You need to go to the rules of the forum and realize we do not attack or insult clergy here, whether they are members here or not they will be treated with the respect and dignity they deserve. I will tag this post for the moderators.
Pope Francis hasn’t actually said anything other than he invites the theological discussion about the wound in the Church that is the faithful in divorce/remarriage. The confusion that people are experiencing is not about his words on doctrine but about their categorical belief that no more can be known on the subject that they don’t already know. There are some very basic and traditional antidotes for that sort of confusion. Humble surrender of the ego to at least the possibility held by Pope Francis that more can be known. And gratefulness for Pope Francis as a gift to us by virtue of his office. Those antidotes to confusion are to replace pride and suspicion with humility and gratitude.
Actually the confusion comes in where people, Cardinals, have expressed and are advocating exactly what Cardinal Burke is talking against and the media attaches it, or others attach those statement to the Holy Father’s calling the synod in the first place. CB is simply stating, go to the CCC and you will see what the Holy Father is teaching, truth.
Card. Burke has made it clear that he will resist Pope Francis if he doesn’t come to a conclusion agreed to by Burke. So we clearly know that Card. Burke is suspicious of and hostile to the Popes mission to examine this issue. I respect that you believe that Card. Burke is speaking out of solidarity with the Pope… my spidey sense is that this may not be the case.
Why must you see division???
Looks like it only took a few hours for your expectations to be fulfilled.
And yet Pope Francis the Holy Father has invited a theological discussion on the subject. What do you say to that?
Personal attacks contribute absolutely nothing positive to the discussion.
I find it amusing how much argument comes from a simple comment from a Cardinal that one should read the catechism.
This…Pope Francis has invited discussion as to pastoral care, not doctrinal change. If we see change in a way that is contrary to Jesus’ teachings, adultery, then you will see Burke and MANY others do more than speak out. Truth does not change, divorce and remarriage is adultery; source, see Jesus. To admit a person living in adultery to communion, endorses that sin as normal and acceptable. That will not happen without a great schism because it would be untrue.
A little sensitive, don’t you think? Calm down.
Mass is a Liturgy, not all Liturgy is Mass. Not sure I get your point. the CCC teaches us the faith which has been handed on to us. Learning our faith would help us appreciate all Liturgies, especially Mass. Is that any help?Q: What is “liturgy” anyway?
A: A word I don’t like because it has too many different meanings.
I’ve been told by our parish “minister of the liturgy” that it means “public works.” Well to me public works are roads, bridges, sidewalks, flood control, water, power, etc. and stuff like that. If you want to know when the “masses” are held, you won’t find them in our bulletin because it lists only the times for “liturgy”. I think its recent introduction is an attempt to be esoteric because, even though I’ve been going to “mass” for 70 years, I never heard the word “liturgy” until about 20 years ago, and it was only about five years ago that I discovered I hadn’t been going to “mass” all those years but “liturgy” instead. Since then I’ve not been able to figure out what “liturgy” conveys that “mass” doesn’t. Now when I go to confession, do I tell the priest I missed “liturgy” or do I say I missed “mass”? Is the cardinal saying we should be devoted to the “mass” when he says “liturgy” … or what?
So said Fr Feeney in his time and the MANY others he spoke for. Believing that one is right doesn’t make them right.
Help me out here, how did Fr. Freeney change a teaching of Christ Himself?
This is the way some debate, bait and switch, deflect attention away from a subject. Please stick to the subject.
I would say the only thing I can - there is nothing to discuss. The pope may have his own opinion on the subject but that doesn’t change anything. Should the Pope come out in favour of Communion for remarried divorcees that will simply prove he has got the wrong end of the stick, and it will not be the first time in the history of the Church that this has happened. He will remain the Pope, Christ’s Vicar on earth. I will continue to love and revere him as such, seeing him as the man Christ has chosen to lead his Church, but on ***this ***point I will have to disagree with him. It’s rare for a Catholic to find himself in such a position but, again, this won’t be the first time in the Church’s history it has happened.
Yes. And?
Eh? Where do you see +Burke say “instead” or similar words? Look at his quote. He said only that if Papa Francis was confusing to use the Catechism. I read that as a means of clarification. That is, one should read Papa Francis in the context of the Catechism.
Has +Burke said otherwise?