Pope Francis "No More Business as Usual"

  • Thread starter Thread starter esieffe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is not enough pressure in the universe that can make a pope teach error. You know that. Such a thought would border on heresy, since the Church cannot teach error even in the ordinary magisterium.
Tell that to Saint Peter when God used Saint Paul to set him straight.I suppose he “bordering on heresy” too. What does God’s Word say? (Jn.14:6). What does Pope Francis say? (Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven, The Independent, December 10, 2013) If there are Atheists who go to heaven, I’m sure that Pope Francis would agree that there are many “heretics” who go there as well. One can have a high I.Q. and all the book knowledge in the world, and still be dead wrong (opus citatum: Stephen Hawking, “So here’s how it all happened without God…”) Shhh! A moment of silence please. President Obama is speaking at the Mandela Funeral in Johannesberg. Wow! Just look at all the teleprompters. :rolleyes:
 
Tell that to Saint Peter when God used Saint Paul to set him straight.I suppose he “bordering on heresy” too. What does God’s Word say? (Jn.14:6).
Peter was not teaching false doctrine. Peter was making a mistake in an area discipline. Disciplines and doctrines are not the same thing. Disciplines are rules. Doctrines are truths.

God did not send Paul. Paul was a bishop who was summoned to the Council of Jerusalem like every other bishop of that day. Like every bishop of the time, he was given the floor to express his concerns and he did.

Observe the narrative very carefully. Paul never addresses Peter by his given name, Simon. He always addresses him by his title, Cephas. Among our people, this is only done when there is acknowledgement of authority and the right of office. Paul, while making his case for the gentiles, is careful not to tread on the office of Peter as the Rock. Paul never accuses Peter of false doctrines.
What does Pope Francis say? (Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven, The Independent, December 10, 2013) If there are Atheists who go to heaven, I’m sure that Pope Francis would agree that there are many “heretics” who go there as well. One can have a high I.Q. and all the book knowledge in the world, and still be dead wrong (opus citatum: Stephen Hawking, “So here’s how it all happened without God…”) Shhh! A moment of silence please. President Obama is speaking at the Mandela Funeral in Johannesberg. Wow! Just look at all the teleprompters. :rolleyes:
Actually what Pope Francis said is not quite this. But if you want to go there, let’s address it from the point of view of solid moral theology.

No one is required to violate his conscience in order to get to heaven. That’s where Pope Francis is coming from.

If a man believes that X is the highest good, but he does Y because you tell him to o Y; even you’re right and Y is a higher good than X, the fact is that he chose Y not because he believed it was a higher good, but because it pleases you. In that case, he has elevated you to a god and has failed to do what he believes is a higher good in order to please you. This kind of choice is not pleasing to God.

While man is naturally ordered toward the higher good and while man has a moral duty to seek the higher good, there is never a guarantee that man will always find it. Human nature is very complex, as is the human mind. So if a man dies while in search, but not having become convinced that he has found it, he can be saved, because of the good that he has achieved and because of his desire to find the ultimate good, which we already know, but the atheist does not yet know.

On the other hand, if a man is dishonest and chooses not to search so as not to find, then he signs his own death sentence. This is the big difference.

Our theology is not so black and white that it condemns people who are in search of truth, even if they have not arrived. At the end of the day, faith is a two way street. Man must search, but as Augustine says, God must find him first and God must give the gift of faith. Faith is a gift that God gives at different times and in different measures, because only He knows our hearts, what is good for us and when.

I’m impressed that you know the hearts of these men so well. I thought the secrets of the heart and conscience were known only to God, the individual and those with whom he shares them.

Are you saying that you know for a fact that the pope is a heretic?
 
Peter was not teaching false doctrine. Peter was making a mistake in an area discipline. Disciplines and doctrines are not the same thing. Disciplines are rules. Doctrines are truths.

God did not send Paul. Paul was a bishop who was summoned to the Council of Jerusalem like every other bishop of that day. Like every bishop of the time, he was given the floor to express his concerns and he did.

Observe the narrative very carefully. Paul never addresses Peter by his given name, Simon. He always addresses him by his title, Cephas. Among our people, this is only done when there is acknowledgement of authority and the right of office. Paul, while making his case for the gentiles, is careful not to tread on the office of Peter as the Rock. Paul never accuses Peter of false doctrines.

Actually what Pope Francis said is not quite this. But if you want to go there, let’s address it from the point of view of solid moral theology.

No one is required to violate his conscience in order to get to heaven. That’s where Pope Francis is coming from.

