|
作者
|
內容
|
|
life
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 02:20:16
|
|
|
Leo,
即便是自由选出的，教宗也有权拒绝，你把教宗当成什么了？莫非是一块橡皮图章？因为这是教宗本有，固有的权力，任何人不能剥夺的。
|
|
oliver
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 02:20:22
|
|
|
太陽之下無新事，但我心中有呀！
「有權」與「無權」何必爭。
羅馬有「天主教」，大陸有「天主教」，無問題；
耶和華是神，但是我站在耶穌這一邊。
我有我信仰，我明白聖經。
耶和華是神，我相信耶穌明白真理。
祂是神，祂給我們真理，令我們明白真理可貴。
明白真理去除無理的愚見，民主自由互見。
祝大家平心靜氣，一個一個的意見，
總有一天，我國(中國)在地上大放異彩。
|
|
KP
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 02:38:44
|
|
|
如果大陸這次的主教選舉磪實是以真正的民主方式進行, 在某程度上這也是一種進步.
可惜的是我們看不到證據大陸的主教選舉有任何民主成份.
大陸給我們看到的只是大話連編, 以擁立共產黨支持者成為主教以圖控制國內天主教會.
說到底只是大陸打壓宗教自由的又一例證.
話說回來, 縱使大陸的主教選舉真是以民主方式進行, 我們天主教也不會𠄘認.
天主教是注重 "由宗徒傳下來的教會" ( Apostolic sucession ) 這個道統的.
簡單化來說, 就像武俠小說的一個門派代代相承的絕世武功, 要師𠄘正统.
如果沒有了世代相傳的這個正统教授, 絕世武功便會有所偏差而不能正確無誤傳揚下世.
天主教相信真理, 所以我們也支持能為人民帶來幸福的民主制度.
也正因為我們相信民主制度, 所以我們更應正確無誤將真理傳揚下世.
選舉出來的主教, 我們教會不是全不承認, 只要他們有這個師𠄘正统成為牧者的恩賜, 教會是完全接納的.
|
|
Leo
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 09:36:21
|
|
|
To: Life / KP
不知道你有沒有再讀一遍總徒大事錄，你接受民主選舉屬于宗徒傳統嗎？
當然，有句話你說得也對：“即便是自由選出的，教宗也有權拒絕”，不然，教宗真的成了橡皮圖章。
KP 說的對，“選舉出來的主教, 只要他們有這個師承正統成為牧者的恩賜, 教會是完全接納的。”
所以，這次事件的真正要點是：
1，選舉是否自由；
2，候選人是否“師承正統”，“可以正確無誤傳揚下世。”
|
|
Leo
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 09:40:19
|
|
|
結論：
如果選舉不自由，候選人信仰不正統，就應該拒絕，
如果選舉自由，候選人信仰正統，就不應該拒絕。
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 11:20:12
|
|
|
M: The Deposit of Catholic Faith, demands the assent to the primacy of the Pope, including submission to the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff.
m: Schism is an act which denies Papal primacy.
C: Therefore schismatic sect like the CPA in China could in no way be "orthodox". In their very acts of schism they are denouncing their faith.
They could call themselves "Chinese Katholiks" = Sinaism, but they are usurping the title of "Roman Catholics", no they are not ROMAN Catholics.
"在中國出產的另一種冒牌貨，是一種宗教的冒牌貨"
If they want their own bishops, fine, let them have it. But they CANNOT call themselves ROMAN Catholics.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 11:38:38
|
|
|
Apostolic Letter by Pope Pius XII to the Chinese Catholics
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12APOST.HTM
7. Seeing also that there was being spread among you the doctrine of the so-called "three autonomies," We warned -- by virtue of that universal teaching authority which We exercise by divine command -- that this same doctrine as understood by its authors, whether in theory or in its consequences, cannot receive the approval of a Catholic, since it turns minds away from the essential unity of the Church.
38. For it has been clearly and expressly laid down in the canons that it pertains to the one Apostolic See to judge whether a person is fit for the dignity and burden of the episcopacy,[11] and that complete freedom in the nomination of bishops is the right of the Roman Pontiff.[12] But if, as happens at times, some persons or groups are permitted to participate in the selection of an episcopal candidate, this is lawful only if the Apostolic See has allowed it in express terms and in each particular case for clearly defined persons or groups, the conditions and circumstances being very plainly determined.
39. Granted this exception, it follows that bishops who have been neither named nor confirmed by the Apostolic See, but who, on the contrary, have been elected and consecrated in defiance of its express orders, enjoy no powers of teaching or of jurisdiction since jurisdiction passes to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff as We admonished in the Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis in the following words: ". . . As far as his own diocese is concerned each (bishop) feeds the flock entrusted to him as a true shepherd and rules it in the name of Christ. Yet in exercising this office they are not altogether independent but are subordinate to the lawful authority of the Roman Pontiff, although enjoying ordinary power of jurisdiction which they receive directly from the same Supreme Pontiff."[13]
40. And when We later addressed to you the letter Ad Sinarum gentem, We again referred to this teaching in these words: "The power of jurisdiction which is conferred directly by divine right on the Supreme Pontiff comes to bishops by that same right, but only through the successor of Peter, to whom not only the faithful but also all bishops are bound to be constantly subject and to adhere both by the reverence of obedience and by the bond of unity."[14]
41. Acts requiring the power of Holy Orders which are performed by ecclesiastics of this kind, though they are valid as long as the consecration conferred on them was valid, are yet gravely illicit, that is, criminal and sacrilegious.
42. To such conduct the warning words of the Divine Teacher fittingly apply: "He who enters not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up another way, is a thief and a robber."[15] The sheep indeed know the true shepherd's voice. "But a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers."[16]
|
|
oliver
|
Posted -
2006/5/12 上午 11:22:19
|
|
|
"在中國出產的另一種冒牌貨，是一種宗教的冒牌貨"
講得好，但是宗教是沒有專利權。
天主的代理權是我們的、大家的；是信仰。
中國有話："青出於藍"。
請耐心等待，總有一天，天主的代理權會合而為一。
天主教總是天主的顯現，榮耀聖潔。
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/5/12 下午 01:45:27
|
|
|
Leo,
你說: " 如果選舉不自由，候選人信仰不正統，就應該拒絕，如果選舉自由，候選人信仰正統，就不應該拒絕。 "
kp明白你的意思, 其實這也正是我們教會現在的做法.
內地提名的主教人選, 有很多也是被梵蒂岡同時承認的.
不過正如Augustine 所指出, 這個正統與不正統的定義是包括對普世教會(universal church)的認同和接納的.
而教宗作為普世教會的領導, 當然正統的定義亦包括對教宗的認同和接納.
福音是天主送給全體人類的禮物, 所以天主教也是屬於全體人類的, 我們不能認同一個主教只是一個屬於中國單一地區的主教而與普世教會沒有任何關聯.
作為一個稱職的牧者, 又點可以只顧中國人而忽略全人類??
要正確無誤將福音傳揚下世, 要傳的又豈止是中國人而己?
|
|
Leo
|
Posted -
2006/5/15 下午 05:21:03
|
|
|
To: KP
你說的對，即使教區神父自由選舉出來的主教，也應該有教宗的認同和接納，不然就“名不正言不順”。
教宗的接納其實是一個‘外在的’記號，顯示了這位主教與普世教會‘內在的’共融，並且形成以教宗爲首的普世主教團，參與牧養普世教會的天主子民，做普世教會的牧人。
|
|
