers, right? Does that preclude the apostles or their first delegates (bishops and presbyters) from having ‘authoritative preeminence’ over other believers?
“The Catholic view of Mary is radically different from how scripture defines her; according to the Catholic Catechism, she is described as –“Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things. . .” pg. 252, (966).”
Let's first address the queenship of Mary. Mary’s title of queen is very biblical and very Jewish. Many Protestants fail to recognize this fact. Mary is queen by virtue of her Son being the king. Why? In the Davidic kingdom, the mother of the king was always the queen (or queen-mother), not the wife of the king as in medieval times in feudal England or Spain. In fact, the queen in the Davidic kingdom had a prominent place in the throne room – the king’s right hand (e.g., I Kgs. 2:19ff). There are numerous references in the OT with regard to the office and honor of the queen-mother.
So, hailing Mary as queen is biblical. In fact, the greeting ‘Hail’ is typical of a greeting made towards someone of significant status, such as royalty. The same Greek word is used when hailing Caesar, or used in the phrase, “Hail, King of the Jews.” So the angel Gabriel was hailing the young Jewess out of honor and veneration because God had chosen her… the only time that I know of in scripture where an angel honors a human being (it’s usually the other way around). Mary is not to be adored (worshiped), for she is a mere creature. She is honored, however, above every other created being by virtue of her privilege. Think about it, God bestowed the highest honor upon her by choosing her to be the mother of His Son. No other woman would ever have this honor. I couldn’t possibly give more honor to Mary than God already has.
EvanCal,
I appreciate your concerns; however, the Catholics on this board and I have been debating these issues off and on for months, though I would not expect you to understand since you may be a new comer here on the CP. Perhaps you should have taken this into consideration before speaking presumptuously!
Everyone here is at liberty to speak what is on their heart; however, you are defending an institution that anathematizes all those who have placed their trust in Christ alone - that would include you by the way. I do not know you personally, so I cannot assume to know your motives here but I do know that the simplicity of the gospel cannot be compromised. Today it seems like some Christians are more concerned about placating others when they should be proclaiming the gospel unashamedly.
You speak of your position (pastor) as if you have preeminence over other believers; I pray that is not the case. Surely, you believe in the priesthood of all believers, right? Hopefully, you do not believe in a false dichotomy between the clergy and the laity.
The Catholic view of Mary is radically different from how scripture defines her; according to the Catholic Catechism, she is described as –“Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things. . .” pg. 252, (966).
It also states, “Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. . .therefore the Blessed Virgin in invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.” – pg. 252, (969).
If you think me unloving for frankly highlighting unbiblical dogmas, what do you think of all the anathemas that Rome declares and their claim to be the only true church? There is a need for us all to be more loving but true Christian love will never negate biblical truth.
TAJ-
You are forgetting one thing, the people who attacked the Spartans actually AGREED on one or two things!
Dear Mr. Online person,
Shame on you! You are not a Pastor and it does not sound like you have formally studied in seminary and yet you throw open your Bible and reach some very odd conclusions in Scripture.
I may also disagree with Catholics on some doctrines, but I also disagree with Baptists on their doctrine of Baptism and I also have an issue with Pentacostals and their doctrine on having to speak in tongues to be saved. I may disagree with them, but as a Reformed Pastor I accept them as my brothers and sisters in Christ because none of these Churches deny Christ as Lord and Savior.
Unlike you, I have participated in many ecumenical dialogues with Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelicals, Catholic and Orthodox for twenty years. This year I will be meeting with leaders from the United Methodist Church. You, online, do not represent the majority of Protestants. You are a poor ambassador of the Biblical faith because you lack love in your heart. Your witness would never bring me into your church. Only a witness of love guided by the Truths of the Bible would make any impact.
Please stop your ANTI-Catholic shenanigans. I accept them as my Christian brothers and sisters and there are many more millions in the Protestant Church today who agree with me and we will continue to work with Catholics so that someday in the future we will be one as we were in the beginning.
Well, we can see from this post that the divide between Catholics and Protestants is still alive and well. Maybe this will help.
Not too long ago I was being fairly critical upon other church methods of worship. And, as we can see, I wasn't the only one. Then God spoke to me and said "Some people worship this way, and some that way. It's not necessarily how they worship, but why".
Beloved, after hearing from God, I needed to ask myself some questions:
Why am I going to church? Am I truly wanting to be by His side, or am I just trying to avoid Hell by performing a weekly ritual?
