Audire Crescendo Manual Arts
Although it seems that it is almost impossible for a modern pope to escape canonization, Pope Francis does appear to make one exception: Pius XII. Without a miracle on his record, the beatification of Second World War-era pontiff Pius XII is stalled, says Pope Francis.
Gli adepti viaggiano attraverso iniziazioni in un costoso crescendo. Cavendish, The Magical Arts, Arkana, Londra. Lewis, Rosicrucian Manual, A.M.O.R.C. PopeWatch was amused by this opening breathless paragraph. The overall effect of Francis’s strategy is a driving crescendo of anticipations. (ob-audire) and.
During a news conference held as Francis returned Monday from a three-day trip to the Holy Land, the pope said that the file on Pius XII is still open. “There is still no miracle,” said Francis.
“If there are no miracles we cannot go forward”.. Well, Pope Francis gave another interview on his flight back from the Middle East. Father Z gives us the details and his comments: You may have heard that Pope Francis visited the Holy Land. On the flight back to Italy, His Holiness held another presser. At this point many of you might be cringing as the thought “What could possible go wrong?” flashes through your brain.
After all, it was on a flight that Pope Francis uttered. And so, during this return flight, from the Holy Land, the Pope was asked, inter alia, questions about Communion for the divorced and remarried and about the possibility of priests being able to marry. The second I will treat in a separate post. I will confine myself, here, to the first. NB: Read the following after reviewing how Card.
Balidisseri backtracked after making some edgy comments. A Spanish language reporter asked: In the Church, for example, what is going to happen with Communion for the divorced and remarried,. The Holy Father answered saying, inter alia. [T]hanks for the question about the divorced.
The Synod will be about the family, on the problem of the family, on research about the family, on the present situation of the family. The preliminary essay that Cardinal Kasper made had five chapters: four on the family, beautiful things about the family, the theological foundation, some familiar problems; and the fifth chapter, the pastoral problem of separations, of matrimonial nullity, the divorced Holy Communion come into this problem.
Free Download Program Contoh Soal Tpa Bappenas S2 Pdf Reader. And I don’t like that many people – even in the Church – priests – have said: “Ah, the Synod for giving Communion to the divorced”, and they’ve gone right there, to that point. I have heard it as if the whole thing had been reduced to case study.
No, the matter is more than this, it is wider. Today, everyone knows it, the family is in crisis: it is in a global crisis. Young people don’t want to marry or they don’t marry or live together, marriage is in crisis, and so too the family. And I wouldn’t want that we fall into this (as if it were) case law [Italian “casistica”: it is hard to render what what the Pope is talking about here in his less than clear Italian.
He means by this, surely, that he doesn’t want an impersonal, theoretical, legalistic view of the problem. It has to do with English “casuistry”]. Can you do it? Can’t you do it? For this reason, thanks much for this question, because it gives me the opportunity to clear this up. The pastoral problem of the family is very, very broad, very broad.
And it must be studied case by case. Something Pope Benedict said three times about the divorced has helped me a lot. Once, in the Valle d’Aosta, another time in Milan, and the last time in the public consistory which he held for the creation of cardinals: to study the procedures for matrimonial nullity; to study the faith with which a person comes to matrimony and [NB] to clarify that the divorced are not excommunicated, and so many times they are treated as excommunicated.
And this is a serious thing. On this case study [casistica – here I think he means something like “problem to be examined”. Again, casuistry is involved.], the Synod will be about the family: the riches, the problems of the family. Solutions, nullity, all that. [] I’ll stop translating there. Hacking through this stream of words, which is in an Italian that is less than perfect, we find a couple main points.
And note that he doesn’t always speak of the divorced and remarried, though it is fairly clear that he includes them in his remarks. First, the Holy Father is upset that all the talk about the Synod is focusing on the question of Communion for the divorced and remarried. Thus, he says the word “family”, over and over again. Second, he was clearly prepared for this question, because he worked in that his (still living) predecessor treated the issue three times and even said where. He was telling the newsies to look up what Benedict XVI said. Thus, by the way, he was telling the newsies what I said for an entire year after Francis’ election: Read Francis Through Benedict.
He aligned himself with Benedict even as he clings to what Card. Kasper presented (which in many respects – not all – was flawed). Third, he wants to review the procedures by which “annulment” cases are handled. A review doesn’t hurt anything. However, I can assure you, there has to be a canonical procedure. The Synod and the Holy Father won’t sweep aside canonical procedure in the review of marriage cases.
The Synod really can’t change that. Changes to the procedure could very well imply changes to doctrine. Thus, changes to procedure would have to be studied closely and with great caution.
