Topic: The Pope to resign?!?! / Pope Benedict XVI resigns / Pope set to resign on Feb. 28th

[Peter J]

Just to add, a bishop who never wanted the promotion in the first place not wanting to cling to it when he is no longer up to it.

I look at the resignation as complimentary to the refusal of his predecessor (who considered it).  The one affirmed that when one became a shell of a former self, he remains a self and not refuse for gabbage disposal (like the fans of euthanasia would have it), the other affirmed that one does not have to cling to a role to remain a self.

And complementary.

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran. 
As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).  You guys have a knack for putting up scaffolding of false timber, and then leaving the facade it has erected up once the timber has rotted enough that even you guys have to take it down.

[podkarpatska]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Ratzinger´s books?

What significance does it have to what has been taught about the Papacy over the last Millennium?

How about he is one of the great academic scholars of the Patristic era of the 20th century,a keen student of liturgy and he possessed the broadest knowledge of, and appreciation for, Orthodox teachings and spirituality of any Pope in say , the past thousand years or so for starters.

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

[J Michael]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Now boys...play nice, or I'm gonna have to send you both to your rooms.  .

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Haven't we already dealt with this?

But take Pastor Aeternus, laying aside the tautology that it is infallible because it says he speaks infallibly: as Fr. Ambrose has actually posted, the Anglo-Irish Catechism of 1870, with its imprematur, states that "infallibility is a Protestant lie" claiming that it was a caricuture and slur that Protestants made against the papacy.

Because of my Irish background Keenan's Catechism fascinates me.

Keenan's Catechism was used throughout England and Ireland and parts of the United States.  It used to be published n the UK by Burnes and Oates, the UK publishers to the Holy See.

The Irish and the English were taught to explicitly deny papal infallibility.

This Anglo-Irish Catechism contained the following question:

.......... (Q) Must not Catholics believe the Pope in himself to be infallible?
.......... (A) This is a Protestant invention: it is no article of the Catholic faith.

Every little Catholic boy and girl learnt this by heart. The Pope is not infallible.
--------------------------------

In 1826, in the time of Pope Leo XII, the Bishops of Ireland wrote to the faithful Catholics of Ireland a "Declaration of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland" :

"The Catholics of Ireland declare their belief that it is not an article of the Catholic faith, neither are they required to believe, that the Pope is infallible."

Of course 40 years later in 1870 when the Pope was declared infallible, the poor Irish bishops, probably now in some sort of material heresy, had to hastily backtrack and try to forget that they had ever taught their people that he was not.


They were also obliged to change Keenan's Catechism and its teaching. What was Catholic teaching in 1869 had become heresy in 1870.

After Vatican I and 1870, the question was omitted from the Catechism, but 26 years later in 1896, the following was added:

.......... "Q: Is the Pope infallible?
.......... A: Yes, the Pope is infallible.

.......... Q: But some Catholics, before the Vatican Council, denied the infallibility of the Pope, which was impugned by this very Catechism.
.......... A: Yes, they did so under the usual reservation, insofar as they then could grasp the mind of the Church, and subject to her future definitions, thus implicitly accepting the dogma."

Does anybody other than me have to smile at the logic of that last answer?  Declaring that the Pope is not infallible is an implicit assertion that he is!  


God bless,
Fr Ambrose  o..o~

I thought so.

[Peter J]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Haven't we already dealt with this?

No, you just made a Lutheran assertion that has no foundation in the real of experience of real Catholics.

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

well done!

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Now boys...play nice, or I'm gonna have to send you both to your rooms.  .

You doing that with the cardinals?

[Papist]

I should just change my signature to "Ialmisry is a Lutheran." <note to moderators, not really going to do this>

[Papist]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Now boys...play nice, or I'm gonna have to send you both to your rooms.  .

You doing that with the cardinals?

For some reason the picture is blocked. Is it something Lutheran?

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Haven't we already dealt with this?

No, you just made a Lutheran assertion that has no foundation in the real of experience of real Catholics.

We are the real Catholics.  As for Keenan, he was one of yours.

Because of my Irish background Keenan's Catechism fascinates me.

Keenan's Catechism was used throughout England and Ireland and parts of the United States.  It used to be published n the UK by Burnes and Oates, the UK publishers to the Holy See.

The Irish and the English were taught to explicitly deny papal infallibility.

This Anglo-Irish Catechism contained the following question:

.......... (Q) Must not Catholics believe the Pope in himself to be infallible?
.......... (A) This is a Protestant invention: it is no article of the Catholic faith.

Every little Catholic boy and girl learnt this by heart. The Pope is not infallible...