When I go to church, do I sing songs about God, or do I sing songs to God?
When I go to church, does the Holy Spirit abide there, or is He just an academic part of history?
----------------------
Beloved, in the end, it doesn't necessarily matter how one worships, but why. We all need to ask ourselves these questions, both Protestant and Catholic. It's not about the church, it never has been. It's all about Him, and will always be.
Someone once said "If God were into conformity, they why did He make no two snowflakes alike"? I agree.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Online for helping us to be better apologists about our faith. The great saints and martyrs of the Church were the ones who had to constantly defend their faith - that is what Online is calling for us to do. His taunts merely cause us to defend more ardently. The people who come on these boards come from one of the 50,000 + different protestant denominations and they come here to attack our faith. Like the Spartans of ancient times let's defend our faith as vigilant as we can using words as our defense. As this article states: "I was struck, the Holy Father just seemed very much energized,". Online helps to energize me in my faith, so thanks online and keep those attacks coming
tliml,
Great, perhaps now that you found it, it would be a good idea to read it.
Online-
Thank you for making yourself chief of my affairs. Yes I have found your bible. Have you found your Klan hood yet?
Blue:
It is true, you are wrong. Happy? Now as for your Golden Throne... I wish you could see the multi-millionaires of the Protestant religion. (The pope may have a golden throne, but he does not get paid and he actually lives a fairly simple life) The Pope has his house, food, and living expenses covered by the church. Your Protestant church catalysts are so wealthy it is not even funny... as for contraception... it is wrong... oh... my... god...
HA! Look at that... two people gave my previous comment a thumbs up. It's ok guys, if my comment has nothing to do with the argument, I would rather not be like a Protestant and give it thumbs up just because it is posted by someone of my own religion. Let's not sink to "heathan" level here.
Once i heard this mr. benedict practically declare war against contraception and criticize non-catholic churches as not real churches, i thought... how does this man think he can get to know america...go back to your golden throne
taj,
Instead of focusing on where I have been; why not support your dogmas from scripture? The “claims” that you make regarding your faith cannot be supported by them. You have a difficult time with answering a simple – Yes or No question; should you really be trying to prove a point?
Online,
Do you want to know what is hilarious about your continual condemnation of purgatory? It's the fact that when you left Catholicism you went to the Seventh Day Adventists and their "soul sleep"..."you sure demonstrated that from scripture".
msn,
It is funny how you accuse me of taking things out of context when you twist and distort scripture to support dogmas foreign to the first century church; for example, Purgatory, uh, yeah, you sure demonstrated that from scripture.
It is funny how you try to equate Catholicism with that of the early biblical Christianity; Catholicism began to take shape during Constantine’s reign and eventually engulfed Europe with its arrogant claims; you continue to elevate dogmas that neither Jesus nor the apostles taught. Hmmm. . . Who is the one taking things beyond that which is written?
Trying to support the papacy from Isaiah 22 is disingenuous to say the least and Matthew 16:18 speaks of Peter’s “declaration that Jesus was the Christ”, this revelation is what Christ built his Church upon (himself). It is “CHRIST” which the church is built upon not Peter.
dgnymn, you say "The Gospel is NOT Catholicism!!!! NOT ONE BIT!!!!" Have you ever read The Didache (the teachings of the Apostles) written while the Apostles were still alive? You're going to find the word Eucharist in there...
Have you ever read Ignatius of Antioch, who in 110 A.D. writes the name of the early Christian Church, known as "Catholic?"
My friend in Christ, the real question is if, like modern-day unknowing Pauls, you found out that the Church you've been persecuting is the one that Jesus founded. Would you come home for one reason and one reason only? Because for Catholics, it's all about Jesus. We're Catholic because we're Christian. We know our Shepherd and we hear His voice. We know the house built on Rock, unmoved by 2,000 years of human stupidity by those within its ranks, myself included.
My friend in Christ, come home.
dgnymn,
"What...the presumption that he is the successor to Peter; that Mary is the Queen of Heaven; that we should pray to the saints: that we should give indulgences: that we should do the Mass and the Eucharist????"
Well said!
ONline,
Does everyone on this board have to use this board to educate you on the WHOLE BIBLE. You take bits and pieces out of context. Prime Minister is absolutely Biblical! Did you ever read the Old Testament??? Isaiah 22 is a prefigurement of Matt 16:18, notice Eliakim getting the keys to open and shut for the Kingdom of David and then in Matt Jesus give the Keys to Peter to bind and lose. You see Isaiah 22 reveals a new dynastic office of Prime Minister to the King from the House of David. David was the King and Eliakim was made Chief Minister with these Keys. But who is the KING OF KINGS? Jesus!! So when Jesus talks to Peter it isn't about earthly royal kingdom like David's it is about being in charge of God's people on earth.
