I would say anyone who says this or any other true Pope is not the Pope is attacking the Holy Father. Martin Luther was for instance a good instance of an attack Dog as for instance was Maria Divine Mercy or Kelly Bowring. I would say an attack is when we cut the ground under a Pope as Pope. Anyone who is Schismatic is be defintion an attack dog. A heretic and an enemy of the Church. But I would not say a critque of the Pope or a Pope's actions is an , 'attack'. I think a good instance of a critique occured under the reign of Pope St John paul 2 when he had a private swimming pool built for just himself in the Vatican (it's still there, I think) . The saint justified this by saying he needed it for exercise and that it was cheaper than winding up with a dead Pope. I never bought this, neither did many others. A private swimming pool was way over the top. But this critique was not an ,'Attack'. Even great saints can bomb and benefit from a tap on the shoulder. I think John Paul was a great saint and Pope but the private swimming pool idea was a big, big , 'No, no'. Just saying.
I think Jill there is a true and false unity as St Paul tells us: 2 Corinthians 6:14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? Heretics and heresy are wicked by definition and ,very sadly many of our Cardianls and Bishops are in fact heretics and operate at the very highest levels of the Church. Light and dark cannot be yoked together, oil and water do not mix. In fact scripture tells us that we as lights in the dark, like little lions must go forth and give a little roar when we see it. 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES. Matthew 5:29-30 "If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. The danger is if we keep quiet about evil and evil doers when they are amongst us we actually become associated with evil. So then we have a true peace, of unity of believe and Chairty..and a false peace which tolerates evil and is afraid to confront it. My favourite scripture passage of all on this subject is that on the Watchman which I am forever quoting. The Watchman who must blow the Shofar, the Warning Trumpet, when the enemy approaches. Ezekiel 33 Renewal of Ezekiel’s Call as Watchman 33 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, speak to your people and say to them: ‘When I bring the sword against a land, and the people of the land choose one of their men and make him their watchman, 3 and he sees the sword coming against the land and blows the trumpet to warn the people, 4 then if anyone hears the trumpet but does not heed the warning and the sword comes and takes their life, their blood will be on their own head. 5 Since they heard the sound of the trumpet but did not heed the warning, their blood will be on their own head. If they had heeded the warning, they would have saved themselves. 6 But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to warn the people and the sword comes and takes someone’s life, that person’s life will be taken because of their sin, but I will hold the watchman accountable for their blood.’ 7 “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the people of Israel; so hear the word I speak and give them warning from me. 8 When I say to the wicked, ‘You wicked person, you will surely die,’ and you do not speak out to dissuade them from their ways, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. 9 But if you do warn the wicked person to turn from their ways and they do not do so, they will die for their sin, though you yourself will be saved.
'Facism?' St Iranaeus reminds us here that it is never, 'Make it up as you go along', time. That the Unity of the Church in Doctrine is not,'Fascism'. Against Heresies (Book I, Chapter 10) St Iranaeus '2. As I have already observed, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul, and one and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is one and the same. For the Churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain, nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those which have been established in the central regions of the world. But as the sun, that creature of God, is one and the same throughout the whole world, so also the preaching of the truth shines everywhere, and enlightens all men that are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth. Nor will any one of the rulers in the Churches, however highly gifted he may be in point of eloquence, teach doctrines different from these (for no one is greater than the Master); nor, on the other hand, will he who is deficient in power of expression inflict injury on the tradition. For the faith being ever one and the same, neither does one who is able at great length to discourse regarding it, make any addition to it, nor does one, who can say but little diminish it.' http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103110.htm
I can put thsi longish post more simply for you Blue, 'Padraig and BrianK you are uneducated Catholic laymen and should just shut up. If Kasper is a heretic then so is Pope Francis . So if you acuse Kasper of being a heretic you are heretics yourselves. So just dry up , you uneducated peons. I, on the other hand who have read loads and loads of books and really , really, really know what I am talking about as I have all kinds of amazing qualifications and have very much the right to do so. Thanks, now dry up. Yours in Christ. Youre very, very highly educated , qualified and Liberal thinking Forum Member , Blue Horizon.'
I dont have to be well educated to realise Kasper is a heretic. He proclaims it from his own mouth. And it wont matter how many books one reads to the contrary. Pope John Paul II and Benedict couldnt stand him.He is one of the Wolves Benedict asked us to pray,he would not flee. But flee he did. And Kasper is now the new darling in Rome. Enter Cardinal Kasper from whose mouth proceeds the very excrement of Satan, saying: The God who is enthroned over the world and history as a changeless being is an offence to man. One must deny Him for man’s sake, because he claims for himself the dignity and honour that belong by right to man. We must resist this God, however, not only for man’s sake, but also for God’s sake. He is not the true God at all, but rather a wretched idol. For a God who is only alongside of history, who is not himself history, is a finite God. If we call such a being God, then for the sake of the Absolute we must become absolute atheists. Such a God springs from a rigid worldview; he is the guarantor of the status quo and the enemy of the new. [Walter Kasper, “Gott in der Geschichte”, an essay that appeared in Gott heute: 15 Beiträge zur Gottesfrage, edited by Norbert Kutschki (Mainz: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, 1967),] Of course this is not only a denial of the dogma of God's immutability (see Denzinger 428, 1782) but it is also blasphemy to say that the God the Catholic Church has always professed to believe in is a “wretched idol” and an “enemy”. And this is the man whose proposal is the inspiration for the upcoming Synod on the Family and whose theology of “mercy” is allegedly “doing theology on one's knees”.
