The most important part of the Pope's appearance on the balcony last night - missed by the various commentators on the TV channels as far as I can see - was that no Catholics listening to the Pope last night, should they die in the near future, will now have to go through Purgatory. His blessing granted a "plenary indulgence" on all who were listening or watching. That means if you are good you will from last night go straight to Heaven without having to go through Purgatory. Now, wasn't that nice of him and wasn't it a shame that the translator did not tell us the good news?
-
-
-
... or indeed Francis de Sales, one of my favourite SaintsOriginally posted by Anna View Post
Comment
-
I do not know how much if any truth there may be in any allegations made against the present Pope and, like anyone else in a just society, he should be treated and regarded as innocent of each and every one of them until proved guilty of any of them, but you do yourself no favours in referring patronisingly to "the usual issues like 'gay marriage'"; do you seriously believe that an organisation like the Catholic Church (which is a large international one even if the extent of its following appears to be widely exaggerated in some quarters) can indefinitely remain wholly inflexible about not only gay marriage but also the rôle of women inside and outside the Church, the insistence upon celibacy and unmarried status of priests, use of contraception, abortion rights, homosexuality, legal divorce, the rights of Catholics to become and be regarded as non-Catholics after leaving the Church and all the rest of it while secular laws on most of these things in most places progress and change? How realistic a position do you really think that this is for the Catholic Church to adopt and maintain? All of these are not merely "usual issues"; they are very important issues that affect society and the position of Catholics and their Church within that society. Most people who appear to support the Church's obdurate head-in-sand approach to such matters tend to brush aside any question of what Christ himself might have thought about them which, again, does them no favours, I think.Originally posted by scottycelt View PostYou're not related to that other 'JS', John Skelton, by any chance.... ?
So you're a Marxist. We are supposed to be discussing the new Pope, not trotting out all the old Leftist propaganda or forever discussing Cardinal O'Brien.
An independent British FT journalist who lived in Argentina for many years said on Sky News today that there is no evidence that the new Pope (who was then a relatively minor cleric) was 'guilty' of any of the allegations now being made. He was widely believed to have saved the lives of at least two 'liberation theology' priests from the Junta. I cannot produce clear evidence for that anymore than you can provide clear evidence for the allegations against him.
As an aside, and for your own information, the previous Pope was a leading exponent of 'liberation theology' in his earlier days before moving solidly to Catholic orthodoxy.
The journalist on Sky News maintained that the allegations made against the Pope originated from sources close to the current secular government with which he has clashed many times on the usual issues like 'gay marriage'. He said he was not 'an apologist for the Catholic Church' but merely stating the facts as he knew them. He called the allegations 'wild', and without any real foundation, and therefore doubted their authenticity.
Sounds familiar ...Comment
-
Hurrah! Oh, re translation, the BBC translator could not translate the Lords Prayer as Francis I said it into English! It was a right mangled mash-up!Originally posted by vinteuil View Post
Comment
-
... I wonder if it shouldn't just be "Francis". After all, we don't refer to King John I or Queen Victoria I.Originally posted by Anna View Post
The 1914-1918 War was initially referred to as the Great War. It was only when a Second World War looked inevitable that people started referring to 1914-1918 as "the First World War" : to have referred to it as WW I in 1918 would have been horrible. *
[ * EDIT : I correct myself : Repington's First World War was published in 1919. Geoffrey Madan said this was a shocking title, as it presupposed another. ]Comment
-
It's a good thing that Deryck Cooke wasn't around to see the new Pope deciding on what cannot have been anything more than a sudden whim to excise the central core of Mahler 10; whatever his predecessor may have thought of Bruckner, this bodes ill for the present one's take on Mahler! A "plenary indulgence" on all who were listening or watching? What? - even including non-Christians like me? "Indulgence" it may have been, but this particular instance of a "do not pass go" caper seems to me like something out of a very Divine Comedy indeed!Originally posted by vinteuil View PostComment
-
Can I ask why? Wiki says: In 1923, Pope Pius XI proclaimed him a patron of writers and journalists, because he made extensive use of flyers and books both in spiritual direction and in his efforts to convert the Calvinists of the region.Originally posted by vinteuil View Post... or indeed Francis de Sales, one of my favourite Saints
St. Francis developed a sign language in order to teach a deaf man about God. Because of this, he is the patron saint of the deaf.Comment
-
Well we'll just have to wait awhile and check out his Papal schtick as it develops.Originally posted by vinteuil View Post... or indeed Francis de Sales, one of my favourite Saints
Who knows, perhaps ....
Comment
-
...hence the term "Paparazzi", as I mentioned earlier (and I could have cited "PapaRatzi" but didn't want to confuse the issue)...Originally posted by Anna View Post
...instead of doing something much more practically useful, like converting water into wine (that could be put into Methuselahs, come to drink of it).Originally posted by Anna View Post
...in which case it might behove the present Papal incumbent to do a carpe diem and initiate some action necessitated by the sad fact that there's none so deaf as a Church that doesn't want to hear...Originally posted by Anna View PostComment
-
Does it count if I watch it on iPlayer now?Originally posted by vinteuil View Post
Or perhaps some enterprising pewrson could sell DVDs.Comment
-
-
No indulgence for you Flosshilde!Originally posted by Flosshilde View Post
No 1 - you have not got the faith.
No 2 - selling indulgences started a revolution previously and you lot ( I mean 'the separated brethren') started your own show.
No 3 - it's not a get out of jail free card - as some money changer described it above - you have to earn it.
But - remember the Good Shepherd - all strays are welcome back.
Comment
-
Does that make you a pen friend, POD?Originally posted by Padraig View PostNo indulgence for you Flosshilde!
No 1 - you have not got the faith.
No 2 - selling indulgences started a revolution previously and you lot ( I mean 'the separated brethren') started your own show.
No 3 - it's not a get out of jail free card - as some money changer described it above - you have to earn it.
But - remember the Good Shepherd - all strays are welcome back.
Comment
-
Surely only an Oxford classicist would think that?Originally posted by vinteuil View Post ‘The First World War’ can just mean that there had been an event, a world war, which had happened for the first time, as in ‘the recent war of 1914 was the first in which combatants from many parts of the world took part’. The question as to whether there would ever be a successor is left open. I can imagine people talking about Napoleon after his defeat as ‘the first emperor of France’ (adding perhaps ‘and we hope the last’). But I think I agree about ‘Francis I’, perhaps because putting the numeral after the name somehow conjures up a series more vividly. (But wasn’t Franz Joseph called ‘Franz Joseph I’?) Interesting point of usage, maybe one for 'Pedants' Paradise'.
Comment
Comment