We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

Eugene • 8 years ago

How I miss this great and true Shepherd of souls...its been 3 years of feeling like an orphan, which has only continue to worsen

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Good grief, go wear a hair shirt or something... Your true Shepard knew all about THE scandal of the century... Speaking of orphans, since our church is against birth control of any sort, why don't you spend your free time (of which you seem to have a good deal of) organizing homes for all the unwanted births; someone has to take care of all these unwanted children of God.

Steve Skojec • 7 years ago

I'm not a fan of how you showed up here and started taking pot-shots at our other guests. Tone down the scathing responses, please, or find somewhere else to comment.

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Oh I'm so sorry... I did not know it was an EXCLUSIVE club. Facts are facts and if you prefer to call them "pot shots," feel free. That is a lot more "ecumenical" on my part then you seem to be able to handle.
In case you were unaware, WE the Catholic People are the church. If you felt my forte is these so called "shots" try this one; I think you would love Malta in perpetual servitude to BURKE!!
YES that was a bit "harsh" but so is the (your) implication that criticism is ALWAYS a negative occurrence. Sometimes one just has to spiritually beat a guy over the head to make a point amidst all this (your) self righteousness.
Some of us are from Jersey bro, if you catch my drift... It's not just the home of Princeton, It's also the home of the BASILICA of the Sacred Heart in Newark, the city where I was born and attended Catholic Prep. We calls 'em like we sees 'em.
I can articulate with the best but there are certain instances where I feel compelled, almost propelled to project, even interject a bit of whimsy... In other words CHILL OUT.

Steve Skojec • 7 years ago

It is an exclusive club, and I'm the bouncer. I'm busy, so I sometimes do a lousy job of it, but one thing I ask of our guests (whom I expect to have strong opinions on just about everything) is at least the pretense of civility.

You're welcome here if you can avoid frenetically colliding with all you encounter. So I'll repeat the warning: lose the histrionics, or get lost.

ChazinPort • 7 years ago

Thanks for the complement!! What, did you think I was going to do ? Go hang myself due to your silly self?
My original response was much more articulate but it was "excommunicated."
There are tons (that's a heavy weight) of addresses WE can access mr. Exclusive.

Steve Skojec • 7 years ago

No, I entertained the faint hope that you might realize your lack of social graces was showing. As I said, though, it was faint.

See ya.

JD • 7 years ago

I smell a troll.

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Well well, how DROLL of you. I am a Catholic with 16 yrs. of education in our faith, as I previously have had to say over and over (boring).
Sorry if the Jesuits taught me to think for myself in ALL matters, especially in the healthy questioning of the church.
Before you go all dogmatic, let me spare you the words I can almost hear boiling in your brain... I am sure the word "Jesuit" is heating up that water in your brain since I am also sure that you will be wanting to lecture me on the "legitimacy" of Francis. Am I correct? If not "mea culpa" bro (?).

JD • 7 years ago

Birth control is responsible for the destruction of the family, which is the building block of communities, countries, and the world. If 16 years of "Catholic education" did not teach you that, then there's a big problem with Catholic education.

Miguel PasaMano • 7 years ago

Are you by any chance a sedevacantist?

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Of fit the love of the Christ on the cross!
What I am is a human being who was taught through 16 yrs. of Catholic Education that of all the gifts, CHARITY & GOOD WILL are paramount.
Honestly, you sound like an Evangelical in reverse (Sola fide). Open up your heart to the world, not dogna.

Konstantin • 8 years ago

I think some readers didn't get that Llámame Jorge is satire...

Llámame Jorge • 8 years ago

I have said these things in all earnestness.

You can look it up.

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

BRAVO!! Finally a real point is made.

Aaron Traas • 8 years ago

I truly don't understand why the Pope Emeritus abandoned us. It makes me sad and angry when I think about it.

@FMShyanguya • 8 years ago

He may have, but God didn't, hasn't, and will never abandon us if we don't abandon him.

Beatriz Jaramillo • 8 years ago

I must think that same thing every day. And I don't believe for a minute that he resigned of his own free will.

