It is currently Sun Dec 08, 2019 7:27 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
 Pius XII and legitimate criticism of popes 
Author Message

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:34 pm
Posts: 89
Location: Griffin, GA
New post Pius XII and legitimate criticism of popes
I have started comparing the innovations in the new church with what pope pius XII would accept.
I have discovered that Pope Pius XII would NOT accept any of it (including "altar girls")
HEADS WOULD ROLL !!! :oops:
Excommunications would be the order of the day! :idea:

_________________
"Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."


Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:23 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post 
Linda wrote:
I have started comparing the innovations in the new church with what pope pius XII would accept.
I have discovered that Pope Pius XII would NOT accept any of it (including "altar girls")
HEADS WOULD ROLL !!! :oops:
Excommunications would be the order of the day! :idea:


Linda,

Its very good to hear a Catholic defend Pope Pius XII. There are too many today who are overly critical of him, and even blame him for our crisis. I take the opposite view, and think that this holy Pontiff defended the Faith, and held back the flood of modernism, that was pushing up against Holy Mother Church.

Pope Pius XII should be our hero, and he is one of mine.

Yours in JMJ,

Mike


Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:49 am
Profile

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 12:28 pm
Posts: 284
New post 
Dear Mike,

I used to hold your perspective with regard to Pope Pius XII and I do agree with you to a point. However, don't you agree that he should have been more prudent in selecting certain bishops? Many of his bishops are the ones that allowed VII to happen. It also seems that it was very imprudent of him to allow those changes in the Mass which you and I have had many discussions about in the past.

God bless you my friend,

Lance


Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:20 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post 
Lance,

For my part, I think it best to give Pope Pius XII the benefit of the doubt, as regards his choosing of bishops. It was the duty of those under him to make the recommendations to him of which bishops to choose. The subversives were good at acting like Catholics, how could the pope have known, in his aging years, the extent of their wickedness?

Hindsight is 20/20, we can see things that Pius XII probably did not see, he was living through it. He did not have the benefit of knowing what would happen to the Church, I don't think anyone in the Church at that time had a clue. I have read the Amerian Ecclesiastical Review through the all of the 1950's. The one thought I had as I was reading these issues, is just how unaware they all were of what was coming. No one had a clue.

I think a good job for a historian would be to research all of the Pope's appointments, see exactly who these men were, so we can make a fair judgment. Maybe someone on this list could speak about Pius XII's appointments of bishops, and help us with this. How many did he appoint? Who were they? How many were considered modernists? How many were considered orthodox? Etc.

Regarding his reforms, many state that his revisions in 1955 led to the Novus Ordo. This is a tremendous leap, they are saying that a universal disciplinary law given by a pope to the Church led to evil and sacrilege. Wow! I know you would never say such a thing, but there are many who do.

Yours in JMJ,

Mike


Fri Jun 09, 2006 1:52 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 12:53 am
Posts: 49
Location: Red Bluff, CA, USA
New post 
Mike wrote:
Hindsight is 20/20, we can see things that Pius XII probably did not see, he was living through it. He did not have the benefit of knowing what would happen to the Church, I don't think anyone in the Church at that time had a clue.


Mike, I'm not qualified to express an opinion on this by any stretch, but I will make this observation. Look at how St. Pius X recognized the problem of modernism and vigorously cleaned house. How is it that Pope Pius XII "didn't see it" especially with such a clear example in his own lifetime? I don't mean to comment on what his intentions were, but as far as his effectiveness goes, how could things have been any worse? The revolution was effected just a few years after his death.


Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:33 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post 
Quote:
Mike, I'm not qualified to express an opinion on this by any stretch, but I will make this observation. Look at how St. Pius X recognized the problem of modernism and vigorously cleaned house. How is it that Pope Pius XII "didn't see it" especially with such a clear example in his own lifetime? I don't mean to comment on what his intentions were, but as far as his effectiveness goes, how could things have been any worse? The revolution was effected just a few years after his death.