....In 1826, in the time of Pope Leo XII, the Bishops of Ireland wrote to the faithful Catholics of Ireland a "Declaration of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland" :

"The Catholics of Ireland declare their belief that it is not an article of the Catholic faith, neither are they required to believe, that the Pope is infallible."

Of course 40 years later in 1870 when the Pope was declared infallible, the poor Irish bishops, probably now in some sort of material heresy, had to hastily backtrack and try to forget that they had ever taught their people that he was not.


They were also obliged to change Keenan's Catechism and its teaching. What was Catholic teaching in 1869 had become heresy in 1870.

After Vatican I and 1870, the question was omitted from the Catechism, but 26 years later in 1896, the following was added:

.......... "Q: Is the Pope infallible?
.......... A: Yes, the Pope is infallible.

.......... Q: But some Catholics, before the Vatican Council, denied the infallibility of the Pope, which was impugned by this very Catechism.
.......... A: Yes, they did so under the usual reservation, insofar as they then could grasp the mind of the Church, and subject to her future definitions, thus implicitly accepting the dogma."

Revisionism is very much the "foundation in the real of experience of real" followers of the Vatican.

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Now boys...play nice, or I'm gonna have to send you both to your rooms.  .

You doing that with the cardinals?

For some reason the picture is blocked. Is it something Lutheran?

Ask a Lutheran.

[dzheremi]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

Hey, that's my favorite, too! Or at least it is much more tolerable than its competitors, You never understood Catholicism properly or else you would have never left and No, me calling you "invincibly ignorant" is actually my way of being nice and letting you off the hook for making a decision that you feel is not something you need to apologize for or explain in the first place, and in no way is this a paternalistic, crappy attitude on my part -- I'm actually doing it with love; you can tell, because I'm calling you "brother" the whole time

[ialmisry]

I should just change my signature to "Ialmisry is a Lutheran." <note to moderators, not really going to do this>

I didn't know that you were Lutheran.

[J Michael]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers): so you want us all to believe you posts over our "lying" eyes and ears?

As for the Malachy prophecy, we already knew it was forgery.

Like the Donation of Constance and other false Decretals (a category to which Pastor Aeternus belongs).

Oh silly willy squishty wishy Izzy, I have never met anyone in my entire life who worships the Pope. You silly silly Lutheran goose. You Lutherans make this up to validate your protestantism. <hugs>

edited for hugs

Now boys...play nice, or I'm gonna have to send you both to your rooms.  .

You doing that with the cardinals?

What, now you're a cardinal, too?  

[Papist]

I should just change my signature to "Ialmisry is a Lutheran." <note to moderators, not really going to do this>

I didn't know that you were Lutheran.

blah blah blah, I hate Catholics, blah blah blah, Map, Map, Map, blah blah blah
I'm a Lutheran.

Unfortunate

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

I prefer the field of research cognitive dissonance in the followers of the Vatican, and their liminal presentation of their beliefs and the employment of plausible deniability.

I don't have to depend on your "literary genre."  I went to your schools, so I know what is taught in the Vatican's name, by those authorized to teach.

I listen to what the "apostolates" of the Vatican have to say.

I have plenty of relatives, friends and acquaintances in submission to the Vatican to observe.

I can read.  And your "magisterium" has put out plenty.

Of course, there are plenty of those who used to be in submission to the Vatican who therefor don't need to be told that it is wrong, and because of their own "lying eyes", also have no need of your "favorite literary genre."

[biro]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

Hey, that's my favorite, too! Or at least it is much more tolerable than its competitors, You never understood Catholicism properly or else you would have never left and No, me calling you "invincibly ignorant" is actually my way of being nice and letting you off the hook for making a decision that you feel is not something you need to apologize for or explain in the first place, and in no way is this a paternalistic, crappy attitude on my part -- I'm actually doing it with love; you can tell, because I'm calling you "brother" the whole time

You mean, just like the way you talk about Roman Catholics all the time?

[Papist]

Of course, there are plenty of those who used to be in submission to the Vatican who therefor don't need to be told that it is wrong, and because of their own "lying eyes", also have no need of your "favorite literary genre."

Are they Missouri Synod like you?

[ialmisry]

I should just change my signature to "Ialmisry is a Lutheran." <note to moderators, not really going to do this>

I didn't know that you were Lutheran.

blah blah blah, I hate Catholics, blah blah blah, Map, Map, Map, blah blah blah
I'm a Lutheran.

Unfortunate

That you are Lutheran?  Well, you can change that.

