Christ-centric or Rome-centric?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Adamek said:
It states that God willed diversity of religions - this is a statement from the Koran. Nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that if God wants multiple religions, how can he send HIS SON to SACRIFICE for the ONE TRUE RELIGION.
Click to expand...
First of all, you said:
Adamek said:
Christ is not God
Click to expand...
Adamek said:
These are pope’s words.
Click to expand...
You then, to prove this, present a document that says God wills the plurality of religions, which doesn’t say “Christ is not God”, which you said were the Pope’s words. So, Pope Francis apparently said no such thing.

Secondly, you are aware God has a passive will and an active will, right? Do you think God wills sin? Of course not. He does not will sin, but allows it to be committed because that would otherwise deny us the free will to reject it. The same can be said regarding the plurality of religions.
 
TARRAT said:
As stated by Fauken I think you need to check your sources. I haven’t heard any of the stuff you presented.
Click to expand...
Here is the quote on Jesus and God:

The statement came in response to a column in La Repubblica, the newspaper founded by Scalfari, in which the 95-year-old self-declared atheist said that “Pope Francis conceives Christ as Jesus of Nazareth, a man, not God incarnate.”
It was cited by an unreliable journalist to whom pope Francis gives interviews and with whom he discusses religion. https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2019/10/09/did-pope-francis-really-say-that-jesus-isnt-god/

The Vatican denied the whole thing and that’s fine. The only question I have is why would a public person such as the pope hold discussion on religion with an atheist journalist?

No one knows exactly what was said, but given this pope’s penchant for making off the cuff public remarks that are, shall we say, controversial, I would not dismiss this out of hand.

I just don’t think that constant denial is the answer here.
 
Adamek said:
Scalfari
Click to expand...
Scalfari? The atheistic reporter who doesn’t take notes who has all the incentive in the world to say Pope Francis said such a thing? That’s your source? That’s who you’ll trust?

There’s stupid off the cuff remarks, and then there’s denying the divinity of Christ.
 
Last edited:
As I have stated somewhere before, shooting the messenger doesn’t solve the problem. I understand the need to defend the pope at all costs, but are you not concerned with truth? Getting at the truth, even if it means raising questions?

I just don’t believe that it is possible in today’s world to continue burying our collective Catholic heads in the sand and pretending that nothing is happening.

BTW. It appears that pacha mama may be making a comeback on the last day of the synod.
 
Fauken said:
Scalfari? The atheistic reporter who doesn’t take notes who has all the incentive in the world to say Pope Francis said such a thing? That’s your source? That’s who you’ll trust?

There’s stupid off the cuff remarks, and then there’s denying the divinity of Christ.
Click to expand...
I agree, but you haven’t read my entire post.
 
Adamek said:
As I have stated somewhere before, shooting the messenger doesn’t solve the problem. I understand the need to defend the pope at all costs, but are you not concerned with truth? Getting at the truth, even if it means raising questions?
Click to expand...
I’m a Dominican. I care about the truth. Raising questions is fine.
Adamek said:
I agree, but you haven’t read my entire post.
Click to expand...
Adamek said:
why would a public person such as the pope hold discussion on religion with an atheist journalist?
Click to expand...
I can’t answer that. But that along with the Pope’s penchant for off the cuff remarks as support for “the Pope’s own words” is little more than conjecture. You said they were the Pope’s own words, and to support it, you quoted an interview by a journalist you yourself said is questionable. How is that supposed to pass as “the Pope’s own words”?
 
Sarcelle said:
The infallibility of the Pope means he cannot officially teach error. This is a grace from the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
“An infallible pronouncement—whether made by the pope alone or by an ecumenical council—usually is made only when some doctrine has been called into question. Most doctrines have never been doubted by the large majority of Catholics.” This is from Catholic Answers.

Infallible statements are almost never made. I don’t believe this pope has made any.

For the whole article on infallibility see this: Papal Infallibility | Catholic Answers

Nothing that this pope has said so far would quality as infallible, according to church definition.
 
Fauken said:
You said they were the Pope’s own words, and to support it, you quoted an interview by a journalist you yourself said is questionable. How is that supposed to pass as “the Pope’s own words”?
Click to expand...
OK. You are right. I misspoke, but even that doesn’t really change much. I am sure that you have been following what the pope says and writes, and maybe you will agree that on more than one occasion he has said something not quite in the spirit of the Magisterium. (Catholics multiplying like rabbits - was not a very Christian statement to make, I would think)
 
Adamek said:
OK. You are right. I misspoke, but even that doesn’t really change much. I am sure that you have been following what the pope says and writes, and maybe you will agree that on more than one occasion he has said something not quite in the spirit of the Magisterium. (Catholics multiplying like rabbits - was not a very Christian statement to make, I would think)
Click to expand...
I don’t like Pope Francis speaking off the cuff, no. I wish he’d hold his tongue more often. He’s said things I don’t agree with. But saying rude things and denying Christ’s divinity are not the same. The latter is a very serious charge, especially against the Vicar of Christ. And I’m not sure what you mean by “speaking in the spirit of the Magisterium”. You already said that Pope Francis hasn’t made any ex cathedra statements: so what does that mean?
 