Alas, what could happen, an unintended consequence, is that priests will simply stop sending in cases. The low-information, weak-synapse type (liberal) priests out there in LaLa Land may do what they did in the matter of Humanae vitae: distort and defy and do their own thing. That would be bad. Fourth, Francis wants everyone not to treat the divorced as if there were excommunicated. Or else, “stop treating the divorced as if they were excommunicated”. I am not sure where that is taking place. After all, some people who divorce may be divorced for good reasons, sad as the circumstances may be.
Moreover, those who are divorced for good reasons are admitted to the sacraments (read: they are not excommunicated). They can go to confession and receive absolution. They can receive Communion. They can be anointed. Sure, there are some divorced people who divorced for sinful and ignoble motives. They must amend their lives, just like anyone else who sins and must amend their lives.
But make no mistake! That line about making sure that the divorced are not treated as if they were excommunicated is probably the most important line of the longish answer. The Holy Father clearly wants the Synod to reinforce that people who are divorced as treated with compassion as well as with justice. Pope Francis was full of surprises yesterday during his visit to the Middle East.
John Allen of The Boston Globe mentions the major one: In a surprise announcement at the conclusion of his Mass in Bethlehem, the pope said to take part in a common prayer for peace, saying that “the men and women of these lands, and of the entire world, all of them, ask us to bring before God their fervent hopes for peace.” Lombardi called it a “creative and courageous” gesture on the part of Francis, adding that the hope is to organize the encounter quickly. Though Lombardi did not say so out loud, the rush is in part because Peres’s term ends on July 27. Both leaders quickly accepted the invitation, which comes one month after the latest attempt at restating peace negotiations broke down. Though the official motive for the meeting would be the prayer, it might also be an occasion for the two leaders to talk informally about substantive matters. Hmmm, a forthcoming movie about Pope Francis may star Antonio Banderas as the Pope; ROME (RNS) Spanish heartthrob Antonio Banderas may be cast in the role of Pope Francis in the first feature film to be made on the life of the Argentine pontiff. Italian director Daniele Luchetti plans to make the $12 million Spanish language film, titled “Call Me Francesco,” with producer Pietro Valsecchi, who has made some of Italy’s highest-grossing movies.
Valsecchi’s Rome-based production house, Taodue Film, confirmed the news Wednesday (May 14), and a spokeswoman said the company was looking to shoot the film in various locations, including Argentina and Italy. Banderas is one of the top Spanish-speaking actors being considered to play the lead role, she told Religion News Service.
The film is based on the best-selling book (or “Francis: The people’s pope”) by Evangelina Himitian, a journalist with the Buenos Aires newspaper La Nacion. Casting is still being finalized but pre-production is well underway, the company spokeswoman said.
Pope Francis raised a very intriguing question at his homily at Mass yesterday: “That was unthinkable. If – for example – tomorrow an expedition of Martians came, and some of them came to us, here Martians, right?
Green, with that long nose and big ears, just like children paint them And one says, ‘But I want to be baptized!’ What would happen?” Peter understands his error when a vision enlightens him to a fundamental truth: that which has been purified by God cannot be called “profane” by anyone. And in narrating these facts to the crowd that criticized him, the Apostle calms them all with this statement: “If then God gave them the same gift He gave to us when we came to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to be able to hinder God?” “When the Lord shows us the way, who are we to say, ‘No, Lord, it is not prudent! No, lets do it this way’ and Peter in that first diocese – the first diocese was Antioch – makes this decision: ‘Who am I to admit impediments?’ A nice word for bishops, for priests and for Christians. Who are we to close doors? In the early Church, even today, there is the ministry of the ostiary [usher].
And what did the ostiary do? He opened the door, received the people, allowed them to pass. But it was never the ministry of the closed door, never.” Again Pope Francis repeated, God has left the guidance of the Church “in the hands of the Holy Spirit.” “The Holy Spirit – he continued – as Jesus said, will teach us everything” and “remind us what Jesus taught us”: “The Holy Spirit is the living presence of God in the Church. He keeps the Church going, keeps the Church moving forward. More and more, beyond the limits, onwards.
The Holy Spirit with His gifts guides the Church. You cannot understand the Church of Jesus without this Paraclete, whom the Lord sends us for this very reason.
And He makes unthinkable choices, but unimaginable! To use a word of St. John XXIII: it is the Holy Spirit that updates the Church: Really, he really updates it and keeps it going. And we Christians must ask the Lord for the grace of docility to the Holy Spirit. Docility in this Spirit, who speaks to us in our heart, who speaks to us in all of life’s circumstances, who speaks to us in the Church’s life, in Christian communities, who is always speaking to us.”. And entering in, he walked through Jericho.