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

"FREE WILL" is what seperates us from the Reformation. Is "Radz" a Protestant then?

CumExApostolatus • 8 years ago

He resigned and won't leave the Vatican city-state for thousands of reasons.

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Correct... HE resigned.

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Poor you then. Could you go on knowing that you could have saved children from abuse and did not act in time or insist that these actions stop?
It is my guess, and I DO believe this in a minute, that you seem to be the type that would push abuse aside for "the greater good."
As I said, poor you.
He had the ENTIRE conservative Curia and "big wigs" like Burke on his side; who forced him?

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Well, let me and others enlighten you then. John Paul II was a politician and his agenda was to denounce communism REGARDLESS of, and in lieu of ANY other concern. Cardinal Raz knew of the sex abuses if the church and brought this knowledge to John Paul, who then swept it aside (bring that more than a few if those who brought big cash to the church were guilty in said crimes).
He seems to have been overwhelmed by his conscience in this matter and simply put, FOLDED.
Does that sink in?

philosophizer • 8 years ago

How did Benedict reject the notion of the Anonymous Christian? The quotation provided rejects a pluralistic approach to religious truths that claim all religions have equal merits in achieving salvation, but such is not Rahner's Anonymous Christian, nor is it a proper understanding of the supernatural existential upon which the Anonymous Christian is built. Would the author care to elaborate the claim?

LionelAndrades • 8 years ago

Theologically he has not rejected the Anonymous Christian theory of his friend Fr. Karl Rahner. Since the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 says all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church. He means there is salvation outside the Church and a person can be saved in another religion through Jesus and the Church.
This 'new theology' is based on the error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.The Letter wrongly assumed hypothetical cases were known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(EENS). So it wrongly assumed that there were known cases of people saved with the baptism of desire or invincible ignorance, without the baptism of water.
This is false. Since no one in the present or past, could have seen, known or met someone saved without the baptism of water. These cases would have been in Heaven.
However for Pope Benedict there is salvation outside the Church and so he rejects the dogma EENS.It is upon this irrationality, of being able to see people in Heaven who are exceptions to EENS, that he has rejected the dogma EENS and assumes there is salvation outside the Catholic Church.

disqus-YZ • 7 years ago

LionelAndrades,

Below, I have posted the full text of what Pope Emeritus Benedict said in the interview section referred to regarding the Anonymous Christian. I am still trying to work through what he said on my own trying to see if he fully rejected the anonymous Christian or if he was seeking to clarify that salvation only comes through Christ even if one does not fully know Christ. I appreciated your answer above and wondered if the full text changes your interpretation of what the pope emeritus meant versus what the reporter wrote (and if so, how)?

Thank you very much!

"Lately several attempts have been formulated in order to reconcile the universal necessity of the Christian faith with the opportunity to save oneself without it. I will mention here two: first, the well-known thesis of the anonymous Christians of Karl Rahner. He sustains that the basic, essential act at the basis of Christian existence, decisive for salvation, in the transcendental structure of our consciousness, consists in the opening to the entirely Other, toward unity with God. The Christian faith would in this view cause to rise to consciousness what is structural in man as such. So when a man accepts himself in his essential being, he fulfills the essence of being a Christian without knowing what it is in a conceptual way. The Christian, therefore, coincides with the human and, in this sense, every man who accepts himself is a Christian even if he does not know it. It is true that this theory is fascinating, but it reduces Christianity itself to a pure conscious presentation of what a human being is in himself and therefore overlooks the drama of change and renewal that is central to Christianity. Even less acceptable is the solution proposed by the pluralistic theories of religion, for which all religions, each in their own way, would be ways of salvation and in this sense, in their effects must be considered equivalent. The critique of religion of the kind exercised in the Old Testament, in the New Testament and in the early Church is essentially more realistic, more concrete and true in its examination of the various religions. Such a simplistic reception is not proportional to the magnitude of the issue."

