Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Sep 14, '10, 8:34 pm
rben20's Avatar
rben20 rben20 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2010
Posts: 755
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default John Henry Newman Controversy

Hello Catholics,

I've been very excited about the beatification of John Henry Newman with the Pope's trip nearing closer each day. In the process I have been reading about this great servant of God, but unfortunately I have come across some allegations that of course try to paint the Catholic Church as evil and intolerant and homophobic and whatever else you can think of that could be used to slander the Church.

Homosexuals have particular started controversy by saying that the Church is trying to remove John Henry Newman from Ambrose St John, even implying that they were possible homosexuals. When they exhumed his body the Church was "going against his wishes" and even allege the reason he chose to be buried in a wooden casket was to avoid his remains being taken for relic purposes.

I don't know how much if any of this is true, but maybe if other people are more knowledgable would care to comment please do. There always has to be some sourpuss for such a great celebration in the Church.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Sep 14, '10, 9:00 pm
Javl Javl is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: August 21, 2009
Posts: 2,123
Religion: Roman Catholic, traditionalist, faithful to the Magisterium
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by rben20 View Post
Hello Catholics,

I've been very excited about the beatification of John Henry Newman with the Pope's trip nearing closer each day. In the process I have been reading about this great servant of God, but unfortunately I have come across some allegations that of course try to paint the Catholic Church as evil and intolerant and homophobic and whatever else you can think of that could be used to slander the Church.

Homosexuals have particular started controversy by saying that the Church is trying to remove John Henry Newman from Ambrose St John, even implying that they were possible homosexuals. When they exhumed his body the Church was "going against his wishes" and even allege the reason he chose to be buried in a wooden casket was to avoid his remains being taken for relic purposes.

I don't know how much if any of this is true, but maybe if other people are more knowledgable would care to comment please do. There always has to be some sourpuss for such a great celebration in the Church.
If ever anyone deserved Sainthood in the Catholic Church it is John Cardinal Newman.
In every cause towards sainthood of a Catholic there is always the "Devil's Advocate".
The function of the advocate is to bring up legitimate reasons to prevent beatification
of that person.

In the case of Cardinal Newman's beatification it seems that the "Devil's Advocate" is good old Satan himself, still trying to destroy Jesus' Church in anyway he can. Thank God Almighty, all the rumors about Cardinal Newman are just that. There's not a modicum of truth in any of them. So, just ignore and put to rest all the false allegations that you hear about the Cardinal and trust in God and His Church to reveal the truth.


PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Sep 14, '10, 9:15 pm
Victorious's Avatar
Victorious Victorious is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2006
Posts: 1,527
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

I am not particularly knowledgeable about Cardinal Newman, but I do note with irritation the tendency in this day and age to sexualize everything, and particularly for homosexualists to take any deep friendship between two men or two women and call it gay. I think it's a safe bet that if there were any evidence to support the idea that Cardinal Newman was a practicing homosexual, he would not be beatified.
__________________
...I put before you the one great thing to love on earth: the Blessed Sacrament...There you will find romance, glory, honour, fidelity, and the true way of all your loves upon earth...J.R.R. Tolkien

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Sep 14, '10, 9:41 pm
chypmonk's Avatar
chypmonk chypmonk is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 363
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Javl View Post
If ever anyone deserved Sainthood in the Catholic Church it is John Cardinal Newman.
In every cause towards sainthood of a Catholic there is always the "Devil's Advocate".
The function of the advocate is to bring up legitimate reasons to prevent beatification
of that person.

In the case of Cardinal Newman's beatification it seems that the "Devil's Advocate" is good old Satan himself, still trying to destroy Jesus' Church in anyway he can. Thank God Almighty, all the rumors about Cardinal Newman are just that. There's not a modicum of truth in any of them. So, just ignore and put to rest all the false allegations that you hear about the Cardinal and trust in God and His Church to reveal the truth.


PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem
I disagree that losing the "devil's advocate" was a good thing. I think that Newman should not be canonized.
"Cardinal Newman is one of the most respected converts to the Catholic Church in recent times and is now up for beatification. While we appreciate his devotional books and apologies, we strongly object to making his book on the "Development of Christian Doctrine" as a tome equal to the heights of Aquinas or other Doctors of the Church, which is not only overstated but dangerous to the Faith. Newman has been raised to the height of Venerable and soon to be Beatified but this can not be assumed as an endorsement of all his writings." http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2009...velopment.html

His theory of the development of doctrine, not by intention, but materially it is in grave error especially condemned by St; Pius X in his syllabus against the errors of the modernists.(see link above)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Sep 15, '10, 12:25 am
Earnest Bunbury's Avatar
Earnest Bunbury Earnest Bunbury is offline
Regular Member
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: October 29, 2008
Posts: 1,231
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

The deeper I get into the theology and teachings of the Church, the easier it is to see the ignorance of those who pit one Church teaching against another, one doctrine against another doctrine, or one Church Council against another Church Council. It is at the deep end of the theological pool that the Church inhabits and when one drags these deep and weighty matters of Her doctrine into the shallow end for a cursory examination and explanation, then the depth is lost and only the obvious can be seen and understood. It is only in their depth that the doctrines come into congruity. It is in the shallow pool that Newman, as well as Vatican II, is derided for "errors".

Quote:
Newman liked to compare the Church to a tree, which grows organically from a seed to a sapling to eventually a full-grown mature tree. The essence of the tree is the same, but its outward appearance does change. Likewise, the Church does teach the same truths today that it did in previous centuries, but our understanding of these truths has developed and therefore outwardly they may appear on the surface to be different.
http://ericsammons.com/blog/2010/09/...omment-page-1/
__________________
Arguments are to be avoided; they are always vulgar and often convincing.
Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Sep 15, '10, 2:46 am
Javl Javl is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: August 21, 2009
Posts: 2,123
Religion: Roman Catholic, traditionalist, faithful to the Magisterium
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by chypmonk View Post
I disagree that losing the "devil's advocate" was a good thing. I think that Newman should not be canonized.
"Cardinal Newman is one of the most respected converts to the Catholic Church in recent times and is now up for beatification. While we appreciate his devotional books and apologies, we strongly object to making his book on the "Development of Christian Doctrine" as a tome equal to the heights of Aquinas or other Doctors of the Church, which is not only overstated but dangerous to the Faith. Newman has been raised to the height of Venerable and soon to be Beatified but this can not be assumed as an endorsement of all his writings." http://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2009...velopment.html

His theory of the development of doctrine, not by intention, but materially it is in grave error especially condemned by St; Pius X in his syllabus against the errors of the modernists.(see link above)
In the history of the Catholic Church it has been shown, and proven, that even Saints, and Popes, can be biased and in error. Although I have not read thoroughly or studied Cardinal Newman's "Development Of Christian Doctrine" I am quite certain that it can be, and maybe is, equal to the writings of the early doctors of the Church. If it weren't it would not hold such a prestigious place in Church literature. Also, I doubt that it can be as dangerous to the faith as it is made out to be since Catholic, and some Protestant, theologians praise, and use as a reference, this work of his.


PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Sep 15, '10, 5:18 am
GloriousOrder GloriousOrder is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 19, 2010
Posts: 1,288
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Javl View Post
Also, I doubt that it can be as dangerous to the faith as it is made out to be since Catholic, and some Protestant, theologians praise, and use as a reference, this work of his.
Perhaps the highlighted fact is one of the reasons our friend with the rabbit avatar is concerned.

Cardinal Newman is a personal hero of mine, and I do think the Gay Agenda is making a bit much out of it. It seems that many people are imprinting an early 21st century vision of male friendship on to this man of the late 19th, and have judged it 'homosexual' in nature. The problem with this estimation is simply that European men from about 1600-1900 didn't particularly mind intimate relationships with one another. Platonic perfection and philia (brother-love) were considered the highest forms of affection and loyalty, modeled after the Classical world. Men would be on the most intimate and beloved of terms with one another - trying to imitate David and Johnathan, I suppose. It was a noble and extremely loyal type of bonding, and not at all sexual.