Facts are stubborn things.  A shame some people can't face them, and have to resort to name calling.

btw, here's my Church. The building used to be Lutheran

The Church is Orthodox (from the webpage):

All Saints’ Church in Chicago is a parish of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, an autonomous missionary jurisdiction of the ancient Patriarchate of Antioch. The bishops of our Archdiocese receive their authority and ministry from the current Patriarch of Antioch, Ignatius IV.

The Orthodox congregation at Antioch, in a continuous, unbroken succession going back to the Apostles themselves, has preserved, maintained, and—when pushed to it by the enemies of Christ—died for the apostolic faith once committed to the saints. We know that “the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch” (Acts 11:26). Among the early Christians who resided and/or ministered in that congregation, history records the names of Peter, Paul, Barnabas, Luke, Silas, and Ignatius I, the second bishop of that city, who died as a martyr in Rome in the year 107.

When the Muslim Turks captured the city of Antioch, the executive offices of the Patriarchate of Antioch was moved to Damascus, the civil capital of Syria, where they remain to this day “on the street called Straight.” (Acts 9:11).

http://www.allsaintsorthodox.org/about_us.php
Here's my son (as St. Patrick, a great Orthodox saint) inside:

[Papist]

I should just change my signature to "Ialmisry is a Lutheran." <note to moderators, not really going to do this>

I didn't know that you were Lutheran.

blah blah blah, I hate Catholics, blah blah blah, Map, Map, Map, blah blah blah
I'm a Lutheran.

Unfortunate

That you are Lutheran?  Well, you can change that.

Facts are stubborn things.  A shame some people can't face them, and have to resort to name calling.

btw, here's my Church. The building used to be Lutheran

The Church is Orthodox (from the webpage):

All Saints’ Church in Chicago is a parish of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, an autonomous missionary jurisdiction of the ancient Patriarchate of Antioch. The bishops of our Archdiocese receive their authority and ministry from the current Patriarch of Antioch, Ignatius IV.

The Orthodox congregation at Antioch, in a continuous, unbroken succession going back to the Apostles themselves, has preserved, maintained, and—when pushed to it by the enemies of Christ—died for the apostolic faith once committed to the saints. We know that “the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch” (Acts 11:26). Among the early Christians who resided and/or ministered in that congregation, history records the names of Peter, Paul, Barnabas, Luke, Silas, and Ignatius I, the second bishop of that city, who died as a martyr in Rome in the year 107.

When the Muslim Turks captured the city of Antioch, the executive offices of the Patriarchate of Antioch was moved to Damascus, the civil capital of Syria, where they remain to this day “on the street called Straight.” (Acts 9:11).

http://www.allsaintsorthodox.org/about_us.php
Here's my son (as St. Patrick, a great Orthodox saint) inside:

Haha, Well, it was nice of the Orthodox priest to let a family of Lutherans participate like this. My only fear is that the Orthodox priest will get in trouble with his bishop for all that evil ecumenism.

[ialmisry]

Of course, there are plenty of those who used to be in submission to the Vatican who therefor don't need to be told that it is wrong, and because of their own "lying eyes", also have no need of your "favorite literary genre."

Are they Missouri Synod like me?

We're in the Antiochian Diocese of Toledo and the Midwest.

[Papist]

Of course, there are plenty of those who used to be in submission to the Vatican who therefor don't need to be told that it is wrong, and because of their own "lying eyes", also have no need of your "favorite literary genre."

Are they Missouri Synod like me?

We're in the Antiochian Diocese of Toledo and the Midwest.

I'm not as well acquianted with Lutherans as you are. I didn't know that there were "Antiochian Lutherans."

[PeterTheAleut]

Papist and Ialmisry (and everyone else involved), knock off this personal back-and-forth about who's a Lutheran and get this thread back on topic.

[ialmisry]

I should just change my signature to "Ialmisry is a Lutheran." <note to moderators, not really going to do this>

I didn't know that you were Lutheran.

blah blah blah, I hate Catholics, blah blah blah, Map, Map, Map, blah blah blah
I'm a Lutheran.

Unfortunate

That you are Lutheran?  Well, you can change that.

Facts are stubborn things.  A shame some people can't face them, and have to resort to name calling.

btw, here's my Church. The building used to be Lutheran

The Church is Orthodox (from the webpage):

All Saints’ Church in Chicago is a parish of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, an autonomous missionary jurisdiction of the ancient Patriarchate of Antioch. The bishops of our Archdiocese receive their authority and ministry from the current Patriarch of Antioch, Ignatius IV.

