Waiting For Benedict

George Weigel has an interesting short piece in the L.A. Times that summarizes what B16 has done in office so far and what many expected him to do that–so far–he has not yet chosen to do.

It’s a nice year-end summary that is worth reading and that may provide a guide to coming days.

GET THE STORY.

UPDATE: The link has been changed to a non-registration required version.

Author: Jimmy Akin

Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live."

74 thoughts on “Waiting For Benedict”

  3. Yet another headline that gets my hopes up that someone is talking about me.
    🙁
    For the record, I was Benedict long before His Holiness took the name.

  6. Limbo of all things may be putting some real pressure on B16’s “theo-thinking” i.e. If Limbo goes extinct as it should, so should original sin as we know it to include the other embellishments required to make it “fit” our sometimes ancient minds and thought processes.

  8. Please do not feed the troll.
    Why not? If we keep him around arguing that 95% of Church dogma is bunk long enough, he may not notice the sun rising and might just turn to stone. One can always hope, anyway. 😉

  10. O, Publius, great is thy faith! But, if prayer can move mountains, it can move a troll, too.

  11. Oh, the weary eye does not read well! I thought you wrote that he might notice the rising sun and turn around. Then again, with grace and prayer, he might.

  13. I wouldn’t mind being corrected–in fact I’d love to be–but when I read the articles quoting Benedict on the matter of limbo, it sounded like he wasn’t necessarily discounting the possibility of it. Rather, he would discourage its being taught because it was never doctrine and because it is a theory at best. Does anyone else get the same impression?

  14. Limbo solves the problem of where to send millions and millions of unbaptized souls i.e. our aborted and stillborn brothers and sisters and those good people of other religions or no religion where the baptism of desire is not a viable option. If not limbo, some other shadow, border spirit state would then have to be theologically invented to make original sin fit the current dogmas and doctrines.

  16. Since it is still the ChristMass season someone should consider giving our resident doubting Thomas a Catechism of the CATHOLIC Church.
    Then he could read what the Church teaches and not have to keep searching the looney tunes “theologians” looking for a image of God he likes.
    Here is my attempt again:
    Catechism of the Catholic Church http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
    Paragraph 7. The Fall http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p7.htm#389
    Mary Christ Mass!
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  17. Hmmm, from the CC, “390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.”
    Hmmm, “figurative language”- The use of words, phrases, symbols, and ideas in such as way as to evoke mental images and sense impressions.
    And the figurative bite from a magic apple or some non-figurative, unspeakable crime by two “swinging now walking”, not-so-intelligent, stone-throwing beings resulted in millions upon millions of souls being banished to “shadow” land!! Get real!!!
    The Jewish scribes were simply keeping up with the Greeks and Babylonians and their gods and myths. We need to eradicate these from our religion now and forever thereby recovering the souls of our Brothers and Sisters.

  18. Wow! Miracles do happen. He stopped reading looney tunes long enough to actually read the catechism!
    Of course he close his eyes to “The ACCOUNT of the FALL …, but AFFIRMS A PRIMEVAL EVENT, a DEED THAT TOOK PLACE at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the CERTAINTY OF FAITH that the WHOLE OF HUMAN HISTORY IS MARKED by the ORIGINAL FAULT freely committed by our first parents.”
    And the rest of the paragraphs that show the Catholic DOCTRINE of Orignal Sin.
    Realist, since you DENY the DOCTRINE of Original Sin you should “get real” and change your name to APOSTASIST. To deny this DOCTRINE is to completely abandon your Christian faith and your need for the Savior.
    If you really have concern for all those souls (and your own) that have gone before us, pray for them after you reconcile yourself to God and His Church.
    Mary ChristMass!
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  19. “The Jewish scribes were simply keeping up with the Greeks and Babylonians and their gods and myths. We need to eradicate these from our religion now…”
    Realist-
    You keep using phrases like “our religion” as if we have the same one.
    As long as you insist on a religion that you can fit neatly into your tiny, materialistic universe, you will never be a Catholic.
    I continue to pray for your conversion to the Christian faith.