And behold, there was a man named Zacheus, who was the chief of the publicans, and he was rich. And he sought to see Jesus who he was, and he could not for the crowd, because he was low of stature. And running before, he climbed up into a sycamore tree, that he might see him; for he was to pass that way. And when Jesus was come to the place, looking up, he saw him, and said to him: Zacheus, make haste and come down; for this day I must abide in thy house.
And he made haste and came down; and received him with joy. And when all saw it, they murmured, saying, that he was gone to be a guest with a man that was a sinner. But Zacheus standing, said to the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have wronged any man of any thing, I restore him fourfold. Jesus said to him: This day is salvation come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
Luke 19: 1-10 Pope Francis made some comments to a UN delegation that have attracted attention. Father Z does the honors: There is some blah blah at first, but keep reading. My emphases and comments. NOTE: A lot of this is simply warmed up John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
There isn’t much new here, apart from the terrible wording about the State and redistribution. But we can, for the most part, say “Ho hum! Next?” Mr Secretary General,Ladies and Gentlemen, I am pleased to welcome you, Mr Secretary-General and the leading executive officers of the Agencies, Funds and Programmes of the United Nations and specialized Organizations, as you gather in Rome for the biannual meeting for strategic coordination of the United Nations System Chief Executives Board.It is significant that today’s meeting takes place shortly after the solemn canonization of my predecessors, Popes John XXIII and John Paul II. The new saints inspire us by their passionate concern for integral human development and for understanding between peoples.
This concern was concretely expressed by the numeous visits of John Paul II to the Organizations headquartered in Rome and by his travels to New York, Geneva, Vienna, Nairobi and The Hague. I thank you, Mr Secretary-General, for your cordial words of introduction. I thank all of you, who are primarily responsible for the international system, for the great efforts being made to ensure world peace, respect for human dignity, the protection of persons, especially the poorest and most vulnerable, and harmonious economic and social development.The results of the Millennium Development Goals, especially in terms of education and the decrease in extreme poverty, confirm the value of the work of coordination carried out by this Chief Executives Board. At the same time, it must be kept in mind that the world’s peoples deserve and expect even greater results. [Do they?]An essential principle of management is the refusal to be satisfied with current results and to press forward, in the conviction that those gains are only consolidated by working to achieve even more. In the case of global political and economic organization, much more needs to be achieved, since an important part of humanity does not share in the benefits of progress and is in fact relegated to the status of second-class citizens. PopeWatch has long regarded Walter Cardinal Kasper as the Cardinal most likely to confuse heresy with Catholicism.
(That is no small feat considering some of the other cardinals in the running for that title.) His latest remark, in which he repeats the Pope’s alleged agreement with the statement that 50% of all marriages are invalid (How on Earth would either of them know?) is not heretical per se, just profoundly, profoundly stupid. Father Z quotes and comments on canon lawyer Ed Peters’ trip with the Cardinal to the woodshed: The distinguished canonist writes about the reckless comments made by Card. Walter Kasper the other day at Fordham University. My emphases and comments. Cardinal Kasper, that shows no let-up in his push to change Church discipline on marriage said, among other things, “I’ve spoken to the pope himself about this, and he said he believes that 50 percent of marriages are not valid.” [?!?] I am stunned at the pastoral recklessness of such an assertion.
Simply stunned. [As we all should be!] Suppose the cardinal had claimed that “50 percent of ordinations are not valid”. [!] Would not such a claim, coming from an internationally-renowned prelate and attributed to a pope, have a shattering effect on the morale of deacons, priests, and bishops around the world? Would not especially those clergy laboring under vocational difficulties immediately conclude that their difficulties were the consequence of having been invalidly ordained, whereupon most of them would just give up? And would not those preparing for holy orders be paralyzed with fear over proceeding to ordination until whatever is behind such a massive invalidity rate were discovered and remedied? Of course they would. Well, if tossing out a comment to clergy alleging rampant invalidity of holy orders would be pastorally unthinkable, by what right does the cardinal casually tell laity that 50% of their marriages are invalid—even if the pope did say it? IK Multimedia Sampletron Vsti RTAS V1 0-Air more.
