TIA,

Regarding the new line of the Vatican paper - that even praises Michael Jackson - here's another one for you. On July 3 L'Osservatore Romano praised French Protestant John Calvin, hailing him an "extraordinary" figure.

We have seen the Vatican go overboard to show its approval for Luther. Now it's Calvin who gets the praise. On the 500th anniversary of Calvin's birth, L'Osservatore Romano recognized the theologian as a "Christian who had a major impact on European life."

I agree he had an impact - but the Church used to denounce that impact. Saints like St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis de Sales fought the heresy of Calvinism. What would they think about such praise?

"Considering the strength of arguments against him, we think it necessary to point out that Calvin is a Christian," the daily paper said of Calvin. Well, this contradicts Catholic teaching also. I believe you had something on your site about St. Ignatius telling us not to call Protestants Christians. Well, that's pass' thinking - those saints need to get with the times.

The paper ranked Calvin alongside French philosopher Rousseau for his influence on modern European life. The pair were the "only two men who influenced some Europeans to change course and were strong enough to lead them in a new direction," it wrote.

The only two men? What about the Catholic saints of the Counter-Reformation.? Guess they were off course because they tried to counter the "new directions" Calvin and Luther were taking. How much more of an approbation of Protestantism do you want?

These are more fruits of Vatican II, and this Pope is promoting the revolution in doctrine - I guess he and his predecessor are like Rousseau and Calvin - "strong enough to lead in a new direction." Unfortunately, that direction is away from the traditional teaching of the Church and into heresy.

Traditionalists, wake up. The revolution is going ahead in the Church. If you won't acknowledge it, you won't fight it, and that is what you'll stand responsible before to God.

     P.H.

TIA,

More recently, in addition to Pope Eugene IV, we also have this from Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, n. 57:

"Finally, while by His grace He provides for the continual growth of the Church, He yet refuses to dwell through sanctifying grace in those members that are wholly severed from the Body."

Unfortunately Vatican II teaches the opposite of these two Popes: Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, nn. 3,4:

"It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church."

Whom are we to believe? Almost 2000 years of traditional Church teaching, or the Modernist-Progressive Vatican II Church?

The Council justifies their position with the novel statement that the Church of Christ "subsists" in the Catholic Church, inferring that it can exist elsewhere (Lumen gentium, 8.2.). But traditional teaching is that the Church that Jesus Christ founded "IS" the Catholic Church, which is His Body of which He is the Head. It is absurd to say that His Church "subsists" in His Body, and can also exist outside of Him!

     Peace,

     F.R.

Dear TIA,

Once again you fall into a simple error. You quote Pope Eugene IV and assume that it is covered by infallibility. This assumption is incorrect.

Neither encyclicals, nor bullae, nor apostolic constitutions, nor speeches, nor colloquies of any kind, nor any document of any of the councils whatsoever, are covered by infallibility by the mere fact of being such documents.

Pope Eugene is wrong. Many non-Catholics will be saved, obviously.

Infallible sentences are rare.

Otherwise we would have about 4,400,000,000 dogmas by now!

     A.W., Ireland

TIA,

One would think that if a president of the United States sided with a strong-armed ex-president law-breaker like Zelaya, that that alone would be the end of his political career. Then when you consider that this same president is trying his utmost to transform the United States into a Communist country and is putting the USA in so much debt that China will hold the pink slip, you've got to think, this man is toast.

I'm not even counting that this president is a supporter of baby-killing for the entire nine months of pregnancy, even the late term gruesome and excruciating painful partial-birth abortion, and that he loves what homosexuals do to each other - as he has stated that he is on their side.

In college this president changed his name from Barry Soetero to Barack Hussein Obama, apparently trying to get in touch with his Muslim side.

Enough of a name that might be construed as being American - he just had to have a Muslim-sounding name. So, as Lew Alcindor, the basketball player, became Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Cassius Clay, the boxer, became Muhammad Ali, Barry Soetero became Barack Hussein Obama. You know - the same ethnic-sounding name as [those of] the terrorists who crashed planes into the Twin Towers and killed about 3,000 people and as [those of] all of the Islamic faith, the faith that decrees that if the infidels do not convert, then kill them.

How can such a person be president of the United States?

     Frank Joseph M.D.

TIA,

Enjoyed your article on Michael Jackson about the Vatican's praise in L'Osservatore Romano.

Also, can't help but wonder if this Vatican thinks much different than Obama's on abortion. Maybe this article by John Allen explains the recent position of their paper. Today it's more about pragmatic "realism" than the truth.

Below are a few excerpts

     J.F.



Papal Theologian Praises Obama's 'Realism,' even on Abortion

July 03, 2009 - In the run-up to President Barack Obama's much-anticipated July 10 meeting with Pope Benedict XVI, an influential cardinal and Vatican adviser has praised Obama's 'humble realism' and compared the president's approach to abortion to the thinking of St. Thomas Aquinas and early Christian tradition about framing laws in a pluralistic society.

Swiss Cardinal George Cottier, 87, former theologian of the papal household under Pope John Paul II, laid out those views in a cover essay in the current issue of 30 Giorni, perhaps the most widely read journal of Catholic affairs in Italy. ... Cottier's essay was overwhelmingly positive, repeatedly arguing that Obama's 'realism,' as well as his commitment to finding 'common ground,' resonate with Christian tradition and the social teaching of the Catholic Church.

Seen through American eyes, perhaps the most striking element was Cottier's analysis of what Obama had to say at Notre Dame. The university's decision to invite Obama, and to award him an honorary degree, were widely criticized in Catholic circles in the States, given Obama's positions on abortion, embryonic stem cell research and other life issues. More than 80 bishops publicly objected to the event.

Cottier, however, compared Obama's Notre Dame address to Pope Paul VI's encyclical Ecclesiam suam, in its accent on dialogue and common ground, and to the document Dignitatis humanae of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) on conducting the search for truth in a pluralistic society. Christians, Cottier wrote, "can be in agreement" with Obama's "way of framing the search for solutions."'

Follow us

  L'Osservatore Romano Praises Michael Jackson

  Card. Willebrands: Luther Is Our Common Master

  Don't Call Protestants Evangelicals

  Please, Don't Call Protestants Christians

  Ordinary and Extraordinary Infallibility in Papal Documents

  Eugene IV: Charity & 'Martyrdom' of Non-Catholics Do Not to Salvation

  The Honduras Impeachment