If a man believes that X is the highest good, but he does Y because you tell him to o Y; even you’re right and Y is a higher good than X, the fact is that he chose Y not because he believed it was a higher good, but because it pleases you. In that case, he has elevated you to a god and has failed to do what he believes is a higher good in order to please you. This kind of choice is not pleasing to God.

While man is naturally ordered toward the higher good and while man has a moral duty to seek the higher good, there is never a guarantee that man will always find it. Human nature is very complex, as is the human mind. So if a man dies while in search, but not having become convinced that he has found it, he can be saved, because of the good that he has achieved and because of his desire to find the ultimate good, which we already know, but the atheist does not yet know.

On the other hand, if a man is dishonest and chooses not to search so as not to find, then he signs his own death sentence. This is the big difference.

Our theology is not so black and white that it condemns people who are in search of truth, even if they have not arrived. At the end of the day, faith is a two way street. Man must search, but as Augustine says, God must find him first and God must give the gift of faith. Faith is a gift that God gives at different times and in different measures, because only He knows our hearts, what is good for us and when.

I’m impressed that you know the hearts of these men so well. I thought the secrets of the heart and conscience were known only to God, the individual and those with whom he shares them.

Are you saying that you know for a fact that the pope is a heretic?
Huh? I am not “judging” Pope Francis or putting him on trial for “heresy.” I am simply saying proceed with caution. Just because someone is a celebrity for the moment does not mean we should pin all our hopes and confidences on him. Both Pope Francis and President Obama have been charged with leadership. Ultimately both men have Almighty God to answer to. I honestly hope that Pope Francis turns out to be a great man for our age, and draws people to the Church who are willing to repent, believe the Gospel, and live it out faithfully throughout their lives.
 
So you are afraid of the the pope and the Church being in the news because of possible negative stories. Well let’s just close the church doors and kneel in prayerful terror of those nasty people.
The Catholic Church needs to be house hold term. All need to know what the Church is about and what it stands for. Who cares if misguided people think that the teaching of the church is going to change. They will come to find out that we stand for God’s truth.
Yes indeed there are changes coming in the Church. No more wishy Washy Catholic that stand in the corner like a fake tree, unable to bear fruit. Instead it is long past time that we approach the world and all in it with Christ’s love.
It has been said over and over again, the pope is not saying anything new. He is presenting it in a different way and this time people are listening, this is a very good event.
His message on economics is in the Church’s social doctrine even the part pertaining to capitalism. His other messages come from various teachings, including the Second Vatican Council.
The Challenge of the New Evangelization is our own faithful to understand the richness of their faith and to work to spread it without fear.

Deacon Frank
Thank you!! Well stated!
 
Huh? I am not “judging” Pope Francis or putting him on trial for “heresy.” I am simply saying proceed with caution. Just because someone is a celebrity for the moment does not mean we should pin all our hopes and confidences on him. Both Pope Francis and President Obama have been charged with leadership. Ultimately both men have Almighty God to answer to. I honestly hope that Pope Francis turns out to be a great man for our age, and draws people to the Church who are willing to repent, believe the Gospel, and live it out faithfully throughout their lives.
Pope Francis has the gift of infallibility. Obama does not.

Pope Francis has proven his fidelity to human dignity. Obama has proven that he has no respect for human dignity.

Pope Francis has proven that he is a son of the Church. He has served the Church courageously and heroically for 57 years. Obama can’t say the same.

Pope Francis is a man of prayer. Can we say the same about Obama?

Pope Francis is not interested in political power or demagoguery. I wish we could say the same thing about any president.

Pope Francis has demonstrated that he’s a compassionate man. Obama has paid for the killing of millions of unborn children.

I think it’s an insult to the pope and to Catholics to put Obama and Francis in the same bracket.

The only thing they have in common is that both will have to answer for their Creator and so will those who cast shadows on the reputation of a good and holy man.
 
Keep in mind that Pope Francis is part of that now graying generation which came of age in the 60’s…“Question Authority,” “Kumbaya my Lord,” and the like. He was, no doubt, trained by Jesuits. Wonder if he ever used clay or wooden chalices and patens in sacred liturgies?

I will continue to pray daily for him and for the Church.
Well I think that if our Lord used clay or wooden chalices, it isn’t out of the question that a future Pope might have used one as well. Your right though. Those Jesuits just don’t go for all that sterling silver, gold inlay, jewel-studded chalices they have in all those fancy gold gilded Cathedrals!😉
 
Pope Francis has the gift of infallibility. Obama does not.

Pope Francis has proven his fidelity to human dignity. Obama has proven that he has no respect for human dignity.