Alessio,

The traditional Catholic attitude towards the pope should be one of honoring our deceased Ponitiff who lives on in happy memory. Every extension of charity should be given to his motives. Did Pope Pius XII act in the best interests of the Church? I think to hold the opposite view is impious.

Under Pope Pius XII, the Holy Office was functioning, and was maintaining files on those who were under suspicion. Interestingly enough they had a file on Ratzinger. I don't think it is just to question his effectiveness as well, that is just a round about way of placing the blame on him for what happened after his death.

How can we judge his effectiveness anyway? The oath against modernism was required by all priests ordained under his reign, the seminaries trained in Thomism, all of the seminary books were traditional theology and philosophy. The Church was actively converting the world, missionaries were everywhere from China to Africa, etc. The Holy See was actively working, and dealing with all sorts of current issues. Read the Canon Law Digest or the Acta through Pope Pius XII's reign, and you will see that the Holy See was actively dealing with a wide array of issues.

Pope Pius XII wrote lenghty encyclical letters, on so many topics, he was actively fighting modern error as seen by Humani Generis. He defined clearly the correct matter and form of Holy Orders and the Consecration Rite for bishops. He defined the essence of the Church. He dealt with Feeneyism, and so many other modern errors.

In total, Pope Pius XII promulgated 46 encyclical letters, he defined the Assumption of the Blessed Mother, and he continually gave speeches, many of which were published in the Acta. He approved canonizations of numerous saints and declared them such in public ceremonies. He guided the Church through World War II, the most vicious and far reaching war in the history of the world. In short, in my view this holy pope should be commended and admired.

He died at the age of 82, and you think that this elderly Pontiff, the Most holy Lord of the Catholic Church guided the flock of Christ through all this turmoil in the elderly years of his life. Most men are living out their retirement on golf courses at that age or vacationing and resting. Not Pope Pius XII, he was actively teaching, governing and sanctifying the Church Militant.

I will defend this Holy Pontiff with my last breath, I admire him, and I will pray that he will always be remembered in happy memory. In our times, Pope Pius XII has become the "whipping boy" of many traditionalists, and it offends my ears to this. The criticize him without evidence, they attack his lawful revisions of the Church's disciplinary laws, as thought he consented to modernism, they allege that his revisions were part of what led to the Novus Ordo, etc. These allegations should be offensive to any Catholic.

Yours in JMJ,

Mike


Sat Jun 10, 2006 1:12 am
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4333
New post 
Mike wrote:
The traditional Catholic attitude towards the pope should be one of honoring our deceased Ponitiff who lives on in happy memory. Every extension of charity should be given to his motives. Did Pope Pius XII act in the best interests of the Church? I think to hold the opposite view is impious.


Dear Mike and Alessio,

I think you've both made good points. I don't agree that "the opposite view is impious" Mike, but I agree with your other sentences quoted above.

Alessio, consider this. Pius XII inherited a situation several decades after the death of St. Pius X. The art of government is the art of the possible. He had to work with what he had.

And a whole raft of considerations might lead a pope to tolerate what in itself deserves censure. One such consideration is the threat of schism if heresy is condemned. Many Catholic scholars have criticised the excommunication of that blatant apostate Queen Elizabeth, on the grounds that it rendered permanent what might only have been temporary if she had been treated in a more conciliatory way. In fact, the excommunication didn't come until 1570, over a decade after she passed her iniquitous laws "outlawing" the Catholic religion and usurping the authority of the Church in England. Here is an extract from the Bull of excommunication and deposition (St. Pius V). "We, seeing impieties and crimes multiplied one upon another the persecution of the faithful and afflictions of religion daily growing more severe under the guidance and by the activity of the said Elizabeth - and recognising that her mind is so fixed and set that she has not only despised the pious prayers and admonitions with which Catholic princes have tried to cure and convert her but has not even permitted the nuncios sent to her in this matter by this See to cross into England, are compelled by necessity to take up against her the weapons of justice, though we cannot forbear to regret that we should be forced to turn, upon one whose ancestors have so well deserved of the Christian community. Therefore, resting upon the authority of Him whose pleasure it was to place us (though unequal to such a burden) upon this supreme justice-seat, we do out of the fullness of our apostolic power declare the foresaid Elizabeth to be a heretic and favourer of heretics, and her adherents in the matters aforesaid to have incurred the sentence of excommunication and to be cut off from the unity of the body of Christ."

