What Happens At The Moment A Pope Becomes An Anti Pope ?

[mortify ii]

Peter's actions demanded repentance.  St. John Paul II's are debatable and are not as clear cut as St. Peters.   

 

You think venerating non-Catholic holy books is a debatable action? I think the Church's teaching on this is extremely clear.

 

I do not see the canonization giving any legitimacy to any errors or mistakes the canonized person may have made during his/her life. 

 

Earlier you alluded to your personal belief that venerating the Quran was a mistake, I'm just curious why you feel this way. As far as I am aware, there was no public indication by the Vatican or any other official that what was done was any sort of mistake.

[Perigrina]

We teach by our example as well, and our fruits reveal what is within us. There was never an apology or explanation for why that act was appropriate, and sadly there are many cases like it.

 

 

 

No one has questioned the validity or legitimacy of the Novus Ordo, but why don't you humbly follow the revisions the Popes since Vatican II made to the liturgy? For decades going to the Traditional Latin Mass was considered "schismatic" until an indult was permitted after the SSPX came to be, but that was only meant to nurture those still "fixated" on the old rite as it's now called, it was never intended as to be a separate rite that young folks like yourself should get into. 

 

You yourself quoted the explanation in a post in another thread http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/133951-graces-from-protestant-services/?p=2671219
"At the end of the audience the Pope bowed to the Muslim holy book the Koran presented to him by the delegation and he kissed it as a sign of respect."

 

It seems to me that anyone who sincerely wishes to know what Pope John Paul meant by his gesture can discover that it was intended as a sign of respect to Muslims and not as an act of veneration of the Qur'an.  I suspect that some of the people who claim to be scandalized by the gesture wish to make a scandal of it.  No explanation will satisfy people who are determined to take scandal, so it is not surprising that we did not see much effort from the Vatican in giving further explanations.

 

I question your understanding of the history of indult Tridentine Masses.  The first indult, in 1971, was the so-called "Agatha Chrisite Indult" an appeal made on the grounds of the cultural and historical significance of the Tridentine Mass.  (Agatha Christie was one of signers of the petition.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agatha_Christie_indult ) This was two years after the promulgation of the Novus Ordo.  I am not aware of any evidence that this indult was a response to the formation of the SSPX which was still within Church structures at the time.  I suppose one could make a case that In 1988, Pope John Paul II's  instruction Ecclesia Dei Adflicta was a response when he ordered: "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued by the Apostolic See."

 

Perhaps your comment about young people is an allusion to Pope Benedict's comment in the letter accompanying Summorum Pontificum:

 

Immediately after the Second Vatican Council it was presumed that requests for the use of the 1962 Missal would be limited to the older generation which had grown up with it, but in the meantime it has clearly been demonstrated that young persons too have discovered this liturgical form, felt its attraction and found in it a form of encounter with the Mystery of the Most Holy Eucharist, particularly suited to them. Thus the need has arisen for a clearer juridical regulation which had not been foreseen at the time of the 1988 Motu Proprio.

 

In the same letter he wrote: 

 

What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.  It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place.

 

The first time I ever attended the Extraordinary Form was on Sept 14, 2007, the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, the day that Summorum Pontificum came into effect.  I do my best to humbly follow Church teaching and I am not sure why you are suggesting that my attendance at the traditional Mass means that I have not.

[Perigrina]

Okie dokie, I remembered this time.

 

Thank you very much.  I may respond to the content if I have anything to say after I have read them, but I wanted to thank you immediately.

[KnightofChrist]

It seems to me that anyone who sincerely wishes to know what Pope John Paul meant by his gesture can discover that it was intended as a sign of respect to Muslims and not as an act of veneration of the Qur'an.  I suspect that some of the people who claim to be scandalized by the gesture wish to make a scandal of it.  No explanation will satisfy people who are determined to take scandal, so it is not surprising that we did not see much effort from the Vatican in giving further explanations.

 

Veneration is to show great respect. Bowing to and kissing a religious item is a sign of great respect for that item and the religion it represents.

[Perigrina]

You think venerating non-Catholic holy books is a debatable action? I think the Church's teaching on this is extremely clear.

 

I am troubled by your insistence on referring to Pope John Paul's gesture as "veneration" when it has been repeatedly pointed out to you that all the evidence indicates that it was not intended that way.  You seem to be going out of your way to malign a pope.

[Perigrina]

Veneration is to show great respect. Bowing to and kissing a religious item is a sign of great respect for that item and the religion it represents.

 

Yes, veneration includes the idea of respect.  However, the Merriam-Webster dictionary lists the following words as synonyms: adore, deify, glorify, revere, reverence, worship.  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/venerate

 

It is misleading to use the word "venerate" to express mere respect.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Perigrina

[Nihil Obstat]

I think it is fair to say that the SSPX's efforts did quite a bit to preserve the traditional Mass in its vitality during the years in which it was de facto illegal in the majority of cases. And in that case in particular, history has vindicated that effort (just as I hope that one day history will look rather more kindly on the Society and Archbishop Lefebvre).

Summorum Pontificum, and Pope Benedict personally both affirmed that it was never wrong or illegal to celebrate the traditional Mass, and it follows that those bishops who attempted to de facto outlaw it in their dioceses acted wrongly. Apart from the ordinations and consecrations contrary to the wishes of the pope, the Society was clearly not wrong in simply continuing to celebrate the traditional Mass after the Novus Ordo was made normative and came into full effect.

[Credo in Deum]

You think venerating non-Catholic holy books is a debatable action? I think the Church's teaching on this is extremely clear.

 

I've already stated that I think his kissing the Qu'ran was a mistake, but this is just my opinion. You will only be able to offer me your opinion, so were does that leave us?  Nowhere.   