  20. Hmmm, original sin, to the best of my knowledge, is not noted specifically in Scripture, therefore it is not God inspired. So we then have the thought processes of some of the original thinkers (second to fourth century) trying to rationalize all the non-scriptural claims of Catholicism.
    IMHO, rationalization continues unabated but it has been slow in coming to grips with the souls of our aborted and stillborn brothers and sisters and the good souls of other religions and no religion. And we cannot forget the good souls of those departed before the time of Jesus. Do we really isolate all these good souls to the shadow land? Contemporary thinking by what appears to be a large number of Catholic theologians would not but let us see what B16 and his 30 “Theos” come up with.

  21. Wow!!! Reading Realist post was like finding and unopened ChristMass gift!
    Realist not only read from the Catechism of the Catholic Church today he just admitted that St. Irenaeus was teaching about Original Sin in the second century!
    Now if he can just add 2 and 2 together and get 4 we would really be making some progress.
    St. Irenaeus was a disciple of St. Polycarp who was a disciple of St. John the Apostle.
    St. Irenaeus was not trying to rationalize (that is your specialty Realist) he was handing on the Faith that had been taught to him through Apostolic Succession.
    All this on the Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus. Praise the Lord and keeping praying for Realist!
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  22. Is there any documented historical evidence of the St. Polycarp relationships? References for any relationships or is this “tradition thinking”?
    And what about all those souls?

  23. This troll has a loop tape for a mind. He keeps spewing out the same tired, debunked heresies over and over, hoping that THIS time we’ll take him seriously. Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Perhaps it’s time to exile him to the Phantom Zone with his anti-matter double, Catholic Defender.

  24. bill912,
    I assume you also have no references to the historical relationships of St. Polycarp?

  25. Perhaps it’s time to exile him to the Phantom Zone with his anti-matter double, Catholic Defender.
    If only there was some way we could force those two to start their own group blog… Sanity would never again rear its head on the Internet!

  26. C’mon, Realist-
    You wouldn’t accept any references that ran counter to your own fantasies, “documented” or not.
    Your appeals to history and scripture are hollow, as you recognize the authority of neither.

  27. Realist,
    This is from St. Irenaeus Adv. Haer., III.3.4:
    But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time, a man who was of much greater weight, and a more stedfast witness of truth, than Valentinus, and Marcion, and the rest of the heretics. He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles, that, namely, which is handed down by the Church.
    …
    And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, “Dost thou know me? “I do know thee, the first-born of Satan.” Such was the horror which the apostles and their disciples had against holding even verbal communication with any corrupters of the truth; as Paul also says, “A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.” There is also a very powerful Epistle of Polycarp written to the Philippians, from which those who choose to do so, and are anxious about their salvation, can learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of the truth. Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.
    I really recommend you start reading the writings of the early church fathers. I am in the middle of my homeschool day but will post more later.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  29. “I really recommend you start reading the writings of the early church fathers. I am in the middle of my homeschool day but will post more later.”
    Is Inocencio a home schooled teen?
    Is Realist being bested by someone young enough to be his grandchild?