The Orthodox congregation at Antioch, in a continuous, unbroken succession going back to the Apostles themselves, has preserved, maintained, and—when pushed to it by the enemies of Christ—died for the apostolic faith once committed to the saints. We know that “the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch” (Acts 11:26). Among the early Christians who resided and/or ministered in that congregation, history records the names of Peter, Paul, Barnabas, Luke, Silas, and Ignatius I, the second bishop of that city, who died as a martyr in Rome in the year 107.

When the Muslim Turks captured the city of Antioch, the executive offices of the Patriarchate of Antioch was moved to Damascus, the civil capital of Syria, where they remain to this day “on the street called Straight.” (Acts 9:11).

http://www.allsaintsorthodox.org/about_us.php
Here's my son (as St. Patrick, a great Orthodox saint) inside:

Haha, Well, it was nice of the Orthodox priest to let a family of Lutherans participate like this. My only fear is that the Orthodox priest will get in trouble with his bishop for all that evil ecumenism.

No, our priest won't commune followers of the Vatican, although he went to school there, Pontifical Institutes and all, and although he, like I, was a member of the Cardinal Ratzinger fan club from way back.


We might say a prayer for the upcoming conclave, but we/he won't commemorate their choice in the DL.

I know we have some former Lutherans, but we have some of your fellow Lutherans at present?

Btw, someone brought up an interesting issue: since all the "sui juris" ecclesial communities have to request communion from their supreme pontiff, do they have to reapply with the new supreme pontiff?  Since all, except the Latin sui juris, have to have their primate confirmed by the supreme pontiff, what do they do if the conclave drags on?  We recently had a spade of turn over at the top in the Orthodox Church: what if this happened with the "sui juris" and the conclave didn't settle on a supreme pontiff for a year or so (it has happened before)?  Where would that leave their "Eastern Catholics" and their communion?

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Ratzinger´s books?

What significance does it have to what has been taught about the Papacy over the last Millennium?

How about he is one of the great academic scholars of the Patristic era of the 20th century,a keen student of liturgy and he possessed the broadest knowledge of, and appreciation for, Orthodox teachings and spirituality of any Pope in say , the past thousand years or so for starters.

he was better as Cardinal Ratzinger. As Pope Benedict XVI he botched the whole Patriarchate of the West thing.

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

Hey, that's my favorite, too! Or at least it is much more tolerable than its competitors, You never understood Catholicism properly or else you would have never left and No, me calling you "invincibly ignorant" is actually my way of being nice and letting you off the hook for making a decision that you feel is not something you need to apologize for or explain in the first place, and in no way is this a paternalistic, crappy attitude on my part -- I'm actually doing it with love; you can tell, because I'm calling you "brother" the whole time

well done!

[dzheremi]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

That said, there is something foreboding and creepy about this resignation. It doesn't sit well with me.

A few loose and cryptic thoughts. Cheers.

Eh, Father??  "...a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight."?  Not quite sure what you mean.  

His resignation doesn't need to sit well with you.  I think any creepiness and foreboding is you perhaps reading into it something that probably just isn't there.

Agreed. I'm sad to see His Holiness, go. He was an scholarly, kind, and gentle man. But I have no feelings of "creepiness." Sometimes I think that non-Catholics endow the Papacy with more mistique than do Catholics.

Not more than it has. As for the followers of the Vatican, some have less mistique for the office than we do.  Others engage in outright idolatry.

Speaking of which, if the next one to take the office doesn't take or have the name Peter, we can put the Malachy prophecy in the same file with the Mayans.

Oh Isa, you are such a silly willy boy. I don't know anyone who worships the Pope, ya Luteran.  

Oh Papist, you silly willy boy. I'm not the only one with extensive interaction with the followers of the Vatican (including those where were former followers)

Did I ever mention that my favorite literary genre is I used to be Catholic so you can believe me when I tell you that it's wrong  ?

Hey, that's my favorite, too! Or at least it is much more tolerable than its competitors, You never understood Catholicism properly or else you would have never left and No, me calling you "invincibly ignorant" is actually my way of being nice and letting you off the hook for making a decision that you feel is not something you need to apologize for or explain in the first place, and in no way is this a paternalistic, crappy attitude on my part -- I'm actually doing it with love; you can tell, because I'm calling you "brother" the whole time

You mean, just like the way you talk about Roman Catholics all the time?

Alright, Biro. I get it. If you have such a problem with what I post, please feel free to take it up with a moderator. I will trust their judgment.

[minasoliman]

sooooooo.....
.....how about that conclave, eh?

[choy]

sooooooo.....
.....how about that conclave, eh?