LionelAndrades • 7 years ago

disqus-YZ
Below, I have posted the full text of what Pope Emeritus Benedict said in the interview section referred to regarding the Anonymous Christian. I am still trying to work through what he said on my own trying to see if he fully rejected the anonymous Christian or if he was seeking to clarify that salvation only comes through Christ even if one does not fully know Christ.

Lionel: This is not the issue. Here he refers to a hypothetical issue. It is theoretical.Speculative.The issue is does every one need to be a formal member of the Church for salvation? This was rejected by Fr.Rahner since he accepted salvation outside the Church. So did Fr.Ratzinger. Their new theology was based on salvation outside
the Church. There were exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.

So since there were exceptions it mean someone could be saved in another religion.He would be saved through Jesus and the Church (CCC 846). So we have the Anonymous Christian according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church approved by Cardinal Ratzinger
and Cardinal Schonborn.
_______________________________

I appreciated your answer above and wondered if the full text changes your interpretation of what the pope emeritus meant versus what the reporter wrote (and if so, how)?
Lionel:It does not change what I wrote above.
_______________________________

Thank you very much!

"Lately several attempts have been formulated in order to reconcile the universal necessity of the Christian faith with the opportunity to
save oneself without it.
Lionel: 'With the opportunity to save oneself without it'?! He considers it a possibility.
_____________________________

I will mention here two: first, the well-known thesis of the anonymous Christians of Karl Rahner.

Lionel: Which is based on 'the opportunity to save oneself without being a formal member of the Church' and is part of the new theology incorporated in CCC 846 and 1257.
____________________________

He sustains that the basic, essential act at the basis of Christian existence, decisive for salvation, in the transcendental structure of our
consciousness, consists in the opening to the entirely Other, toward unity with God. The Christian faith would in this view cause to rise to
consciousness what is structural in man as such.
So when a man accepts himself in his essential being, he fulfills the essence of being a Christian without knowing what it is in a conceptual
way. The Christian, therefore, coincides with the human and, in this sense, every man who accepts himself is a Christian even if he does
not know it.

Lionel: The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says outside the Church there is no salvation. Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 mentions schismatics ( Orthodox Christians) and heretics
( Protestants) being on the way to Hell. They believe in God and even
believe in Christ.
_______________________________

It is true that this theory is fascinating,but it reduces Christianity itself to a pure conscious presentation of what a human being is in himself and therefore overlooks the drama of change and renewal that is
central to Christianity.
Lionel: Words.The real issue is that there is no known salvation outside the Church.
So there are no known exceptions to the dogma EENS.
______________________________

Even less acceptable is the solution proposed by the pluralistic theories of religion, for which all religions, each in their own way, would be ways of salvation and in this sense, in their effects must be considered equivalent.
Lionel: The International Theological Commission in a theological paper titled Christianity and the World Religions supports a theology of
religions. It was approved by Cardinal Ratzinger.
This was possible since there is salvation outside the Church for Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria ( Ex-President,ITC).
______________________________

The critique of religion of the kind exercised in the Old Testament, in the New Testament and in the early Church is essentially more realistic, more concrete and true in its examination of the various religions.
Such a simplistic reception is not proportional to the magnitude of the issue."
Lionel: I don't know what he is referring to here.
-Lionel Andrades

disqus-YZ • 7 years ago

Thank you, Lionel! Your replies clarifying this for me are all very interesting. My knee jerk response would simply have been to reply with CCC 847. Thank you again!

Jay • 8 years ago

1949? Pope Pius IX talked about salvation for the invincibly ignorant in the mid 19th century

LionelAndrades • 7 years ago

Yes and it was understood that 1) that this was a theoretical, hypothetical case (common knowledge) and 2) it would be followed with the baptism of water in the Church in a manenr known only to God.

The Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston 1949 assumed 1) that the hypothetical case was explicit and that 2) this explicit case was an objective exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
This is how the liberal theologians then started interpreting Pius IX and others who mentioned invincible ignorance and the desire for the baptism of water by a catechumen who dies before receiving it.