  30. Realist,
    From the Catholic Encyclopedia:
    Various passages in St. Irenaeus
    In St. Irenaeus, Polycarp comes before us preeminently as a link with the past. Irenaeus mentions him four times: (a) in connection with Papias; (b) in his letter to Florinus; (c) in his letter to Pope Victor; (d) at the end of the celebrated appeal to the potior principalitas of the Roman Church.
    The following quote is from the letter to Florinus:
    “These opinions … Florinus are not of sound judgment … I saw thee when I was still a boy in Lower Asia in company with Polycarp, while thou wast faring prosperously in the royal court, and endeavouring to stand well with him. For I distinctly remember the incidents of that time better than events of recent occurrence … I can describe the very place in which the Blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed … his personal appearance … and how he would describe his intercourse with John and with the rest who had seen the Lord, and how he would relate their words … I can testify in the sight of God, that if the blessed and apostolic elder had heard anything of this kind, he would have cried out, and stopped his ears, and said after his wont, ‘O good God, for what times hast thou kept me that I should endure such things?’ … This can be shown from the letters which he wrote to the neighbouring Churches for their confirmation etc.”.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  31. Hello Dr. Eric,
    I am a Stay-at-Homeschool Dad of six so far!
    I am 38 years old but pray that I remain child-like in my faith.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  32. Inocencio,
    Danke Schoen!!!
    “Polycarp
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
    Polycarp of Smyrna (martyred in his 87th year, ca. 155-167) was a Christian bishop of Smyrna (now Izmir Turkey) in the second century. He died a martyr, by being stabbed and his corpse burned at the stake in Smyrna, and is recognized as a saint in both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. “He had been a disciple of John, and opinions differ as to whether this John was the son of Zebedee, or John the Presbyter” (Lake 1912). Traditional advocates follow Eusebius in insisting that the apostolic connection was with John the Evangelist, and that the author of the Gospel of John was the Apostle. Polycarp never quotes from the Gospel of John in his own writings, which may be a strong indication that whichever John he knew was not the author of that Gospel.”

  34. Realist,
    If Wikipedia is the foundation of your faith beware the winds and rain.
    Anyone can edit those articles and you knew that before you posted it.
    You are grasping at straws and it is painfully obvious.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  35. Some interesting commentary from http://camassia.notfrisco2.com/archives/005495.html
    “Augustine’s perspective of perfect humans falling; resulting in “original sin” is one perspective. Irenaeus offers a different view; that of humanity being created imperfect,and progressing towards perfection. The analogy he uses is that of an infant; the “fall” becomes the actions of immature children, not willful rebellion by adults.
    This results in Irenaeus seeing evil as an essential part of the progression; part of the plan (think Job), rather than coming out nowhere as Augustine seems to suggest. That always troubled me; Augustine insists that God could not have created evil…that seems to put some serious limitations on God, doesn’t it? I’ll go with Irenaeus and Job. Unfortunately, most of Christendom is rooted in Augustinian (the former Manichean) thought. Any surprise that dualism is such a popular solution to the problem of evil?”
    Hmmm, I like the way Irenaus was thinking and it appears to agree with that of many contemporary Catholic theologians. I wonder if B16 and the Commission will adopt his way of thinking?

  36. Realist,
    Why doesn’t that person quote from St. Irenaeus’ writing like I did? Your foundation is crumbling.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  37. Realist,
    St. Irenaeus’ own words:
    For [Adam] showed his REPENTENCE by his conduct, through means of the girdle [which he used], covering himself with fig-leaves, while there were many other leaves, which would have irritated his body in a less degree.
    He, however, adopted a dress conformable to his DISOBEDIENCE, being awed by the fear of God; and resisting the erring, the lustful propensity of his flesh (since he had LOST his NATURAL DISPOSITION and child-like mind, and had COME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF EVIL THINGS),
    he girded a bridle of continence upon himself and his wife, fearing God, and waiting for His coming, and indicating, as it were, some such thing [as follows]:
    Inasmuch as, he says, I HAVE BY DISOBEDIENCE LOST that ROBE of SANCTITY which I had from the Spirit, I do now also acknowledge that I am deserving of a covering of this nature, which affords no gratification, but which gnaws have retained this clothing for ever, thus humbling himself, if God, who is merciful, had not clothed them with tunics of skins instead of fig-leaves.
    St. Irenaeus’ writing are here to read for yourself.
    http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103323.htm
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+M

  38. Realist-
    This game of 3-card Monty that you play is breathtaking.
    First you want to see evidence that Irenaus was a true disciple of Polycarp, then after receiving evidence, you deny that Polycarp was REALLY a disciple of John the Apostle… then you cite Irenaus as an authoritative source to support your kooky, sin-free version of “catholic lite”.
    Which way do you want it?
    Grasping at straws is right. You must be exhausted.
    Why go so far out of your way to avoid the obvious? Why this feverish and frenzied denial?
    What frightens you about believing in the truth that God has revealed? Or does it sting your pride to think that he revealed it to others, rather than to yourself?
    It doesn’t matter how old you are… you can become like a child again. Just accept and believe. Dare to have faith in Christ, rather than in your own intellect (such as it is).