Does turmoil among married persons in the wake of such a remark not matter to any except those who suffer it? As I said, I am stunned that such a remark was made, [IN PUBLIC! Sometimes priests will kick ideas around in private as they discuss problems today, but that doesn’t mean they a) think everything they kick around and b) would be so abysmally dumb as to repeat the conversation from their pulpits on Sunday.] even if it was a mere repetition of another’s views. But, no matter who said it—and I have no patience left for this string of ‘guess-what-the-pope-supposedly-told-me’ disclosures—let me outline several reasons why the claim that ‘half of all marriages are null’ is not just reckless, it’s also wrong.
I preface my remarks thus: I worked in diocesan tribunals for more than 10 years and concluded that hundreds of the marriage cases I saw therein were canonically null; I have been married for nearly 30 years; and I have seen, in my own family and among my closest friends, dozens of successful and failed marriages, some of those latter being canonically null, others just ruined. In short, my perspectives here are at least as professionally credentialed and as personally experienced as anyone else’s. [Haudquaquam dubitandum’st.] 1.
Marriage is, before anything else, a natural contract. Any claim, therefore, about “marriage”—including the shocking claim that half of all marriages are invalid—must be true about marriage as entered into by the great majority of the world’s population; that, or it must be abandoned. So, does Cdl. Kasper really think that half of the marriages around the world are invalid?
If not, he should never have expressed himself so. But perhaps the prelate only had in mind sacramental marriages (marriages entered into by two baptized persons) when he asserted that half of all marriages are null. But, if sacramental marriage perfects natural marriage and if grace builds on nature, what would make Christian marriage less stable than natural marriage? Actually, a few things come to mind. Some Catholic marriages are invalid for reasons having nothing to do with natural law, because they were, say, entered into by boys under age 16 contrary to Canon 1084 or by renegade priests contrary to Canon 1087. But those invalid marriages represent a proverbial drop in the bucket of invalid unions; their presence hardly allows one to claim that half of all marriages among the baptized, or even among Catholics, are invalid.
Admittedly one source of canonical nullity has no foundation whatsoever in natural law, yet accounts for thousands of invalid marriages among Catholics: what I have described as the outdated requirement of. But, while this requirement allows tens of thousands of Catholics to walk away from ‘marriages’ that we would require Protestants (and indeed all non-Catholics) to honor, violation of form does not occur in numbers that would make half of all marriages, even among Catholics, let alone among Protestants, to say nothing of non-Christians, invalid. Not even close. Or perhaps Cdl. Kasper wants to take on the “automatic sacramentality” point of Church teaching on marriage (see 1983 CIC 1055), and from there tease out a contractual invalidity argument for any sacramentum fidei attentatum sine fide, but I’ve seen nothing so complex offered yet. Well, there is much more to say, but keeping in mind that this is only a blog post, let me conclude by reminding all that a long, long, tradition of Church teaching recognizes humans’ natural capacity for marriage, reminds Christians that the grace of matrimony adds to the stability of marriage, and presumes the validity of all marriages unless and until it is proven otherwise.
In short, the validity of marriage far exceeds the odds one enjoys in a coin toss.. Pope Francis had some interesting observations on the first Christian martyr, Saint Stephen, this week: The Christian who does not witness to the faith becomes sterile. This was the focus of Pope Francis’ homily at morning Mass at Casa Santa Marta.
The Pope drew inspiration from the martyrdom of St. Stephen, narrated in the Acts of the Apostles. The Church, he said, is “not a university of religion”, but the people who follow Jesus. Only in this way, he added, is the Church both “fruitful and mother”.
Emer McCarthy reports: In his homily Pope Francis traced the path that led to the death of the first martyr of the Church, a death that was the exact replica of Christ’s. He, too, like Jesus, he said, had encountered “the jealousy of the leaders who were trying” to eliminate him. He too had “false witnesses”, a “rushed judgment”. Stephen warns them that are resisting the Holy Spirit, as Jesus had said, but “these people – said the Pope – were uneasy, were not at peace in their hearts”. These people, he added, had ” hatred ” in their heart. That is why, on hearing Stephen’s words, they were furious. “This hatred – said Pope Francis – was sown in their hearts by the devil”, “this is the devil’s hatred of Christ”.
The devil “who did what he wanted with Jesus Christ in his Passion now does the same” with Stephen. This “struggle between God and the devil” is clearly seen in martyrdom.
“On the other hand, Jesus had told his disciples that they had to rejoice to be persecuted in his name: “To be persecuted, to be a martyr, to gives ones’ life for Jesus is one of the Beatitudes”. That is why, the Pope added, “the devil cannot stand seeing the sanctity of a church or the sanctity of a person, without trying to do something”. This is what he does with Stephen, but “he died like Jesus forgiving”.