Since the theologians considered these hypothetical cases as being explicit they mentioned them in Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14) with reference to orthodox passages which support EENS( all need faith and baptism).They really should not be there. Since they are invisible cases and so irrelevant to EENS.
Then they also inserted so many hypothetical cases in Vatican Council as if they were exceptions to the traditional teaching on salvation (LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, AG 11( seeds of the Word) etc.
Cardinal Ratzinger accepted that there were explicit exceptions to the dogma EENS and so there is a reference to being saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance in the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1992).They should not have been mentioned in the Catechism.He needed to clarify that these cases were hypothetical and so were not exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS. He did not do this.
To assume hypothetical cases are explicit exceptions to EENS is Cushingism for me. Cardinal Ratzinger interpreted EENS as a Cushingite.He also interpreted Vatican Council II as a Cushingite.

For me there are no explicit exceptions to EENS.This is Feeneyism. I interpret EENS as a Feeneynite. I also interpret Vatican Council II as a Feeneyite.
For Cardinal Ratzinger LG 16 refers to a known exception to the dogma EENS since it is visible and objecively seen for him ( Cushingism). For me LG 16 refers to an invisible case. So it is not an exception to EENS.
So for me Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) does not contradict EENS ( Feeneyite).
For Pope Benedict Vatican Council II ( Cushingite) contradicts EENs ( Feeneyite).
So Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus was written with the theology of Cushingism. This was a flaw.
He also did not tell Archbishop Lefebvre that Vatican Council II could be interpreted with Feeneyism. The Archbishop and the SSPX bishops were rejecting Cushingite Vatican Council II.
-Lionel

ebergerud • 8 years ago

I can think of many reasons why being part of Mother Church is vital for a deep and happy life, but I'm not sure that the sole road to salvation is one of them. This puts us back in the world of Luther, Calvin and the Council of Trent - is that a place to be in a world where Christianity is under legal and physical attack across much of the world? Go to YouTube and listen to James White, a well educated Evangelical apologist, argue that Roman Catholics are not "brothers and sisters in Christ." Do we really have the time and resources to evangelize one third of the world's Christians on the issue of damnation? I do not doubt that in the fullness of time the truth will out, but we have seen Christian communities that existed for over a thousand years in the Mideast and Central Asia destroyed by physical persecution - from Muslims, not Lutherans. If you wish the Church militant to launch spiritual warfare against other faiths that say the Apostle's Creed or at least accept the Trinity and the holy inspiration of the Gospels? Mother Church continues to grow in the global south and so do evangelical sects. Do we make no distinction between Christians that do not honor Rome and faiths that do not honor Jesus or do not believe in God altogether? Should modern Popes continue to speak with respect toward Jews if Catholic doctrine teaches that the followers of the first covenant are heading for hellfire? I think this is an idea that sounds better on paper than it would in practice. In America we are threatened by subjective materialism that calls for the eradication of all faiths - our allies in this fight include many Protestant sects, conservative Jews and - yes - Muslims. I can think of no Catholic teaching that could hurt the Church more than to say to those supporting us in this relentless push by government, academia and the media "thanks, but you're going to join Richard Dawkins in hell anyway."

Deacon_Augustine • 8 years ago

I can think of an infallible dogmatic reason why you should belong to Holy Mother Church:

The Council of Florence (A.D. 1438-1445) From Cantate Domino — Papal Bull of Pope Eugene IV:

It (the sacrosanct Roman Church) firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.

disqus-YZ • 7 years ago

This is a good infallible reason to belong to the Church indeed, Deacon_Augustine. In light of our current Catechism, clarification on who the papal bull was directed is in order to see the unity of Church teaching over time, Specifically, paragraphs 846 and 847 note that "all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body" and that "this affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church. The purpose of the Council of Florence was pastoral. It was trying to bring back lost sheep. An important key to reading this document is to look at the order of the categories listed. Pagans are listed first. They have received none of the message of salvation. The Jews have received only part of the message, that of the Old Testament. Third are the heretics who, although having received the complete message of salvation, seem to have lost some of it by way of a conscious separation from the Church. The fourth group is the one to whom the document is primarily directed, the schismatics. They have deliberately cut themselves off from the Church by a complete break from its head, the Pope. It was hoped at the time that the strongly worded statement would bring the separated Eastern Churches back into unity with Rome. As for the first two categories of people who barely (if at all) know Christ or what the Church teaches, practicing Catholics continue to besent on the mission of spreading the good news everywhere (using words if needed).