  40. Realist,
    St. Irenaeus own words are pertinent to the discussion. I read the article at the link you posted and he did not quote St. Irenaeus.
    I have and again ask you to point out where St Irenaeus does not teach our first parents lost sanctity by disobedience or in other words committed Original Sin.
    I have read through most of the looney tune articles you have posted.
    I disagree with YOU and your crumbling foundation and have made that very clear.
    You have offered no documentation other than looney tunes “theologians” who comment and offer no documentation from Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture (the Gospel of Thomas, etc., are NOT Sacred Scripture) or the Magisterium.
    You seem very concerned about the souls of those who have gone before us. You should be just as concerned about your own soul.
    You have not answered my question.
    What do you expect to happen after your death if you have lived your life denying the need for a Savior?
    I pray as the Church prepares to celebrate the Feast of the Epiphany you, like the wise men, will seek God and His kingdom.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  41. Inocencio,
    from: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/zim/ev/ev_01evolution_sin13.html “Irenaeus and Augustine teach in agreement that Adam sinned and lost his initial endowment of friendship with God, and that all people die as a result of Adam’s sin. But whereas Augustine sees God’s pristine plans frustrated by original sin, Irenaeus sees the same sin as an almost necessary step for the education of mankind. Irenaeus sees God laying out His plans with original sin already foreseen from the beginning. He would create man free, He foresaw the sin, He then made provisions accordingly. He would help man to use that freedom properly, with original sin as a stepping stone to facilitate the learning process. Christ would come fully prepared to cope with the situation of the fallen race. He would recapitulate the fallen race and lead it to the Father. ”
    See also: http://frjakestopstheworld.blogspot.com/2004/06/human-progress.html

  42. Reallist,
    Again you quote someone COMMENTING on St. Augustine and St. Irenaeus writings. I am asking you to read their own words and point out where they don’t teach Original Sin.
    The above article very clearly states that both St. Augustine and St. Irenaeus taught Original Sin. You have backed yourself into the corner of your crumbling foundation.
    Will you now answer my question?
    What do you expect to happen after your death if you have lived your life denying the need for a Savior?
    Wise men still seek Him.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  43. Not being a theologian or biblical scholar, I rely on the commentaries and thoughts of educated, degreed, contemporaries who have read the works of Irenaeus and Augustine. Should I put you on the my list of degreed experts?
    Hmmm, “Savior denial”. I assume you mean leaders/founders of the great religions when you type Savior. If I were born a Moslem, then Mohammed would be my Savior. Jewish, then Abraham. Christian, then Jesus. But since we all believe in same God, does it make a difference who saves us i.e. gets us to the Gates? If an atheist is a good person and does not violate any of the basics of the founders, is he or she not saved by the baptism of desire?
    God is Good. Being Good is the ultimate Savior.
    Now lets save those millions upon millions of good souls trapped by a mythical stain in the shadow land of limbo. B16 goes back into action next week. It should be interesting to see how he saves the little ones.

  45. Realist,
    If you are a Catholic you should rely on the Magisterium of the Church Christ founded.
    Because I don’t want you to make an ignorant assumption, when I say “denying the need for a Savior”, I am speaking of your post baptismal deny of the DOCTRINE of Original Sin.
    The only Savior is Christ Jesus since you seem confused. Which Dominus Jesus make very clear.
    http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html
    You call Original Sin a mythical stain and yet you could not refute any of the documentation presented. The last article you quoted (by Fr. Zimmerman) not only clearly stated both St. Irenaeus and St. Augustine TAUGHT Original Sin but that St. Irenaeus was a disciple of St. Polycarp who was a disciple of St. John the Apostle. You need to read your own sources a little more than what google will cache.
    As for a good Atheist being saved do not presume on God’s mercy, that in itself is a sin.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  46. Realist-
    Will you accept Pope Benedict’s teaching on the matter, regardless of your personal feelings?
    I will.
    Also, how do you judge between two “degreed, educated contemporaries” who completely disagree on a given topic? Who is your final authority? Your head?
    If so, isn’t that a bit of a dead giveaway that you will believe what you want, regardless?
    And what if you are just wrong?