“Martyrdom is the translation of a Greek word that also means witness. And so we can say that for a Christian the path follows in the footsteps of this witness, Christ’s footsteps, to bear witness to Him and, many times, this witness ends up in laying down one’s life. You cannot understand a Christian without witness.
We are not a ‘ religion’ of ideas, of pure theology, beautiful things, of commandments. No, we are a people who follow Jesus Christ and bear witness – who want to bear witness to Jesus Christ – and sometimes this witness leads to laying down our lives”. On Stephen’s death, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, “a severe persecution began against the Church in Jerusalem”. These people, the Pope observed, “felt strong and the devil provoked them to do this” and so “Christians scattered to the regions of Judea and Samaria”. This persecution, the Pope noted, means that “the people spread far and wide” and wherever they went they explained the Gospel, gave testimony of Jesus, and so “mission of the Church” began.
“So many – he recalled – converted, on hearing these people”. One of the Fathers of the Church, explained this by saying: “The blood of martyrs is the seed of Christians”. With “their witness, they preach the faith”: “Witness, be it in everyday life, in difficulties, and even in persecution and death, always bears fruit. The Church is fruitful and a mother when she witnesses to Jesus Christ. Instead, when the church closes in on itself, when it thinks of itself as a – so to speak – ‘school of religion’, with so many great ideas, with many beautiful temples, with many fine museums, with many beautiful things, but does not give witness, it becomes sterile.
The Christian is the same. The Christian who does not bear witness, is sterile, without giving the life he has received from Jesus Christ”.
The Pope continued, “Stephen was filled with the Holy Spirit”, and “we cannot bear witness without the presence of the Holy Spirit in us”. Pope Francis advised those present: “In difficult times, where we have to choose the right path, where we have to say ‘no’ to a lot of things that maybe try to seduce us, there is prayer to the Holy Spirit, and He makes us strong enough to take this path of witness”: “Today thinking about these two icons – Stephen, who dies, and the people, the Christians, fleeing, scattering far and wide because of the violent persecution – let us ask: How is my witness? Am I a Christian who witnesses to Jesus or are a simple numerary in this sect? Am I fruitful because I bear witness, or sterile because unable to let the Holy Spirit lead me forward in my Christian vocation?”. The canonization sermon by Pope Francis in regard to Pope John Paul II and Pope John XXIII with commentary by Father Z: At the heart of this Sunday, which concludes the Octave of Easter and which John Paul II wished to dedicate to Divine Mercy, are the glorious wounds of the risen Jesus. He had already shown those wounds when he first appeared to the Apostles on the very evening of that day following the Sabbath, the day of the resurrection.
But Thomas was not there that evening, and when the others told him that they had seen the Lord, he replied that unless he himself saw and touched those wounds, he would not believe. A week later, Jesus appeared once more to the disciples gathered in the Upper Room, and Thomas was present; Jesus turned to him and told him to touch his wounds.
Whereupon that man, so straightforward and accustomed to testing everything personally, knelt before Jesus with the words: “My Lord and my God!” (Jn 20:28). The wounds of Jesus are a scandal, a stumbling block for faith, yet they are also the test of faith. [May I add also that there are hard teachings which we must accept if we are to remain Christians? I have in mind, among others, the Lord’s teaching about marriage, to which the Church has] That is why on the body of the risen Christ the wounds never pass away: they remain, for those wounds are the enduring sign of God’s love for us. They are essential for believing in God. Not for believing that God exists, but for believing that God is love, mercy and faithfulness.
Saint Peter, quoting Isaiah, writes to Christians: “by his wounds you have been healed” (1 Pet2:24, cf. Is 53:5). [It is a great mystery that, even through Christ conquered death definitively, once for all time, we still have to die.] John XXIII and John Paul II were not afraid to look upon the wounds of Jesus, to touch his torn hands and his pierced side. [As Christ said and John Paul famously repeated, “Do not be afraid.”] They were not ashamed of the flesh of Christ, they were not scandalized by him, by his cross; they did not despise the flesh of their brother (cf. Is 58:7), because they saw Jesus in every person who suffers and struggles. These were two men of courage, filled with the parrhesia of the Holy Spirit, and they bore witness before the Church and the world to God’s goodness and mercy. They were priests, bishops and popes of the twentieth century. [Let us not forget the indignities and sufferings they experienced as children, lay men!] They lived through the tragic events of that century, but they were not overwhelmed by them.