Last edited:
Fauken said:
But saying rude things and denying Christ’s divinity are not the same. The latter is a very serious charge, especially against the Vicar of Christ.
Click to expand...
Again, I agree. But that line about plurality of religions is a statement from the Koran. (I can look for it if you insist).
It more than suggests that:
a/ all religions are ok
b/ maybe all are equal
c/ maybe all offer salvation (otherwise why bother with a religion that doesn’t)

Given these options, where does that place Christianity?
 
Adamek said:
Again, I agree. But that line about plurality of religions is a statement from the Koran. (I can look for it if you insist).
It more than suggests that:
a/ all religions are ok
b/ maybe all are equal
c/ maybe all offer salvation (otherwise why bother with a religion that doesn’t)

Given these options, where does that place Christianity?
Click to expand...
Does God passively allow sin?
 
Adamek said:
Are we to follow Christ, his life and his way, or Rome?
Click to expand...
Yes. Follow Christ and Rome. It’s not difficult to do both.

I know you can find fault with the Catholic Church. I might say, it is the worst church, except for all the alternatives.

What alternative, if any, would you find acceptable?
 
The criticism of the current pope can’t be just dismissed. He has made many controversial statements over the past six years that are just dismissed as ‘off the cuff’ and ‘misinterpretations’ of his actual words. And all of them tend in the same direction, toward a leftist political position. He likes to criticize conservative Christians (particularly Catholic) and those who seek to maintain the faith as handed down. They ‘breed like rabbits’, they are ‘uptight’, they are like the Pharisees, and etc. you would think that Catholicism was a political organization with the same goals as the progressive left. The religiousity of Catholicism has been relegated to an afterthought.

Every once I a while I will read something that the pope said that will be a religious statement but it is so rare that it is almost meaningless. Almost everything is political. Now I haven’t read everything the pope has said, so I don’t have a comprehensive view (far from it). So I will admit that I may not have an accurate view.
 
Adamek said:
Since I can’t answer your question and have to assume that you know way more than I do, all I can do is ask for the source. 🙂
Click to expand...
It took me a while to find something that wasn’t the Summa (that can be a bit dense and I am certainly not good enough to explain all of Aquinas’ points), but I found a New Advent (Catholic Encyclopedia) article over Providence:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm

Some quotes:
“In spite of sin, which is due to the wilful perversion of human liberty, acting with the concurrence, but contrary to the purpose and intention of God and in spite of evil which is the consequence of sin, He directs all, even evil and sin itself, to the final end for which the universe was created. All these operations on God’s part, with the exception of creation, are attributed in Catholic theology to Divine Providence.”
Click to expand...
" * Sin is not ordained by the will of God, though it happens with His permission. It can be ascribed to Providence only as a secondary result (Origen, Against Celsus IV.68; St. John Damascene, “De fid. orth.”, ii, 21 in “P.G.”, XCIV, 95 sq.)."
Click to expand...
" St. Thomas’ treatment of the problem of evil in relation to Providence is based upon the consideration of the universe as a whole. God wills that His nature should be manifested in the highest possible way, and hence has created things like to Himself not only in that they are good in se , but also in that they are the cause of good in others (I, Q. ciii, a. 4, 6). In other words He has created a universe, not a number of isolated beings. Whence it follows, according to St. Thomas, that natural operations tend to what is better for the whole, but not necessarily what is better for each part except in relation to the whole (I, Q. xxii, a. 2, ad 2 um; Q. lviii, a. 2, ad 3 um; Contra Gent., III, xciv). Sin and suffering are evils because they are contrary to the good of the individual and to God’s original purpose in regard to the individual, but they are not contrary to the good of the universe, and this good will ultimately be realized by the omnipotent Providence of God."
Click to expand...
 
My mother-in-law had a few minor strokes over the years. She can walk around and talk, but she’s not grounded in reality. There aren’t any people living in her closet, or strangers walking through the house.

If the pope should say outrageous things, if press want to twist something he said to suit their purpose, whatever, this has no impact on me at all. I will continue to go to the sacraments, offer each day to the will of God, and most importantly be united with Christ for the conversion of sinners and peace in this world. This is mine to do. I have no control over the media or anything that goes on in the world besides my prayers and sufferings.

The pope could have mini strokes and go off the rails. My confidence does not rely on this man but in Christ. He’s the anchor, He’s the rock. If there are hostile media people who twist what he says, that’s on them. I’ll go about my day.
 
Most of those of us who have faith in the guidance of the Holy Spirit are moving on.

The Church has 2,000 years of guidance; it has a history of subsets wihing the Church wandering off in heresy; and the church is still true to Christ and the Gospels.

As none of us has any (name removed by moderator)ut on the synod or those involved in it, we pray and then move on with our life. Constantly seeking out negative elements within society and focusing on them has a tendency to remove our eyes from Christ and cause our feet to stumble in following Him.

And not to make too find a point of it, but daily there are hundreds, if not htousnads of children being murdered in the womb.

So, many of us focus on prayer, on Christ, and move on.
 
Click bait!

There is NO difference. The Church which Christ founded, and which is His mystical Body on earth, is headquartered in Rome.

I caution all who attempt or seek to divide - or even justify division. That is the evil one’s primary tactic.

Does not matter how good or pure one’s intentions may be. Those intentions pave the road…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top