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

Ho hum... Is this the Middle Ages? That is the same excuse used to when non-catholic children were baptized "in fear of death" and then torn from the bosom of their families. Limbo has been put in limbo or have you not heard?
You prove to me that I am correct in being very very weary of giving a voice to untrained "deacons" who push extreme and unmerciful self views. You would do better to join the ranks of Opus Dei than grab at a self absorbed, self gratifying title... dDeacon Al

LionelAndrades • 8 years ago

Mistakes in Vatican Council II : All Catholics can interpret extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the 16th century missionaries.
http://eucharistandmission....

The mistakes in Vatican Council II
http://eucharistandmission....

While I agree with this statement 100% (and should, it's the teaching of the Magisterium) it always raises a question for me that I haven't gotten a good answer on, either from my own study or those who are or should be more knowledgeable than myself. It is this: In this statement, Protestants would fall under the heading of "heretics" and "schismatics." Now, this statement was made shortly before the Protestant reformation, but certainly holds for the reformers and those who followed them as they promoted heresy and divided the church. The real question is, do Protestants today, who have inherited this faith from their ancestors or were introduced to Christianity through that means, are they in actuality heretics and schismatics? They would be material heretics as the Protestant sects teach heresy, but their culpability, if not provided with the truth would be invincible, would it not? And as far as schismatics, I wouldn't think they actually are as they have not (necessarily) performed any schismatic action. This is of course assuming that these people do not know the fullness of faith through no fault of their own. Are they not following Jesus Christ to the best of their ability? Remember, this is assuming "the best" in that case of a Protestant who has never been presented with the catholic faith and is doing the best they know how.

For a bit of context, this is question from a convert of 6 years who has helped several close friends and later acquaintances on their journey to the Church. I have no problem proclaiming the catholic faith to Protestants and is less a question of practicality and more of soteriology.

Deacon_Augustine • 8 years ago

The kind of person you mention would be a material heretic rather than a formal heretic. Only God knows whether people's ignorance is invincible or culpable. Pope Bl. Pius IX taught that if ignorance was invincible, then by that fact, nobody would be condemned for their ignorance.

However,that leaves the question of the efficacy of the Sacraments outwith the unity of the Catholic Church. Following St Augustine and St Fulgence of Ruspe, Florence taught that the Sacraments availed nothing for those who remained outside the unity of the Church. In the case of Protestants it is rather a moot point as 99+% of them don't accept the Sacraments anyway. if we assumed that a Protestant believed in Baptism for the remission of sins, and his condition of being outside the Church was due to invincible ignorance, how does he deal with post-baptismal sin?

The main problem that the Protestants have is that they have rejected the very means which Christ provided for forgiveness of sins. Their whole theological system leaves them trapped in their sin. I know they say they can confess their sins "directly to Jesus", but nowhere in the Bible does He offer that as an alternative for us. Jesus never told anybody to confess their sins to Him, rather He gave His Church the authority to forgive sins in His name.

LionelAndrades • 8 years ago

Pope Benedict uses irrational Cushingism as a theology to interpret Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus : he was unaware of the choice
http://eucharistandmission....

Pope Francis, Pope Benedict and Cardinal Muller use an irrational theology to interpret Vatican Council II and so reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission....

Steve Skojec • 8 years ago

And yet souls depend on it. Pretty utilitarian, don't you think, to hide the truth in order that we might profit from those who do not benefit from it?

Tertullian was right: "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church." Christ and His teachings are all that matter. The rest is so much sand.