For them, God was more powerful; faith was more powerful – faith in Jesus Christ the Redeemer of man and the Lord of history; the mercy of God, shown by those five wounds, was more powerful; and more powerful too was the closeness of Mary our Mother. In these two men, who looked upon the wounds of Christ and bore witness to his mercy, there dwelt a living hope and an indescribable and glorious joy (1 Pet 1:3,8).
The hope and the joy which the risen Christ bestows on his disciples, the hope and the joy which nothing and no one can take from them. The hope and joy of Easter, forged in the crucible of self-denial, self-emptying, utter identification with sinners, even to the point of disgust at the bitterness of that chalice. Such were the hope and the joy which these two holy popes had received as a gift from the risen Lord and which they in turn bestowed in abundance upon the People of God, meriting our eternal gratitude. This hope and this joy were palpable in the earliest community of believers, in Jerusalem, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles (cf. It was a community which lived the heart of the Gospel, love and mercy, in simplicity and fraternity. This is also the image of the Church which the Second Vatican Council set before us. John XXIII and John Paul II cooperated with the Holy Spirit in renewing and updating the Church in keeping with her pristine features, those features which the saints have given her throughout the centuries.
Let us not forget that it is the saints who give direction and growth to the Church. In convening the Council, John XXIII showed an exquisite openness to the Holy Spirit. He let himself be led and he was for the Church a pastor, a servant-leader. This was his great service to the Church; he was the pope of openness to the Spirit. [Since last July I have been saying that this canonization of the two Popes is also the canonization of the Second Vatican Council.] In his own service to the People of God, John Paul II was the pope of the family.
He himself once said that he wanted to be remembered as the pope of the family. I am particularly happy to point this out as we are in the process of journeying with families towards the Synod on the family. It is surely a journey which, from his place in heaven, he guides and sustains. [All of you should note that reference to the Synod. I know that the Cardinals and Bishops present heard that.] May these two new saints and shepherds of God’s people intercede for the Church, so that during this two-year journey toward the Synod she may be open to the Holy Spirit in pastoral service to the family. May both of them teach us not to be scandalized by the wounds of Christ and to enter ever more deeply into the mystery of divine mercy, [NB!] which always hopes and always forgives, because it always loves. PopeWatch has long admired the standup comedy performed by Vatican press flack Father Federico Lombardi.
In reaction to the cold call mess, go to read about it, he has outdone himself with this hilarious statement: Several telephone calls have taken place in the context of Pope Francis’ personal pastoral relationships. Since they do not in any way form part of the Pope’s public activities, no information or comments are to be expected from the Holy See Press Office. That which has been communicated in relation to this matter, outside the scope of personal relationships, and the consequent media amplification, cannot be confirmed as reliable, and is a source of misunderstanding and confusion. Therefore, consequences relating to the teaching of the Church are not to be inferred from these occurrences.
The Easter Message of Pope Francis: Dear Brothers and Sisters, a Happy and Holy Easter! The Church throughout the world echoes the angel’s message to the women: “Do not be afraid!
I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for he has been raised Come, see the place where he lay” ( Mt 28:5-6). This is the culmination of the Gospel, it is the Good News par excellence: Jesus, who was crucified, is risen! This event is the basis of our faith and our hope.
If Christ were not raised, Christianity would lose its very meaning; the whole mission of the Church would lose its impulse, for this is the point from which it first set out and continues to set out ever anew. The message which Christians bring to the world is this: Jesus, Love incarnate, died on the cross for our sins, but God the Father raised him and made him the Lord of life and death. In Jesus, love has triumphed over hatred, mercy over sinfulness, goodness over evil, truth over falsehood, life over death.
Rest assured that most of the media will ignore this statement of Pope Francis: The pope thanked the Movimento per la Vita, one of Italy’s leading political pro-life groups, for their work, urging them to continue “with courage and love” for life “in all its phases.” “It is therefore necessary to reiterate the strongest opposition to any direct attack on life, especially innocent and defenseless, and her unborn child in the womb is the innocent par excellence,” the pope told the gathering of politicians and pro-life activists at the Vatican today. “If you look at life as something that is consumed,” the pope said, “it will also be something that sooner or later you can throw away, with abortion to begin with.” Human life, however, is “a gift from God” and if it is accepted as such, “then you have before you a valuable and intangible asset, to be protected by all means and not to be discarded.” In a different tack from previous popes, Pope Francis took the opportunity to link the pro-life message of the Church to his critique of the global economy, a major theme of this pontificate.
“This economy kills. In a shock April 1, 2014 announcement the Vatican has stated that Pope Francis is resigning today and Pope Benedict will resume his duties as Pope.
