(First post: “if only they listened“)
Advantage to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers.Very special investigation is needed for those students who, although they have hitherto been free of formal sins against chastity, nevertheless suffer from morbid or abnormal sexuality, especially sexual hyperesthesia or an erotic bent of nature, to whom religious celibacy would be a continual act of heroism and a trying martyrdom. (Pope John XXIII Religiosorum institutio)
I alwasy wonder what would have become of the II Vatican Council had our Lord granted Bl. John XXIII to live till its conclusion?
I am sure that something not so disastrous would have become of it.
I agree, I don’t think he would have allowed the things Paul VI either seemed to have willed, or allowed. Strange how modern liberal “Catholics” have made John XXIII as the poster child.
This suggestion to superiors in religious orders about homosexuals could be a disciplinary rule, which of course the church can make. (In any event it’s not doctrine.) Though it would have been unfair to some, considering what happened and made the news a few years ago, deservedly bankrupting a few dioceses, ‘if only they had listened’ indeed.
I tend to agree that the council wouldn’t have been nearly as bad if he had lived through the whole thing.
His idea of liturgical revision was adding St Joseph to the Roman Canon. (But I like Blessed Pius IX’s approach better: ‘I can’t! I’m only the Pope!’)
He also wanted to revive the teaching and use of Latin in seminaries!
A lovely man, no question, with a big heart as many say. Like you I wonder how the Modernists have managed to exploit his image all these years.
[...] As usual, Ken of Hallowed Groundhas interesting photos - this one of Blessed John XXIII is nice. The Mass the Motu Proprio will permit is said to be that of the Roman Missal of 1962, now referred to by some as the Mass of John XXIII, since revisions were made at his direction. Ken’s post is entitled, “If only they had listened”. [...]
Hey Roberto, I deleted your post.
1. Homosexuality is a sin, always has been, always will be. The Church cannot change natural law. I did not equate Sodomy with Pedophilia, Bl. John XXIII did, he called them evil. Remember the 4 “Cry to Heaven for Vengeance” sins? Sodomy IS (not was) one of them. The recent crisis in the Church was caused by homosexuals, they just happened to like young men. Morality does not change to the whims of society, or ” new scienctific research”. I have nothing against the person who suffers from that affliction, they are people just like any sinner (all of us). However I will not submit to the “gay” agenda: “Say we are normal, or you are intolerant” crap. I will not call evil good. Your sin is not OK because you say so loudly and often.
2. I am not a “nostalig-nic”, I never thought the Church should be trapped in amber. I am down with the Hermeneutic thing of the current Pontiff.
3. If you disagree, you disagree, no need to write a book in here.
Actually, in my experience, it is sedevacantists who accuse him (John XXIII) for having started the whole thing, since he was the one who convoked the Council. Modernists take advantage (with good reason to a certain extent) of Paul VI’s actions and changes.
John XXIII was in fact a good man with a good heart and great devotion to Our Lady, but he also had a “utopian” mind. I think that he actually believed that an “aggiornamento” would bring everyone (including non-Catholics) back to God. He was extremely optimistic, but he wouldn’t have allowed what Paul VI allowed at all. Just look at his Coronation Mass and the *minor* changes (compared to others before and after him) that led to the 1962 Missal - they are not bad at all, except of course, the removal of some words to one of the prayers on Good Friday.
I think John XXIII overall gets a bad rap. The “libs” use him to justify their non-sense. I think he would have condemned all the “Spirit of Vat 2″ stuff.