'Cardinal Kasper from whose mouth proceeds the very excrement of Satan,' Very poetic. Rotfl .You're a hoot Mac. You must be a joy to have a drink with.
I wish I could take credit for that line Padraig.But it is from a real writer.....http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/1971-kasper-the-blasphemer
Oh Padriag, I meant the forum, not the vatican. I see the forum as a kind of family, when we attack each other it weakens us--and how happy that makes old hairy legs. A little "vigorous discussion" is fun, but its been a bit caustic lately, that's all. Maybe I'm worrying over nothing and should stick to the less controversial posts. (I still feel Pope Francis will be a good Pope in the end. If not you get to say "I told you so!") Good night my Irish brother and God's blessings upon you. pcj
I do hope from this minute to post only good news . At least till Christmas and its octave . No more trouble from me . I promise View attachment 3924 Time for some peace and joy.And a Blessed Christmas to all. Need some more Christmas threads.
I love your avatar Jill, a happy Christmas to you all. I suppose the risk we take when we discuss dangers to that which we love is that we can take them a bit too seriously. That is why I suppose thye ban talk of religion and politics in bars.
I don't entirely agree about Kasper being a "new darling". I had never heard of him before this pontificate (probably not educated enough), now I know all about him. If he and his co-heretics had fled, why did Benedict resign? I think Kasper has come away with quite a bloody nose from the two synods-a heretic, a racist and a liar. Your quotation also demonstrates he is logically incoherent as well. If God is "history", what are we but automatons without free will and it is question begging of what is the whole shooting match about. And how can a perfect being "change"?
Mere personal opinion Fatima. That the Pope obviously disagrees with you should signal pause for thought by uneducated laity. Unless of course you truly believe you, a comparatively uneducated lay person, understand the theology/faith issues involved better than these two theologians of good standing? Even if we play the "I'm not educated but infused by the Holy Spirit" card the Pope still wins on that score as well in my book.
Mac's quote is a new one for me. I googled it and found it appeared (of course!) on all the 'traditionalist' websites but found the following response to it on one of them: This is astonishing! Cardinal Kasper's theology here is perfectly sound, perfectly in accord with the Church's theological tradition, and yet people seem to want an 'auto da fe', to burn him at the stake. The God he rejects here is indeed an idol. It is the named God, the defined God, the comprehended God, the God who has been appointed by men to a cosmic position, so to speak, to a condition and set of functions. There has always been a temptation in Christianity to do this, but the saints and the greatest theologians have always resisted it, sometimes in even more dramatic language than Kasper. Consider Pseudo Dionysius insisting in De Divinis Nominibus that any naming of the divine entails blasphemy, that we can know God only 'quasi ignoto', as something unknown. And Aquinas fully endorses this position of Pseudo Dionysius. As our only knowledge of God is negative knowledge, he says, "we should consider the ways in which God does not exist, rather than the ways in which God does". Ridding the Christian understanding of idolatrous Gods has always been a part of the doctrine of the Church and, especially, of the mystical tradition. Nothing in what Kasper says in this quote would surprise any of the great Dominican mystics of the Middle Ages. Think of Meister Eckhart's famous prayer: "I pray God to rid me of God". That's more dramatic than anything Walter Kasper says here, and Eckhart means much the same thing: in order to keep discourse about God open and free of idolatry, one must constantly rid oneself of false, positive, limiting notions of the divine, including the image of a God who is outside of the historical, and therefore (as Kasper says) limited, finite. For historical and political reasons, there was something of a fall away from the apophatic - mystical - tradition between the 17th and the 19th century. But there was a tremendous revival of interest in this ancient and venerable discourse in the 20th century, and Kasper is writing here in the light of this return. If you are a Catholic, this is your tradition - your beautiful, profound, dramatic, poetic, problematic, and deeply suggestive tradition. What a pity it is to see Catholics scandalised by it! And really, is it likely - is it even possible - that Kasper could have meant something either atheistic or insulting to God, given his personal history, his religious commitment, and his impressive theological writings, so well regarded by so many good Catholics? How badly do you have to want Kasper to be the villain to come to such a silly conclusion? Really, the scandalised comments here are not worthy, because they display both a lack of charity and a lack of knowledge of the Church's intellectual tradition.
Yet, in Mac's quotation, Kasper resorts to his own definition of God-as a being who can change and who "is history". If God is unknowable, why does he choose to reveal Himself? Indeed, how can He reveal Himself? If He is unknowable, how can we said to be made in His likeness? Smells. Strongly. Of Gnosticism.
Sticks and stones Padraig. A little unworthy of a Forum Moderator. But I understand why you feel the need to do this.
Mac please look up the definition of heretic, one doesn't need to be educated to do that. A Cardinal still in good standing with the Pope cannot reasonably be impugned as a heretic. To do so would be tantamount to saying much the same of his Pope. If that is what you mean just say so. Even this over educated smartass knows enough to know he is out of his depth when presuming to say C Kasper's proposals are clearly at odds with the faith ... let alone stubbornly so in the face of Magisterial repremand. Until he shows stubborn adherence in the face of Magisterial reprimand he cannot reasonably be labelled a heretic from my understanding of the matter.