  47. Realist-
    Will you accept Pope Benedict’s teaching on the matter, regardless of your personal feelings?
    That has to be the most rhetorical question I’ve ever seen. 🙂

  48. B16 and the Commission I am sure will eliminate Limbo. It has for too long been an embarrassment to our religion.
    Hopefully the reasoning of Irenaeus will be used in the the rational but the judgement will IMHO be so full of “theo-speak” of the “ghost writers” that no one will be able to understand most of it since clarity will raise significant doubts about Augustine’s concept of original sin, the Immaculate Conception and the need for infant baptism. And hopefully the commentary and votes of the Commission will be released along with B16’s judgement.
    With respect to degreed scholars having differing opinions, I typically agree with the one who has demonstrated the best reasoning based on their reviews of previous scholarship.

  49. Actually Realist “catholics in name only” such as yourself are the biggest embarrassment of our faith.
    You say you agree with the scholar who has demonstrated the best reasoning and yet you quote scholars who give commentary without quoting (or even reading) the text or they quote non-canonical text.
    When I go right to the source you answer by saying you rely on commentaries because you haven’t read the actual document (and still refuse to read the actual text). I can attest that they are not hard to understand. I only have a public high school education and I enjoy reading them.
    You have trapped yourself in a corner you know it and I know it. You keep putting up the same arguments that have been clearly refuted by Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium.
    You keep throwing the cream puffs across the plate I don’t mind the batting practice.
    I pray you have a happy and holy Feast of the Epiphany of the Lord.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  50. Inocencio,
    OK, so you have read the Irenaeus documents. So then why is your interpretation so different from those more qualified?
    Goodness rules.

  51. Realist-
    Those who teach in opposition to the magisterium have no authority and are not qualified to instruct anyone in the Catholic faith, no matter how many degress they have.
    You sure put alot of stock in university training.
    I have a couple of degrees.
    Are you impressed? You shouldn’t be. One thing I learned in university is that it takes no great intellect to get a university degree.
    I also found, as I matured, that a great deal of my university training was either inadequate or just plain wrong-headed. Garbage In – Garbage Out.
    It did keep me off the streets, though.

  53. Realist,
    My whole point is that you quote people who are not qualified and it is THEIR interpretation that is different than the Church’s teaching.
    Below is a quote from the bishops stating that Catholic professors and theologians must “present authentic Catholic teaching” and “be faithful to the Church’s magisterium as the authoritative interpreter of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition”.
    ————————————————-
    Ex Corde Ecclesiae
    An Application to the United States
    4. Faculty
    b. All professors are expected to exhibit not only academic competence and good character but also respect for Catholic doctrine.37
    d.Both the university and the bishops, aware of the contributions made by theologians to Church and academy, have a right to expect them to present authentic Catholic teaching. Catholic professors of the theological disciplines have a corresponding duty to be faithful to the Church’s magisterium as the authoritative interpreter of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
    ————————————————-
    You have quoted Crossan (who contends dogs ate our Lord’s body and denies the Resurrection), Camassia (whoever that is?), “Fr.” Jake (an eccentric Episcopal priest) and a legion of other looney tune theologians.
    I have quoted Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, JP II, Pope Benedict XVI, St. Irenaeus’ own words not commentaries.
    Each time you offer nothing to refute the Authentic and Authoritative Teachings of the Church.
    You simply quote looney tunes with degrees who do not qualify according to JP II’s Ex Corde Ecclesiae (Born from the heart of the Church) and the U.S. Bishops to teach because they do not respect Catholic Doctrine and are not faithful to the Church’s Magisterium.
    Below are links to JP II’s Ex Corde Ecclesiae and the U.S. Bishops Application to the U.S. so you can read the ACTUAL DOCUMENTS and not what someone says the teach or mean.
    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_15081990_ex-corde-ecclesiae_en.html
    http://www.usccb.org/education/excorde.htm
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  54. Degrees in what pray tell? Books written? Journal articles?
    And when you finish reading Crossan’s 14 books, you might just see the history and embellishment in our scriptures. And you will also see why Crossan has not been excommunicated.

