One of her-refugees-from-radicalisms-past sighs that Vatican II was “the 1968 of the Catholic Church.”
Makes you want to say, "Dude, Vatican II ended in 1965." 
Lol. Another favorite claim of those who are 'in the spirit of Vatican II' claim that the hierarchy was abolished. Turns out that the word hierarchy and the variants of it appear 25 times in Lumen Gentium alone. Vatican II never said anything about the wreckavation of our alters! Vatican II didn't condemn Eucharistic Adoration and the rosary. Read Guadium Et spes, it actually admonishes Eucharistic Adoration and the rosary. Nostra Aetate didn't give Jews absolution for the crimes of the crucifixion of Christ, it said that they can't be solely blamed. The ADL of course loves to make connections between Nazism and traditional Church teachings. (more from those who claim to be the authority.)
One of my favorite articles on Vatican II is "Will the Real Vatican II please stand up?" by Peter Stravinskas (appearing in This Rock, July 2003). It's a good place to start when refuting the usual nonsense that comes up when "The Spirit of Vatican II.." is mentioned.
Did I mention that
T + I = H
H + T = A
H = Heresy
A = Apostacy
I = Innovation
Unitatis Redintegratio did not allow 'inter communion'. And nor was the "freedom of conscience" allowed Guadium et spes. (rolling my eyes).
>It’s yet another attempt to drive a wedge between Benedict XVI and John Paul II, along the hoary “nice Wojtyla/nasty Ratzinger” axis of pseudo-analysis.
I reply: Somebody remind me. Wasn't it once Nice John XXIII vs. naughty hyper conservative JP2?
hahahahaha......yeah
"In Crossing the Threshold of Hope, John Paul II stated flatly that 'not only the theology but also the anthropology of Islam is very distant from Christianity.' That’s a far more dramatic statement of the gap between Christianity and Islam than anything Benedict XVI said at Regensburg."
For sure.
"Ms. Kramer really think it a bad thing to challenge irrational forms of faith that command the murder of innocents in the name of God? Is it wrong to suggest that there is danger in the obverse of irrational faith: that trouble is afoot in the West’s loss of faith in reason, which erodes our capacity to defend the universality of human rights and the superiority of the rule of law over the rule of coercion?"
I wonder if it will ever occur to her that a religion that calls for the death of innocents is akin to Nazism.
"Nostra Aetate didn't give Jews absolution for the crimes of the crucifixion of Christ, it said that they can't be solely blamed."
Which Jews are those, Nick, my grandma Molly?
Nick, in your algebra above, what is T? Guessing theology, but just want to be sure I'm guessing right.
Pavel,
I assume Aunt Molly was a human being, right? Sure she's to blame, just like I am.
Pavel,
The Jewish leaders were well aware that the prophecies concerning the Messias were being fulfilled in Christ. And they should have recognized him. But due to their pride and arrogance they were too proud to admit they were wrong. If they did admit they were wrong about Christ, the Jewish leaders were afraid they would loose their credibility in the sight of their people. The Jews in general acted in ignorance. Jesus forgave them saying, "Father forgive them, they know not what they do." The fact of the matter is we are all responsible for the death of Christ. Not just certain people.
"Nick, in your algebra above, what is T? Guessing theology, but just want to be sure I'm guessing right."
Yes, T in my algebra above means theology. That is correct.
Nick
But the Jews have been saddled with a blame for this event that is not really fair. Yes, yes, we are all guilty of the killing Christ everytime we sin, yet that is a markedly different thing then the belief that "the Jews killed Jesus" that sometimes seems to still be lingering about.
NB: I am not accussing you or the Church itself of any of this nonsense. However, there are lots of goof balls out there who take things like St. Thomas (Aquinas) letter (can't recall the title, it was addressed to a noble woman) regarding the treatment of Jews and misinterpret it. (it is really about usury and not Jews) That is what I think Pavel is referring to.
pax
Dale,
You don't go around making controversial statements like that.
BenYachov- Yes, a mere two years ago Pope John Paul II was the bad guy for some within and without the Church.
I remember here locally, when a Catholic health care provider took over a hospital in a nearby small city. Proponents of abortion, birth control, etc. were up in arms of course. There was a meeting involving the health care provider, if I recall correctly was headed by or had a priest high up in its leadership, and at the meeting, one progressive Catholic scolded the priest and the health care provider of the changes that were to come. She angrily stated that changes to the Church would not come until Pope John Paul II and, then, Cardinal Ratzinger were dead.
"The Wojtyla-vs.-Ratzinger business is easily rebutted. In Crossing the Threshold of Hope, John Paul II stated flatly that “not only the theology but also the anthropology of Islam is very distant from Christianity.”"
A columnist in our local paper tried this Wojtyla vs. Ratzinger approach, and I used "In Crossing the Threshold of Hope" to counter some of his claims and perceptions in a letter to the editor. I would have to assume that the columnist never read anything from Pope John Paul except what was covered in the media.
7 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
