Skip to main content

Flashback: Chris Ferrara called for an "Imperfect Council" & his Mentor called Francis an Antipope & Why don't you write a article explaining why you disagree with Fr. Gruner that Francis is an Antipope

On September 17, 2018, Chris Ferrara, president of the American Catholic Lawyers Association wrote an article calling for a "imperfect council" to be enjoined to investigate and possibly "declare" Francis "deposed" from the papacy:

Comments

Anonymous said…
Ratzinger "Die Sacramentale Begründung der Christlichen Existenz"(1966):
“Eucharistic devotion such as is noted in the silent visit by the devout in church must not be thought of as a conversation with God. This would assume that God was present there locally and in a confined way. To justify such an assertion shows a lack of understanding of the Christological mysteries of the very concept of God. This is repugnant to the serious thinking of the man who knows about the omnipresence of God. To go to church on the ground that one can visit God who is present there is a senseless act which modern man rightfully rejects.”

Ratzinger, "Introduction to Christianity": “It now becomes clear that the real heart of faith in the resurrection does not consist at all in the idea of the restoration of bodies.” (page 349)
Referring to the biblical pronouncements concerning the general resurrection, he says:
“Their essential content is not the conception of a restoration of bodies to souls after a long interval…” (page 353)
“This resurrection [of the body] would also imply — or so it seems at any rate — a new heaven and a new earth; it would require immortal bodies needing no sustenance
and a completely different condition of matter. But is this not all completely absurd, quite contrary to our understanding of matter and its modes of behavior, and
therefore hopelessly mythological?” (page 348)
“…the idea of the anima separata (the “separated soul” of Scholastic theology) has in the last analysis become obsolete.” (page 351)

http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/RazResArt.pdf
Anonymous said…
"Ratzinger credited with saving Lutheran pact" Those who know Ratzinger, however, say few figures have exercised greater influence on him than Luther. In a 1966 commentary on Vatican II’s “The Church in the Modern World,” Ratzinger said that the document leaned too heavily on Teilhard de Chardin and not enough on Luther - a remarkable comment in an era with no offical Lutheran-Catholic contact, when many Catholics still branded Luther a heretic. “Ratzinger has been involved in dialogue with Lutherans from way back,” said Br. Jeffrey Gros, ecumenical affairs specialist for the U.S. bishops. “In the 1980s he was even interested in declaring the Augsburg Confession [the first Lutheran declaration of faith] a Catholic document. To think that he wanted to torpedo this [agreement] is a total misread.”
First, he agreed that the goal of the ecumenical process is unity in diversity, not structural reintegration... Second, Ratzinger fully acknowledged the authority of the Lutheran World Federation to reach agreement with the Vatican. Finally, Ratzinger agreed that while Christians are obliged to do good works, justification and final judgment remain God’s gracious acts."
http://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/1999c/091099/091099f.htm

"in a statement that attracted much attention, ratzinger, now cardinal AB of munich, declared in january, 1976: 'efforts are under way to achieve a catholic recognition of the CA, or more correctly a recognition of the CA as catholic, and thereby to establish the catholicity of the churches of the CA which makes possible a corporate union while the differences remain.'" The Catholicity of the Augsburg Confession, j avery dulles:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1203403
https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/b002aht.htm
https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/b002bht.htm
https://search.freefind.com/find.html?si=62930896&pid=r&n=0&_charset_=UTF-8&bcd=%C3%B7&query=ratzinger+lutheran

"Lutherans do not want to keep the (500th) commemoration of the Reformation just among yourselves, but also to celebrate it together with us Catholics. The Catholic Church is happy to accept this invitation, as Pope Benedict XVI has already declared. In his address at a private audience with the delegation from the United Evangelical Lutheran Church in Germany on 24 January 2011, Pope Benedict emphasized that on this occasion Lutherans and Catholics would have the opportunity “to celebrate throughout the world a common ecumenical commemoration,"
http://www.christianunity.va/content/unitacristiani/en/dialoghi/sezione-occidentale/luterani/relazioni/en4.html
https://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A303rcRatzLutherans.html

Anonymous said…
“I count among the most important results of the ecumenical dialogues the insight that the issue of the eucharist cannot be narrowed to the problem of ‘validity.’ Even a theology oriented to the concept of succession, such as that which holds in the Catholic and in the Orthodox church, need not in any way deny the salvation-granting presence of the Lord [Heilschaffende Gegenwart des Herrn] in a Lutheran [evangelische] Lord’s Supper.” [Briefwechsel von Landesbischof Johannes Hanselmann und Joseph Kardinal Ratzinger über das Communio-Schreiben der Römischen Glaubenskongregation, Una Sancta, 48 (1993): 348.]

If the actions of Lutheran pastors can be described by Catholics as “sacred actions” that “can truly engender a life of grace,” if communities served by such ministers give “access to that communion in which is salvation,” and if at a eucharist at which a Lutheran pastor presides is to be found “the salvation-granting presence of the Lord,” then Lutheran churches cannot be said simply to lack the ministry given to the church by Christ and the Spirit. In acknowledging the imperfect koinonia between our communities and the access to grace through the ministries of these communities, we also acknowledge a real although imperfect koinonia between our ministries.

Between Ratzinger... and Sarah a great gap is fixed. Ratzinger is aware of what Vatican II made possible and what new paths have opened up since Vatican II... One gets the impression that Sarah is not well-informed in this area, perhaps even is unaware of ecumenical discussions and dialogues. He comes across as one of those whom Pope Francis scolds for being fundamentalist.
https://www.praytellblog.com/index.php/2015/12/01/more-on-ecumenism-valid-sacraments-and-cardinal-sarah/

It is Benedict who approved use of the Anglican (Protestant) Rite:

III. Without excluding liturgical celebrations according to the Roman Rite, the Ordinariate has the faculty to celebrate the Holy Eucharist and the other Sacraments, the Liturgy of the Hours and other liturgical celebrations according to the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See, so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apc_20091104_anglicanorum-coetibus.html

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...