  55. Realist,
    After seeing how ignorant you are of Catholic teaching and history because of Crossan’s 14 books I don’t need to waste my time. Crossan has NO authority whatsoever! But he has a huge responsibility for the scandal he has obviously caused. Rather than quote him you should pray for him.
    I don’t have a degree. I already told you I have a public high school education. Yet I can still tell the difference between the Catholic Faith and trash.
    You should read the writings of those who were willing to die to preserve the Catholic Faith instead of those who spend there life attacking it. If you would read the early Church fathers you would see the Catholic Faith. But that would require you to read, think and reason as opposed to finding someone who says what you want to hear.
    Many idiots who call themselves “catholic” have not been excommunicated but that is not really a reason to put your faith in them instead of our Lord and His Bride, the Church.
    At least be honest and admit what your pride has revealed, you do not believe the Catholic Faith and should not call yourself Catholic or pretend to be one.
    St. Anastasia pray for us.
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  59. Realist,
    Since you are so impressed with degrees, books and journal articles here is a SMALL SAMPLING of Pope Benedict’s education and publications.
    ————————————————-
    1947 Ratzinger enters the Herzogliches Georgianum, a theological institute associated with the University of Munich.
    1951 June 29: Georg and Josef Ratzinger are ordained into the priesthood by Cardinal Faulhaber, in the Cathedral at Freising, on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul.
    1953 July: Ratzinger receives his doctorate in theology from the University of Munich. In connection with his doctoral studies he produces his first important work: Volk und Haus Gottes in Augustins Lehre von der Kirche [People and House of God in Augustine’s doctrine of the Church].
    Ratzinger devotes his Habilitationsschrift — book-length contribution to original research in order to teach at the university level — to Bonaventure’s theology of history and revelation.
    1959 April 15: Ratzinger begins lectures as full professor (one holding a chair) of fundamental theology at the University of Bonn.
    1962-65 Ratzinger is present during all four sessions of the Second Vatican Council as a peritus, or chief theological advisor to Cardinal Josef Frings of Cologne, Germany.
    1963 Ratzinger moves to the University of MĂźnster.
    1966 Ratzinger takes a second chair in dogmatic theology at the University of TĂźbingen.
    1969 Scandalized by his encounter with radical ideology at TĂźbingen, Ratzinger moves back to Bavaria to take a teaching position at the University of Regensburg. He eventually becomes dean and vice president and later, theological advisor to the German bishops.
    1972 Ratzinger, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Henry De Lubac and others launch the Catholic theological journal Communio, a quarterly review of Catholic theology and culture.
    On March 24, Ratzinger is named Archbishop of Munich and Freising. He is urged by his confessor to accept the office and chooses as his episcopal motto the phrase from the third letter of John, “Co-Worker of the Truth,” reasoning:
    For one, it seemed to be the connection between my previous task as teacher and my new mission. Despite all the differences in modality, what is involved was and remains the same: to follow truth, to be at its service. And because in today’s world the theme of truth has all but disappeared, because truth appears too great for man, and yet everything falls apart if there is no truth. [Milestones, p. 153].
    He is ordained May 28.
    June 27 – Ratzinger is elevated to Cardinal of Munich by Pope Paul VI.
    1980 Ratzinger is named by Pope John Paul II to chair the special Synod on the Laity. Shortly after, the pope asks him to head the Congregation for Catholic Education. Ratzinger declines, feeling he shouldn’t leave his post in Munich too soon.
    1981 On November 25, Ratzinger accepts Pope John Paul II’s invitation to take over as Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
    1986 On July 10, Pope John Paul II appointed Cardinal Ratzinger head of a 12-member commission responsible for drafting the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
    1998 On November 6, Ratzinger is elected vice dean of the College of Cardinals.
    2002On November 30, The Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, approved his election, by the order of cardinal bishops, as dean of the College of Cardinals.
    2005 On April 19, Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Bishop of Rome, and took the name Benedict XVI.
    ————————————————-
    Hmmm not excommunicated but scandalous and crazy Crossan or the Vicar of Christ? Not even close for a Catholic.
    Don’t worry I know what your response will consist of blah…big fat cream puff across the plate…blah…Crossan…blah…Gospel of Thomas…blah blah…Bible false…blah…Gnostic writings are “true”…blah…goodness rules…blah blah…
    Be holy etenity is long. St. Anastasia pray for us!
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  62. OK, bill912, pray tell what degrees do you have?
    As per Tim J’s request:
    With respect to my education: K-12, Franciscan grade and high school, valedictorian, senior class president, high school All-American in football.
    Undergraduate- B.S. ChE.
    Graduate school- M.S. Polymer Science, PhD Polyscience
    As per Crossan and the Rock since it was mentioned above:
    (as noted previously noted):
    What does Crossan and other religious historians conclude about the historic
    reliability of said foundation: (Think ill of Crossan’s work if you want but he has done his
    homework as shown by the content of the books he has written- See
    http://www.amazon.com for a compilation. Ditto for Schillebeeckx. See also http://www.faithfutures.org/Jesus/Crossan2.rtf
    John 14: 26 not historic ( 62-. Spirit under Trial: (1) 1Q: Luke 12:11-12 = Matt
    10:19-20; (2) Mark 13:11 = Matt 10: 19-20 = Luke 21:14-15; (3) John 14:26.)
    John 16:13- not reviewed by Crossan or others that I can find
    Matt 16: 18-19 not historic (73- Who Is Jesus?: (1) Gos. Thom. 13; (2a) Mark
    8:27-30 = Matt 16:13-20 = Luke 9:18-21; (2b) Gos. Naz. 14; (2c) John 6:67-69.)
    1 Timothy- not written by St. Paul (See Crossan’s “In Search of Paul”, Harper, San
    Francisco, 2004, p.105)
    2 Peter 1:20
    Since Schillebeeckx basically ruled out prophecies by concluding God does not know
    the future, one can rule out the infallible nature of this verse.
    Also from Raymond Brown’s, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2 Peter was
    the last canonical work written i.e. ~ 130 AD, author unknown. Tis a bit dated for use in claiming infallibility plus the verse is not from Jesus or Peter but some possible remembrance/embellishment of a scribe.
    From another source:
    Also think about the logic (or lack thereof).
    “I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.” Would your
    anyone let that logic pass if it came from the followers of any other book
    or person? “I believe x is inspired because x says so.” Fill in the blanks:
    x=Pat Robertson
    x=the Koran”
    more “logic”?
    And yes indeed Goodness rules!!