Have you signed your "March Madness: Sweet Sistine Papal Bracket"? 

[CoptoGeek]

[CoptoGeek]

sooooooo.....
.....how about that conclave, eh?

Have you signed your "March Madness: Sweet Sistine Papal Bracket"? 

Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet's get ready to conclave!

[Peter J]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Ratzinger´s books?

What significance does it have to what has been taught about the Papacy over the last Millennium?

How about he is one of the great academic scholars of the Patristic era of the 20th century,a keen student of liturgy and he possessed the broadest knowledge of, and appreciation for, Orthodox teachings and spirituality of any Pope in say , the past thousand years or so for starters.

he was better as Cardinal Ratzinger. As Pope Benedict XVI he botched the whole Patriarchate of the West thing.

Yes, I'm sure it's shocking to you Orthodox that a title that was in the Annuario Pontificio since 1863 is no longer there.
[/sarcasm]

[Papist]

sooooooo.....
.....how about that conclave, eh?

Have you signed your "March Madness: Sweet Sistine Papal Bracket"? 

Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet's get ready to conclave!

This is pure awesomeness. And it even includes a map for Isa.

[J Michael]

sooooooo.....
.....how about that conclave, eh?

Have you signed your "March Madness: Sweet Sistine Papal Bracket"? 

Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet's get ready to conclave!

This is pure awesomeness. And it even includes a map for Isa.

Now, wouldn't it be interesting if none of those mentioned in the above graphic emerged as Pope?

[Papist]

sooooooo.....
.....how about that conclave, eh?

Have you signed your "March Madness: Sweet Sistine Papal Bracket"? 

Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet's get ready to conclave!

This is pure awesomeness. And it even includes a map for Isa.

Now, wouldn't it be interesting if none of those mentioned in the above graphic emerged as Pope?

Yes it would. I really do wish it was Dolan, though I know he doesn't really have a chance. I think Dolan would be a vocal leader like JPII. Though, I'm not sure he's academic enough.

[choy]

Since I'm Filipino-Canadian, I'm picking Ouellet and Tagle.  Who's the bookie here?

[ialmisry]

The Pope of Rome, to us, does not carry a signification of enchantment, wonder, and filial delight like he carries for Roman Catholics. He's not usually something of great interest to us.

Have you ever read any of Ratzinger´s books?

What significance does it have to what has been taught about the Papacy over the last Millennium?

How about he is one of the great academic scholars of the Patristic era of the 20th century,a keen student of liturgy and he possessed the broadest knowledge of, and appreciation for, Orthodox teachings and spirituality of any Pope in say , the past thousand years or so for starters.

he was better as Cardinal Ratzinger. As Pope Benedict XVI he botched the whole Patriarchate of the West thing.

Yes, I'm sure it's shocking to you Orthodox that a title that was in the Annuario Pontificio since 1863 is no longer there.
[/sarcasm]

Not shocking, just revealing

[ialmisry]

Since I'm Filipino-Canadian, I'm picking Ouellet and Tagle.  Who's the bookie here?

[minasoliman]

sooooooo.....
.....how about that conclave, eh?

Have you signed your "March Madness: Sweet Sistine Papal Bracket"? 

LOOOOOLLLL!!!!!!!!

[ialmisry]

I've been told by Catholics that I'm still a Catholic (and consequently Benedict is still the Pope I should be following/listening to...or was until yesterday) by virtue of my baptism and their "indelible mark" theology. Not many, admittedly/thankfully, but they are out there. When I have told them in response that the Orthodox Church did not accept my RC baptism (by pouring, not triple immersion) and that we do not have this belief that "once a X, always an X" via some kind of mark or otherwise, they've either implied that this is irrelevant (I guess only RC sacraments count, even when their official documents say otherwise), or that we really do believe this, I just don't understand Orthodoxy (and I guess by implication, they do, since they say that we believe the same thing)...just like how I just don't understand Catholicism, either...what will I not understand next?

We may not always get along, Catholics, but I must say...every day is an adventure with you people.

Very odd that the papacy leaves no indelible mark, given their "once a priest, always a priest, priest forever after the order of Melchizedek" theology.

[CoptoGeek]

Yes it would. I really do wish it was Dolan, though I know he doesn't really have a chance. I think Dolan would be a vocal leader like JPII. Though, I'm not sure he's academic enough.

I'd love for it to be Cardinal Dolan as well, but heard an interview with Fr. Joseph Fessio a while back where he said there's little chance of that happening.  Something along the lines that America is too prominant a power for other Cardinals to also want to see an American Pope. That was the gist of it as best I can recall.