Any progressive Catholic who is an active homosexual naturally has a reason to smear his own Church with this nonsense. They want recognition for their sins, so it's very sad, really.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Sep 15, '10, 6:33 am
OraLabora OraLabora is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2007
Posts: 8,241
Religion: Roman Catholic, Benedictine Oblate
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GloriousOrder View Post
It seems that many people are imprinting an early 21st century vision of male friendship on to this man of the late 19th, and have judged it 'homosexual' in nature. The problem with this estimation is simply that European men from about 1600-1900 didn't particularly mind intimate relationships with one another. Platonic perfection and philia (brother-love) were considered the highest forms of affection and loyalty, modeled after the Classical world. Men would be on the most intimate and beloved of terms with one another - trying to imitate David and Johnathan, I suppose. It was a noble and extremely loyal type of bonding, and not at all sexual.

Any progressive Catholic who is an active homosexual naturally has a reason to smear his own Church with this nonsense. They want recognition for their sins, so it's very sad, really.
It is sad that modern society has to hypersexualize everything. Love does not equal sex, and a loving relationship between people of the same or different genders does not automatically imply they are having sex.

It's unfortunate that Cardinal Newman is being tarred with innuendo about a relationship that we know nothing about, and that is taken totally out of the context of its time and place, by people with an agenda. Of course these are the same people who would say that David and Jonathan had a homosexual relationship. So it's probably a lost cause trying to get through to them.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Sep 15, '10, 9:19 am
MarcoPolo's Avatar
MarcoPolo MarcoPolo is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: August 17, 2005
Posts: 15,655
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by chypmonk View Post
His theory of the development of doctrine, not by intention, but materially it is in grave error especially condemned by St; Pius X in his syllabus against the errors of the modernists.(see link above)
I read through that link and keyword searched St. Pius X's encyclical. It does not seem Pius X mentions Cardinal Newman at all. It seems that the author of that blog post interpreted some of Pius X's condemnations as referring to Newman's Development of Doctrine. Did I miss the special condemnation of Newman in Pius X's encyclical?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Sep 15, '10, 11:39 am
Javl Javl is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: August 21, 2009
Posts: 2,123
Religion: Roman Catholic, traditionalist, faithful to the Magisterium
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GloriousOrder View Post
Perhaps the highlighted fact is one of the reasons our friend with the rabbit avatar is concerned.

Cardinal Newman is a personal hero of mine, and I do think the Gay Agenda is making a bit much out of it. It seems that many people are imprinting an early 21st century vision of male friendship on to this man of the late 19th, and have judged it 'homosexual' in nature. The problem with this estimation is simply that European men from about 1600-1900 didn't particularly mind intimate relationships with one another. Platonic perfection and philia (brother-love) were considered the highest forms of affection and loyalty, modeled after the Classical world. Men would be on the most intimate and beloved of terms with one another - trying to imitate David and Johnathan, I suppose. It was a noble and extremely loyal type of bonding, and not at all sexual.

Any progressive Catholic who is an active homosexual naturally has a reason to smear his own Church with this nonsense. They want recognition for their sins, so it's very sad, really.
I remember my father kissing and hugging his father, and father-in-law, in greetings and my uncles ( on both sides ) kissing and hugging their father in greetings, and there was no hint whatsoever of any sexual inuendo. I hugged and kissed my father and grandfathers as well as my uncles when I was well into my adulthood. My father died at 90, and I was 65, and I still had hugged and kissed him. My sons and grandsons still follow this custom which is/ was the norm, not only in my family but with others as well. It was the onset of "political correctness" in my estimation, that brought a tragic end to this beautiful expression of
philia.


PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Sep 15, '10, 11:49 am
Javl Javl is offline
Regular Member
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: August 21, 2009
Posts: 2,123
Religion: Roman Catholic, traditionalist, faithful to the Magisterium
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

May I remind some of our detractors that John Henry Cardinal Newman is not only a most notable convert to Catholicism but that he and his writings have caused more Protestants to "swim the Tiber" than all others.


PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Sep 15, '10, 3:45 pm
chypmonk's Avatar
chypmonk chypmonk is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 363
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcoPolo View Post
I read through that link and keyword searched St. Pius X's encyclical. It does not seem Pius X mentions Cardinal Newman at all. It seems that the author of that blog post interpreted some of Pius X's condemnations as referring to Newman's Development of Doctrine. Did I miss the special condemnation of Newman in Pius X's encyclical?
Since Pius the X published his condemnations in 1907 he was condemning the Modernist movement. Newman was already dead by 1890. Newman, at least in his book on Developments, is heretical in aspects but that does not necessarily make him a formal heretic, only mistaken in good faith.

“We shall find ourselves unable,” he says again, “to fix an historical point at which the growth of doctrine ceased. Not on the day of Pentecost, for St. Peter had still to learn at Joppa about the baptism of Cornelius; not at Joppa and Caesarea, for St. Paul had to write his Epistles; not on the death of the last apostle,..."(Developments of Doctrine pg.107)

#21: Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles. --condemned. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10lamen.htm

This above quote of Newman is clearly seriously wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Sep 15, '10, 6:46 pm
floresco's Avatar
floresco floresco is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 16, 2010
Posts: 2,115
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by chypmonk View Post
Since Pius the X published his condemnations in 1907 he was condemning the Modernist movement. Newman was already dead by 1890. Newman, at least in his book on Developments, is heretical in aspects but that does not necessarily make him a formal heretic, only mistaken in good faith.

“We shall find ourselves unable,” he says again, “to fix an historical point at which the growth of doctrine ceased. Not on the day of Pentecost, for St. Peter had still to learn at Joppa about the baptism of Cornelius; not at Joppa and Caesarea, for St. Paul had to write his Epistles; not on the death of the last apostle,..."(Developments of Doctrine pg.107)

#21: Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles. --condemned. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10lamen.htm

This above quote of Newman is clearly seriously wrong.
I do not think it is wrong, but that you are misunderstanding it. Perhaps this point from the Catechism of the Catholic Church will make things clearer:
66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ." Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
When Newman writes of the growth of doctrine, he does not refer to new revelation but to an increase in our understanding of it.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Sep 15, '10, 7:50 pm
MarcoPolo's Avatar
MarcoPolo MarcoPolo is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: August 17, 2005
Posts: 15,655
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
Originally Posted by floresco View Post
I do not think it is wrong, but that you are misunderstanding it. Perhaps this point from the Catechism of the Catholic Church will make things clearer:
66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ." Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
When Newman writes of the growth of doctrine, he does not refer to new revelation but to an increase in our understanding of it.
I agree with this and would like also to add the fact that the Apostles were a foundation to be built upon. He is not suggesting new revelation, hence the title "Development."

p.s. chypmonk, earlier you suggested Cardinal Newman was going to be "canonized," but I understand him to receive "beatification," i.e. called "Blessed" and not "Saint" (yet). No?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Sep 15, '10, 8:15 pm
Third Day Third Day is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 2, 2009
Posts: 931
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: John Henry Newman Controversy

Quote:
=chypmonk;7065519]Since Pius the X published his condemnations in 1907 he was condemning the Modernist movement. Newman was already dead by 1890. Newman, at least in his book on Developments, is heretical in aspects but that does not necessarily make him a formal heretic, only mistaken in good faith.

“We shall find ourselves unable,” he says again, “to fix an historical point at which the growth of doctrine ceased. Not on the day of Pentecost, for St. Peter had still to learn at Joppa about the baptism of Cornelius; not at Joppa and Caesarea, for St. Paul had to write his Epistles; not on the death of the last apostle,..."(Developments of Doctrine pg.107)
I can't find that on page 107. What Chapter is it in?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump




Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
6597CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: tawny
6138Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
5162Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
4627Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: neweggs
4287Poems and Reflections
Last by: Purgatory Pete
4053OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: Fischli
3290For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: GLam8833
3261Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: Herculees
2822Let's Empty Purgatory 2
Last by: tawny
2448SOLITUDE
Last by: beth40n2



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 7:24 am.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.