  65. I am an artist.
    I have a Bachelors and a Masters degree in Fine Art.
    Do you think that people who look at my paintings care how many *degrees* I have?
    There may be a striking parallel to Theology, here.
    I have taught a number of art students, both privately and in the university. I can tell you one thing; you can’t educate someone into being an artist, any more than you can cure someone of tone-deafness (ever watch American Idol?). They are either an artist when they come to you, or not. You can help them along, perhaps dramatically. You can offer them the cup, but if they are not already thirsty, it will be of little benefit.
    A student with that thirst, or spark, can learn more in a year than others will learn in twenty. It is a thrill to have such a student. Others can benefit in the sense that they become more well-rounded individuals, but they will never be artists in the full sense.
    I suspect that something similar may be true in theology, except the *spark* is faith. You can not understand the scriptures without faith, no matter what intellectual aplomb you bring to the task. You begin to REALLY understand the moment you begin to believe.
    You can’t comprehend the teaching of the Church without faith, and you can’t do theology without faith. Faith is the first step. The first *baby* step. Without it, the truth will remain forever opaque to you, mental gymnastics notwithstanding.
    You can stack all the books you like on your head, but you will never be a Christian theologian without faith in the Church Christ founded.
    Instead, you will find Church documents confusing, and the Bible full of contradictions.
    Haven’t you heard?
    …Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.”. – Luke 10:21
    Without faith in the risen Christ, the more sophisticated and educated the theologian, the more distorted and buffoonish the theories become.
    Lord, deliver us from faithless theologians, and talentless artists.

