Commentary about criticism of Pope Francis

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Neithan said:
God bless you for giving them the benefit of the doubt. I hope you’re right, but it seems obviously superstitious to me.
Click to expand...
Different cultures have different looks.

Here is a long video:


At around 13:20 you should be able to hear, “Our Lady of the Amazon” (obviously not in English).

According to the Catechism, concerning the 8th commandment (and I insist the others getting into heated argument here also consider):

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:
  • of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
  • of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;
  • of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.

2479 Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one’s neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity.
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a8.htm
 
Last edited:
For example, within the last week, Taylor Marshall revealed that he lied and manipulated his audience regarding his involvement in the theft of the indigenous Catholics’ statues during October’s Amazon Synod in Rome (he coordinated and financed the entire thing, then “broke” the story). The Holy Father’s “respectful” critics claim to hold themselves to a higher standard than the fringe, however.

Wow my Lord above! It’s a big relief to know he is outed for the shifty, money grubbing, liar he is though. People will still support his anti Francis agenda but they’ll be doing it knowing full well the character he truly is.
 
Emeraldlady said:
It’s a big relief to know he is outed for the shifty, money grubbing, liar he is though.
Click to expand...
I won’t defend the ‘veneration’ of pachamama at the synod, and I do think the guys who threw it into the Tiber were right to do so, but Taylor Marshall strikes me as iffy. I read Infiltration and coming to the ending I had two thoughts:

First, he was right to include different ‘options’ for faithful Catholics to choose from, but he ironically made a better case for atheism than anything else.

Second, I wanted to tell him to calm down. Real life isn’t nearly as conspiratorial as he thinks it is.

I also don’t think he fully understands what is and isn’t infallible teaching.
 
This video by the brilliant Fr. Robert Spitzer, S.J., PhD, helped my understanding considerably. It is an hour long, and I believe that those who incessantly speak in contra should muster the attention span to take this in.

 
Bowing down and praying to Pachamama is idolatrous. I tried to defend it when it happened but I regret doing that.

However, I trust our Holy Father. That’s all I’ve decided to do. I don’t give that whole fiasco much thought anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top