When I say read the early church fathers, I tell you to read them because they were discussing the Scripture versus longer than there have been Protestants. We Catholics just think context is important and that gaining wisdom from those who were taught by the Apostles seem a far greater guide than from someone who just opened up their Bible and told the rest of us how the Holy Spirit guides you.
The Gospel is NOT Catholicism!!!! NOT ONE BIT!!!! Have we forgotten the truths of the Reformation and what those great saints had to suffer due to the Papacy and all the Popish claims to sovereign rule in the world??!!?? Give me a break!!! Benedict should stay in Rome, because I do not care to know what he knows!!! What...the presumption that he is the successor to Peter; that Mary is the Queen of Heaven; that we should pray to the saints: that we should give indulgences: that we should do the Mass and the Eucharist???? C'mon, folks...this is one of the primary false cults in the world today!!! We have forgotten because we have forgotten our history!!!
REPENT, FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS AT HAND!!!!
Taj,
It is funny that you would ask me a question when you failed to answer mine with a simple YES or NO. Msn had to speak in your behalf and bail you out; at least he was honest enough to declare what he truly believes. Dancing around a simple YES or NO question was interesting; have you finally translated that tough English sentence yet?
tliml,
One question; have you finally found your bible yet?
msn,
“Where you and I agree and differ is that Jesus IS the Spiritual Head of the Church and the Pope is not, the Pope is simply the prime minister.”
You are right when you say, we differ on the pope being prime minister; where is that in the scriptures? Jesus specifically said the Holy Spirit would come in his name to lead, teach, and guide – John 14:26 & John 16:13.
I have studied enough church history to realize that Rome as long since abandoned the true gospel of Jesus Christ and has usurped an authority that is not hers to begin with. You council me to read the early Christian writings but at the same time you neglect the clear teachings of scripture to keep the man made traditions of Rome. You failed to support Purgatory from the scriptures and I am not expecting you to do anything less with all the other dogmas.
msnchris,
Something you might not be aware of is that a Jesuit can NEVER become Pope. It has never happened and it will never happen because the Jesuits have taken a pledge not to become Pope. However, msnchris you are right about their liberal ways and it hasn't escaped our pope. Pope Benedict XVI has publicly reminded members of the Jesuit religious of their vow of obedience to the pontiff and said their main job was to interact with modern culture. The Vatican has had a sometimes tense relationship with the Jesuits.
In a highly publicized incident, Pope John Paul II named a temporary replacement to lead the order after Rev. Pedro Arrupe suffered a crippling stroke in 1981, brushing aside Arrupe's choice for an interim leader in an unprecedented change-of-command.
You are right there are liberal elements in the Church who want to destroy the strong moral leadership of the Church that is why we have to pray for our spiritual leaders and especially our papa, who as you pointed out is our president/prime minister and not our Lord and Savior. Seriously Online how long were you a Catholic to get the two confused??
Oh... look... our church leaders discussing moral values... What do your church leaders discuss? I believe it has something to do with whether they hang the black man that they captured with a long rope or a short rope. It is kind of funny to imagine thought... (Deep Narrator Voice) "The pope... has arrived... he will be addressing moral values... but first he is having a birthday lunch with his buddies."
Yes... I took my time to read every page of Catholicism for Dummies. It is quite a well-written book, it has a Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur so anything in it about Church Doctrine goes... That means you wilderness ;)
By the way... I am going to keep hammering you with "Peter Stories" until you at LEAST admit that he had supremecy over the other apostles. "I give you the keys to heaven" "THOU ART PETER, and upon this rock I built my church." JESUS WAS TALKING TO PETER, NOT HIMSELF! If you pretend that he was saying "Oh yea, guess what, you ARE Peter, and I am building this church upon myself" you are a blind fool! PERIOD! Let's also see... In Acts, Peter and... jeese forget who else... were preaching Jesus' word. The guards captured them and brought them before the Sanhedrin. The bible says "Peter answered, because he was full of the Holy Spirit" mhm... When the apostles were visited by the Spirit... the wording is different... check it out. So... since the wording is different for PETER and nobody else... he obviously has supremecy over the others... COMMON!