  66. Someone help me out here. I am an artist, and not a theologian after all…
    I forget… how many degrees did Jesus have?

  67. Realist,
    You believe x (Crossan) is correct because x (Crossan) says so. You believe Schillebeeckx because Schillebeeckx says so. You believe Brown because Brown says so. Not one of them has any authority to declare or define ANYTHING.
    Pope Benedict XVI not only has more theology education and experience then all of your looney tunes combined he has the authority of the Vicar of Christ. Because he doesn’t say what you want to hear so you ignore him.
    So much for you logic (or lack thereof). For someone who has so much education you sure paint yourself into a corner quickly.
    I believe the Bible is inspired because the Catholic Church says it is and historically only one Church can trace its beginning to Christ. You don’t believe the Bible is inspired because you found people who say what you want to believe.
    Are you at least smart enough and honest enough to admit you are not a Catholic?
    You don’t believe what the Church teaches so WHY do you even pretend to be Catholic?
    Since you consider yourself far to intelligent to believe what the Church proclaims why not walk away?
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  68. Nah, don’t walk away, Realist.
    Just turn around & have faith in Christ, instead of putting your trust in what Paul called “clever arguments”.
    Embrace the fullness of the teaching of the Church, rather than trying to accomodate sin.
    You can change. I did.

  69. Ahh, so what we need here is the e-mail address of B16. I wonder if he would consider a debate between himself and Crossan with the subject being the authencity of infallibility. We also need someone to write reviews on the politics of Peter, Paul’s media evangelism (or how to make a buck in the first century), and/or the embellishments in Christianity.
    And as per Karen Armstrong, we are all Sons and Daughters of God.
    Time for Sunday Mass and praying for the millions upon millions of souls condemned to limbo by B16 et al.
    Be Good!!!

  70. Realist,
    Let us get to the heart of the matter. Why must the Church be wrong on Original Sin? Do you work with sick children who have not been baptized?
    Is it because you work with people who suffer and therefore have decided God is not good but you are?
    Is your problem with the Church a moral one? What is it?
    Rather than hide behind per(insert name of person who says what you want to believe) says, why not just come out and say why the Church has to be wrong?
    Many people in this comment blog have given you not only the teachings of the Church but enough documentation that even a person without a degree (gasp!) can see the Truth.
    I do not expect an honest answer, but God willing you think about what is causing you to deny the Faith you feel compelled to claim you hold.
    St. Anastasia pray for us!
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  71. Realist-
    I continue to pray for your conversion to the Christian faith, as I did at Mass this morning.
    BTW, truth is not established by either debate or democratic vote. Truth just IS.
    Therefore, no Church teaching sends anyone to heaven, hell or pugatory. Unlike your crowd, the dogmas of the Church are a recognition of revealed truth, not the invention of self-important intellectuals.
    You want the Church Christ founded to conform it’s doctrines to your lifestyle. I want to conform my lifestyle to the doctrines of the Church Christ founded.
    It ain’t impossible!

  73. Realist,
    Be reborn as a member of Crossanity? Where all members must deny the Teachings of the Catholic Church, no thank you.
    I will be faithful to my Baptismal promises and remain a member of the Mystical Body of Christ and continue to pray for you and your scandalous friends.
    St. Anastasia pray for us!
    Take care and God bless.
    J+M+J

  74. And the one-note symphony continues…
    In the words of Jesus, “Stop doubting, and believe.”.

Comments are closed.