Gian Luca • 8 years ago

I think we should stop calling modern Popes rock of the Church anymore since modern Popes like Benedict (even JP II) or Francis don't protect and preserve the Catholic faith. Christ alone is the head and the rock of the Church, the author and perfecter of faith. This interview demonstrates the ambivalence of Benedict. He ask pierce questions but does not give clear answers.He sees and point out the errors but doesn't do anything to correct and eradicate them nor does he say that the grave error should be corrected. Pope Emer. Benedict basically denies that the church is needed for salvation. He praises the mercy of Pope Francis, a mercy that is abused by Francis as a bulldozer against the teaching. This interview is as ambiguous as the document of Vatican II. As a loyal Catholic I'm sorely disappointed with Popes who neglect and almost abandon the word of God for embracing the wisdom of the world and human philosophy as if modern humans know more and are wiser than the eternal God that is the author of the bible.

CumExApostolatus • 8 years ago

That's why I personally don't call them Popes. That is all I can do within my small sphere. The Catholic Church continues nevertheless.

LionelAndrades • 8 years ago

CDF can see 'the writing on the wall',thousands of Internet posts say the dogma EENS and Vatican Council II can be interpreted according to the old missionaries: Pope Benedict theologically contradicts them
http://eucharistandmission....

Chaz54 • 7 years ago

These comments are well thought out and point out the watershed difference between hysterical evangelicals (who are found of calling us idolaters at best) and our Holy Mother Church. Salvation by scripture ALONE will never be the credo of Peter's Church and we must NEVER give up the solid notion that we, as Catholics, must care for others and FREELY live the best lives we can. This may sound overly simplified but FREE WILL is a sacred mystery to me; good deeds are of worth. Adhereance to scripture is a worthy pursuit but it can not be the sole way we approach the world... As I learned as a child... God gives crosses to those that can bear them. It is our DUTY to care for others above any duty to indoctrinate anyone to a narrow way of thought. Luther did expose many of the abuses of the church and then proceeded to dismantle and edit the very scripture by which he professed we should live. Go figure!

Yvonne Bongle • 8 years ago

The whole point of the matter is, if you follow God's 10 commandments as He told us to, and receive his sacraments as He told us to, and treat our brother's and sister's the way in which He wants us to treat them, then we are living the way we are suppose to. I believe that this is all in the Catholic faith. I don't think that you can find any of this in any other faith. The true body of Christ is in the Catholic faith it is not a pretend body as in protestant churches. So, to wrap this up. If you follow these, this is all God is asking us to do and it is all found in the Catholic church. Yes, we need to follow the pope. However, we still need to follow God first. We know right from wrong and when something doesn't seem quite right then it probably isn't. We need to pray to the Holy Spirit about it. The Catholic Church is where we find our Salvation.

CumExApostolatus • 8 years ago

The Muslims didn't seem to be a current problem for Catholics up until approximately 1948.

Jonk • 8 years ago

All of those threats to Christendom and civilization sound to me like excellent reasons to re-invigorate a true, universal, apostolic Christianity.

The more brothers and sisters we have beside us, and the better they're trained, the better our prospects become. And, as an added bonus, it trains us to be better Catholics, as well.

Lynne • 8 years ago

Cardinal Ratzinger told a Lutheran woman that she did not need to convert.

Rorate Caeli link

She wanted to convert. She listened to Cardinal Ratzinger and died a Lutheran.
Sigrid Spath was the most famous German translator in Rome. She worked in the Jesuit General House, and then in the Vatican, since the days of Paul VI and translated around 70,000 pages of documents from Italian, French, English, Spanish or Polish into German, as well as several texts by Joseph Ratzinger, as Cardinal or Pope, as he also wrote original texts in Italian. The granddaughter of a Lutheran pastor, Spath was born in Villach, Carinthia (Austria), on August 1, 1939 (that is, just one month before the war), and she died this Sunday, February 2, 2014, in Rome.
@FMShyanguya • 8 years ago

Very interesting considering simliar counsel to others by Pope Francis.

Lynne • 8 years ago

Yes, I love Pope Benedict but in many aspects, he was as modernist as the other popes since Vatican II.

@FMShyanguya • 8 years ago

Ay! The crisis in the Church runs very deep!