[Nihil Obstat]

I've already stated that I think his kissing the Qu'ran was a mistake, but this is just my opinion. You will only be able to offer me your opinion, so were does that leave us?  Nowhere.   

Well, it does give us a starting point from whence we should ask "what does this mean?" Specifically, if irreproachably faithful Catholics such as yourself can seriously and respectfully question whether the action was right, then what is a proper response? Obviously it invites us to dig deeper. Did John Paul act rightly or wrongly? If he acted wrongly, what was the specific nature of the wrong action? What, if any effect should it have on the average layperson who sees what John Paul did? Questions of that sort should be asked and answered. By whom, I am not quite sure. Many bishops do not seem willing to address such issues.

[Perigrina]

Well, it does give us a starting point from whence we should ask "what does this mean?" Specifically, if irreproachably faithful Catholics such as yourself can seriously and respectfully question whether the action was right, then what is a proper response? Obviously it invites us to dig deeper. Did John Paul act rightly or wrongly? If he acted wrongly, what was the specific nature of the wrong action? What, if any effect should it have on the average layperson who sees what John Paul did? Questions of that sort should be asked and answered. By whom, I am not quite sure. Many bishops do not seem willing to address such issues.

 

Even assuming that it was a mistake, I do not see it having any implications for the average layperson if a pope used a gesture that was too easily misunderstood.  It is fairly easy to determine that it was intended as a gesture of respect to Muslims.  What I take away from this is that I ought to be respectful of non-Catholics.  I also learn that I should exercise caution when using gestures since they are open to misunderstanding.
 

Edited May 14, 2014 by Perigrina

[KnightofChrist]

Yes, veneration includes the idea of respect.  However, the Merriam-Webster dictionary lists the following words as synonyms: adore, deify, glorify, revere, reverence, worship.

 

It is misleading to use the word "venerate" to express mere respect.

 

Veneration has various degrees of giving respect and honor. We venerate the Father, Son and Holy Ghost but not in the same sense that we venerate Mary and the Saints, the Beautified, or the Venerable. 

 

Bowing to and kissing the Qur'an was a deep and profound sign of great respect. Which some could mistakenly or otherwise see as veneration of some type. I think this action by Pope John Paul II was and is confusing to many people. There are many of those like Mortify who see it as veneration. The reasoning for this is likely due to the fact he bow to and kissed the Qur'an in nearly if not the same visible manner priests bow to and kiss the Bible.

Edited May 14, 2014 by KnightofChrist

[Nihil Obstat]

Even assuming that it was a mistake, I do not see it having any implications for the average layperson if a pope used a gesture that was too easily misunderstood.  It is fairly easy to determine that it was intended as a gesture of respect to Muslims.  What I take away from this is that I ought to be respectful of non-Catholics.  I also learn that I should exercise caution when using gestures since they are open to misunderstanding.
 

Might a Catholic layperson reasonably conclude that because a pope - canonized no less - bowed to and kissed the holy book of a false religion, that he could or even should do likewise? Might such a person even conclude, and not without cause, that John Paul did in fact venerate the Koran? And that he might do the same? Or that he might participate in a Muslim service?

It is not necessary that a pope taught these things. But it is appropriate for us to ask if anyone might think he did. And if some Catholics do think that - and I am sure we can find many who do - how do we most effectively correct them without thereby disrespecting the person of the pope who is now even a saint?

[Credo in Deum]

Might a Catholic layperson reasonably conclude that because a pope - canonized no less - bowed to and kissed the holy book of a false religion, that he could or even should do likewise? Might such a person even conclude, and not without cause, that John Paul did in fact venerate the Koran? And that he might do the same? Or that he might participate in a Muslim service?

It is not necessary that a pope taught these things. But it is appropriate for us to ask if anyone might think he did. And if some Catholics do think that - and I am sure we can find many who do - how do we most effectively correct them without thereby disrespecting the person of the pope who is now even a saint?

IMHO the majority of Catholics who would use such actions to justify that type of thinking are the ones that are looking for any excuse to shake off and oppose the Church for some deeper reason.  They point at JPII actions and say "that's why I am justified for disagreeing with the Church on such and such a matter."   Those who do not have that mind set jut looked at the popes actions, gave a face palm, and continued with their day knowing that people, Popes, and even Saints can make a mistake during their life. 

Edited May 14, 2014 by Credo in Deum

[Perigrina]

Might a Catholic layperson reasonably conclude that because a pope - canonized no less - bowed to and kissed the holy book of a false religion, that he could or even should do likewise? Might such a person even conclude, and not without cause, that John Paul did in fact venerate the Koran? And that he might do the same? Or that he might participate in a Muslim service?

It is not necessary that a pope taught these things. But it is appropriate for us to ask if anyone might think he did. And if some Catholics do think that - and I am sure we can find many who do - how do we most effectively correct them without thereby disrespecting the person of the pope who is now even a saint?

 

Virtually nobody would even be aware that Pope John Paul once kissed a Qur'an, if this incident were not constantly being brought to attention.  It was not a significant action and it could easily be forgotten, but some people will not let it rest.  These people are at least as guilty of causing scandal as the pope himself.

 

Certainly we need good catechesis on how Catholics should interact with non-Catholics and their worship, but I am not sure that any teaching needs to be made with reference to this specific incident.

[Perigrina]

IMHO the majority of Catholics who would use such actions to justify that type of thinking are the ones that are looking for any excuse to shake off and oppose the Church for some deeper reason.  They point at JPII actions and say "that's why I am justified for disagreeing with the Church on such and such a matter."   Those who do not have that mind set jut looked at the popes actions, gave a face palm, and continued with their day knowing that people, Popes, and even Saints can make a mistake during their life. 

 

I too have this impression.