Pope Francis is quoted as naming two factors in his decision for resigning: 1. The rich Italian cooking that could get him up to 400 pounds if he stayed in Rome; and 2. Criticisms from Catholic blogs, especially in America. Noting that his predecessor had warned him about reading the blogs, Pope Francis was disturbed by the divisions his election had caused. “I do not want to be the cause of acrimony among Catholic bloggers.
If I stay as Pope it could be another “torture debate”, and I doubt if Western civilization could survive that.” As for Pope Benedict, he is described as rested, fit and rearing to resume his duties as Pope. Father Lombardi, Vatican press spokesman, said that Pope Benedict feels 75 after months of sleeping all night and eating hearty monastery food.
As for blogs, Pope Benedict stopped reading them after the condom flap, according to Father Lombardi, although he conceded that the Pope did sneak a peak at Eye of the Tiber for a laugh now and then. The Consistory on the 22nd February to discuss the family, was supposed to be secret. Instead a decision came from the top that it was opportune to publish Cardinal Kasper’s long report on the theme of the Eucharist for the divorced and remarried. In all probability [this] to open the way in prospect of the October Synod on the Family. However half of the Consistory remained secret: [that half] concerned observations from Cardinals. And maybe not by chance, as, after Cardinal Kasper had presented his long report (and as it seems it was not very light when given,) rather a lot of voices were raised in criticizing it.
So much so, that in the afternoon when the Pope gave him the job of responding, the German Cardinal’s tone appeared piqued, even angry to the many [present]. In this sense, Cardinal Caffarra of Bologna as well as German Cardinal Mueller (Prefect of the Congregation of the Faith) spoke clearly. Equally explicit was Cardinal Walter Brandmuller (“ Neither human nature nor the Commandments nor the Gospel have an expiry date[]Courage is needed to enunciate the truth even against current customs. Whoever speaks on behalf of the Church must possess courage if he does not want his vocation to be a failure.[] The desire to obtain approval and applause is a temptation which is always present in the transmission of religious teaching.” Afterwards he made his words public). Also the President of the Italian Bishops, Cardinal Bagnasco expressed himself in a critical manner with regard to “Kasper’s theorem”; the same went for the African Cardinal Robert Sarah, Head of “Cor Unum” who at the end of his comments, recalled that in the course of the centuries even on dramatic questions controversies and divergences had existed inside the Church, but that the role of the Papacy had always been the one of defending doctrine. Father Z highlighted some interesting commentary from Rush Limbaugh with comments by Father Z: RUSH: Well, folks, the left’s honeymoon with Pope Francis may be coming to an end.
Remember the pope went out there and released an economic encyclical or document in which. And this caused just There were eruptions in voluminous amounts. In fact, there were volcanic eruptions in the media. And all of a sudden the left, which hates the Catholic Church, fell in love with the pope! Remember that? Oh, if I come out criticize him, the pope’s gotta be a good guy.
So they fell in love with pope. “The pope is a great guy!” But now the Vatican’s chief justice feels that President Obama’s policies have been hostile toward Christians. “Vatican Chief Justice: Obama’s Policies ‘Have Become Progressively More Hostile Toward Christian Civilization’ — The Vatican’s chief justice feels that President Barack Obama’s policies have been hostile toward Christians.” Now, this is the Vatican. This is an official. It doesn’t have to be coming from the pope in order for it to be official.
Rush you need some tutoring here.]“In an interview with Polonia Christiana magazine [] — and transcribed by Life Site News — Cardinal Raymond Burke said that Obama ‘promotes anti-life and anti-family policies.’” So the Vatican is out defending Christianity, defending itself, and this is gonna cause a fissure between the media, which was falling in love with the pope. [Not to mention fissures in the catholic Left. Wait until the feminists start demanding that their tame males turn on Francis because Francis will never support the ordination of women.] They weren’t falling in love with the Catholic Church, don’t misunderstand.
They were falling in love with the pope. They thought, they really thought Here, again, is another classic illustration of total ignorance.
They really think that they can make the Catholic Church moderate its tone. They think they can bring the Catholic Church into what they call the Twenty-First Century. They think that this pope might actually legalize gay marriage, sanction it in the church. They think this pope might actually allow women to be priests.
They think this pope might actually lighten up on its pro-life position. They really believe that. They really think the Catholic Church is just another political organization. [Which is why the catholic Left talks about the Church’s “policies”.]If they exert enough pressure, and if they get the right pope in there, they can work on him to bring the church forward into the Twenty-First Century. And this from the Vatican chief justice is just a major, major slapdown.