For over a decade the pope had tolerated the most blatant heresy and schism imaginable. All in the hope that Elizabeth might convert, and in the fear that the schism might by precipitate action be rendered permanent. I'm not arguing that Pius XII faced a particular threat of schism, by the way (although he may well have), but only bringing forth this example as evidence that even really top-shelf popes can be rather dilatory in condemning heretics.

On the other hand, Mike, consider the judgement formed by Monsignor Fenton during Pius XII's reign, and expressed (only in his own diary, however) at the time of Vatican II. "Since the death of St. Pius X the Church has been directed by weak and liberal popes, who have flooded the hierarchy with unworthy and stupid men. This present conciliar set-up makes this all the more apparent." ("History of Vatican II" by Msgr. Giuseppe Alberigo and Rev. Joseph Komonchak, SJ., Vol. II).

It is my opinion that we must endeavour to defend the popes in whatever way we can, always attempting to think well of them and realising that their task of governing the Church involves numerous considerations we cannot hope fully to comprehend, and of course many facts which we simply don't and can't know about. But having said that it remains true that good and holy men have criticised the government of the Church by particular popes.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:32 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 12:53 am
Posts: 49
Location: Red Bluff, CA, USA
New post 
Mike wrote:
Quote:
The traditional Catholic attitude towards the pope should be one of honoring our deceased Ponitiff who lives on in happy memory. Every extension of charity should be given to his motives. Did Pope Pius XII act in the best interests of the Church? I think to hold the opposite view is impious.


Don't get me wrong, Mike. I wasn't in any way questioning Pope Pius XII's intentions, orthodoxy, or evident piety. Nor am I on any sort of anti-Pius XII campaign. I just find it hard to reconcile certain facts with the claim that he was a great pope. Specifically, the facts that Vatican II happened so shortly after his death, and almost entirely by men who held offices in the Church during his reign.

I don't know, Mike. Are we required to think all past popes were great, saintly, and effective? I was taught to distinguish between the man and the office.

Alessio


Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:34 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 12:53 am
Posts: 49
Location: Red Bluff, CA, USA
New post 
Mr. Lane,

I was composing my last post when yours went up. (As you can see, they were two minutes apart.)

That is certainly a good point, and one that didn't occur to me. As you (and Mike) probably remember from past encounters, diplomacy isn't my strong suit. I tend to keep an itchy finger on the nuke button. :roll:


Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:43 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post 
Alessio Larrabee wrote:
Mr. Lane,

I was composing my last post when yours went up. (As you can see, they were two minutes apart.)

That is certainly a good point, and one that didn't occur to me. As you (and Mike) probably remember from past encounters, diplomacy isn't my strong suit. I tend to keep an itchy finger on the nuke button. :roll:


Alessio,

Yes, I do remember, but you are a very reasonable man as well. I remember the "old" days on Traditional Catholics Club where you defended the Faith with great zeal. I hope all is going well with you in law school.

Yours in JMJ,

Mike


Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:18 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post 
Quote:
It is my opinion that we must endeavour to defend the popes in whatever way we can, always attempting to think well of them and realising that their task of governing the Church involves numerous considerations we cannot hope fully to comprehend, and of course many facts which we simply don't and can't know about. But having said that it remains true that good and holy men have criticised the government of the Church by particular popes.


John,

I agree with this, and I was surprised by Msgr. Fenton's statement. I would have never guessed that he had thought that way from his public writings.

I think one of my key problems, is that many often criticize Pope Pius XII in a very vague way, without possessing any real evidence to back up their statements. Perhaps he could have done more, I am not sure, mabye he thought he was doing enough to defend the Church, and did not realize the extent of the modernist networks flying below the radar.

Yours in JMJ,

Mike


Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:29 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.