Thursday, June 16, 2005

Time to Rant and Roar Pt. 1

HELLO faans. welcome to Critiques of a Doormatt. Today, we will discuss an article that appeared in the Catholic Family News (May 2005 issue) about our former pope, John Paul II. The article, entitled "The Secret of Pope John Paull II's Success", discusses what made people begin calling him John Paul the Great even before his death. The article, however, does not support this view for a very important reason: He failed to preserve the doctines of the Church, sepcifically the one that stated "Outside the faith there is no salvation."
The article itself is facinating, long, and well supported with multiple sources, one of which is Abraham Foxman, a Jewis writer who praised John Paul II for recognising "the special relationship between Christanity and the Jewish people, while sharing his understanding of Judaism as a living heritage, of the permanent validity of God's covenant with the Jewish people."
The article continues with this comment on the above quote: "Foxman thus applauded John Paul II for rejecting the truth found in Scripture and in the defined dogmas of the Catholic Church, tht the New Covenant superseded and made obsolete the old Judaic Covenant. Foxman rejoices in the error that members of today's Jewish religion have their own covenat wiht God, and need not accept Jesus Christ nor convert to the Catholic Church for salvation."
You can see where this is going. The writer of the article discusses later the infalibility of the doctrine that JPII ignored. This is long, but here it is. It is from the Council of Florence, under Pope Eugene IV: "The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal ife, but that they are to go into the eternal fire 'which is prepared for the devil an his angels,' (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joinged with her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining withing this unity can profit from the sacraments of the hurch unto salvation , adn that they alone can recieve an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."

Well, my hands are tired. I will comeback later to continue. Feel free to post what you think on this so far.


  1. Where does this leave the Eastern Orthodox? (Sorry Ibid. That was mean. I just needed to get a dig in about your past theological blunders.) Um, it could be that I've only had 3.5 hrs of sleep, or that I've had next to nothing to eat, or the fact that I'm listening to Irish music, but, ah, I don't understand.

  2. Insomuch as they reject Christ the jews can't go to heaven. Insomuch as they partake in the law (albiet the old law) they are on the right track. I think the article was being overzealous.

  3. I forgot to say the reason for all this evil acts of the pope. It is all the blame of Vatican II. I know these writere guys are making a big stretch. Oh well.

  4. Those Scriptural and Magisterial illiterates! What chutzpah!

  5. Okay, so I got some sleep & some food & read this over. (Or maybe it's because I'm now listening to 3 Doors Down. :P) Anyway, I agree with Peachy! Whatever weirdos!

  6. I *detest* that paper. I believe the editor is exccommunicated. Since it isn't like the liberal garbage we usually get thrown at us, it's easy to give it a fair listen, but honestly, it doesn't deserve one.

    One of the few articles I read was about chapel veils. Obviously I approve of them -- but I hated the article. It basically said: "Women are in enough trouble already because of the sin of Eve. They shouldn't make it worse by defiantly acting as if they were as perfect as men by refusing to wear chapel veils."

    Needless to say, that's not an argument I much approve of.