The left is not going to be happy about this.. Recent Comments • Clinton on To attend a Papal audience, one must first obtain • Nate Winchester on 1) Shea had admitted he has diabetes. 2) Mark does • Greg Mockeridge on • Greg Mockeridge on Don, You may not be aware of this, but you have to • on 'How popular is Pope Francis?
With the public? Wit • Dave Griffey on MIke, That is one of Mark's goto tactics. He accus • Mike Miller on Mark does seem to have a memory issue that apparen • Phillip on 'Oh, for the record, I don’t think Mark is pro-abo • on From section XCIV in Satiricon Liber, I believe th • on Some people are overweight because of physical ail.
Hello lance,! Echolocation is more simple than it is supossed acording the texts I read about it. More simple, and more complex. More simple because we, the environment all, and air, and all are waves ok? Incredible more rich and complex, because you are 3D aware of that waves dance, you becomes, your body, a quantum biologist practising the last generation technology: sensomics, across echolocation, you are aware thus of the direct network of waves bits, crossing around you, and being chased by your sense powers. Movement is basic, the surround swallows you when you moves in, this is more 'visible' in early morning inside quiet parks where air masses keep quiet and thus discernible Felicidades colega! Bipolar Abduction seemed well established, until recently, across the neurosemantic networks of so-here-called, bipolar scientists.
New (for Science) Multipolar Abduction, after one century of Noosphere, 'soft', incubation (After Pierce), was exponentially increasing across scientific papers. We all are bi-and-multi-bipolar. We all use a certain combination of deduction, induction, and abduction (ab-in-deduction). Multipolar Abduction Recent Papers not just refers in any papers towards the Old, Bipolar Abduction, very well expressed, neurosematincally, in 'Old' methods of education-and-or-Communication. Actualy a later development-and-incubation of a single process that begun with the first reference by painting, of christ in a remote cave in Anatolia. In this way, scientist speaking about that excitant field as Multipolar Abduction seems going from their own Bipolar Abduction just as if they were authentic extraterrestrial for a planet called Multipolar Abduction.
Predicated upon the interconnectedness of communities, lands and peoples, the interrelatedness of all social, cultural and natural phenomena, the interlocking nature of past, present and future, and the complementary nature of the cognitive, affective, physical and spiritual dimensions of the human being. It addresses issues of citizenship, development, equity, health, peace, social justice, and environmental sustainability. Its scope encompasses the personal, the local, the regional and bioregional, the national and planetary. Congruent with its precepts and principles, its methodology is experiential, interactive, learner-centered, democratic, convivial, participatory and change-oriented. The cyborg that Donna Haraway appropriated in ‘Manifesto for Cyborgs’ as a metaphor for political action and theoretical inquiry has ceased to have the potency it did 20 years ago.
While Haraway has turned from a central focus on technoculture to companion species, much important cultural work remains to be done, especially in networked and programmable media. Problems with the cyborg as a metaphor include the implication that the liberal humanist subject, however problematized by its hybridization with cybernetic mechanism, continues as a singular entity operating with localized agency.
In a word, the cyborg is not networked enough to encompass the emergent possibilities associated with the Internet and the world-wide web and other phenomena of the contemporary digital era. Instead I propose the idea of the cognisphere. As operational concept and suggestive metaphor, the cognisphere recognizes that networked and programmable media are not only more pervasive than ever before in human history but also more cognitively powerful. It is closely associated with what many researchers regard as a major insight: the idea that the physical world is fundamentally computational.
While these scientists regard computation as a physical process, the cultural critic is apt to see it as an over-determined metaphor. The binary choice between seeing the computational universe as a literal description of the physical world and reading it as an over-determined metaphor misses a crucial aspect of contemporary cultural dynamics: the interaction between means and metaphor, technology and cultural presupposition. Taking this dynamic into account leads to a more complete understanding summed up in the aphorism, ‘What we make and what (we think) we are co-evolve together.’.
The act of breaking free is called While we partake of surface-only existence, we define reality, ourselves and what is possible for us as individuals according to human consensus reality, accepting the limitations and definitions imposed on us by family, cultural and religious conditioning (among other factors.) The experience of 'stopping the world,' of freeing ourselves, even momentarily, from all limiting definitions of self and world in a sense destroys both – the self and world we once knew and believed all-encompassing fall away, never to return. Once we have experientially sampled those deeper layers of reality, verifying their existence for ourselves and putting the lie to our previously cherished illusions, we can never again accept limitation. We can never return to who we once were; that person has died. In his place stands a newly initiated shaman.