Pope Francis has proven that he is a son of the Church. He has served the Church courageously and heroically for 57 years. Obama can’t say the same.

Pope Francis is a man of prayer. Can we say the same about Obama?

Pope Francis is not interested in political power or demagoguery. I wish we could say the same thing about any president.

Pope Francis has demonstrated that he’s a compassionate man. Obama has paid for the killing of millions of unborn children.

I think it’s an insult to the pope and to Catholics to put Obama and Francis in the same bracket.

The only thing they have in common is that both will have to answer for their Creator and so will those who cast shadows on the reputation of a good and holy man.
👍

Nevertheless, there are some who will passionately defend the rights of those who want to equate or approximate the two in some way.

Free will is wonderful. 😃
 
Just because someone is a celebrity for the moment . . .
The Pope of the Catholic Church, Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Christ, is a bit more than a “celebrity for the moment.” It’s rather dismissive to call him that. 😦
 
The Pope of the Catholic Church, Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Christ, is a bit more than a “celebrity for the moment.” It’s rather dismissive to call him that. 😦
Well what do you know? He’s Time Magazine’s “Man of the Year.” Rather dismissive:rotfl:
 
Well what do you know? He’s Time Magazine’s “Man of the Year.” Rather dismissive:rotfl:
Two other Popes were also Time’s “Man (Person) of the Year”- John XXIII in 1962 & JPII in 1994- where they just ‘celebrities of the moment’, too? :rolleyes:
 
Well what do you know? He’s Time Magazine’s “Man of the Year.” Rather dismissive:rotfl:
Even Time’s article is more respectful of him than you are. It says a lot about you that you find that amusing.
 
Even Time’s article is more respectful of him than you are. It says a lot about you that you find that amusing.
So far, I am very impressed with Pope Francis. I am a fan.

I would also point out that there is often a “honeymoon” period with the media, during which the press is very positive.

Since a comparison has been made with Mr. Obama, I will admit that I am not his fan. I believe that he was a better choice than the alternative in both of his elections, but I am very disappointed in his performance. But going off on a tangent about the President, does nothing to serve this thread.
 
Two other Popes were also Time’s “Man (Person) of the Year”- John XXIII in 1962 & JPII in 1994- where they just ‘celebrities of the moment’, too? :rolleyes:
A dubious honor. They named Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev, “the computer”, “the endangered earth” and “you” as person of the year.

It means nothing. I’m sure His Holiness is not putting a framed copy of the magazine cover in his office.

-Tim-
 
Since a comparison has been made with Mr. Obama, I will admit that I am not his fan. I believe that he was a better choice than the alternative in both of his elections, but I am very disappointed in his performance.
[sarcasm]

OH NOES U EVIL LIBRUL HERETIC Y U SAY THAT??!!!111

[/sarcasm]

While comparing President Obama with Pope Francis is ridiculous, the way the media is treating them is certainly instructive.
 
A dubious honor. They named Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev, “the computer”, “the endangered earth” and “you” as person of the year.

It means nothing. I’m sure His Holiness is not putting a framed copy of the magazine cover in his office.

-Tim-
As someone already pointed out in the other thread - the award is for the person and/or concept which generated the most interest and news. It’s about what got people talking. It’s not an award like the Nobel Peace Prize.
 
As someone already pointed out in the other thread - the award is for the person and/or concept which generated the most interest and news. It’s about what got people talking. It’s not an award like the Nobel Peace Prize.
Arafat got the Nobel Prize for peace. Another sham.

-Tim-
 
His message on economics is in the Church’s social doctrine even the part pertaining to capitalism.
Indeed it is. The pope has done nothing more than reiterate standard Catholic social teaching on this.

Next thing people will be getting upset about the pope promoting a preferential option for the poor.
 
Arafat got the Nobel Prize for peace. Another sham.

-Tim-
So did Barack Obama, for doing, uh, absolutely nothing.

And so did some people whose records were later shown to be a little embroidered… 😃

The Nobel Prizes for Peace and Literature are, by and large, pathetic jokes. 😛
 
So did Barack Obama, for doing, uh, absolutely nothing.

And so did some people whose records were later shown to be a little embroidered… 😃

The Nobel Prizes for Peace and Literature are, by and large, pathetic jokes. 😛
Ugh, not intended to be a debate on the merits of who won Nobel prizes (there are a lot of clunkers…). The point was the Time’s person of the year is based on generating news stories and prompting talk, not in the value of their message, person, or deeds.
 
Ugh, not intended to be a debate on the merits of who won Nobel prizes (there are a lot of clunkers…). The point was the Time’s person of the year is based on generating news stories and prompting talk, not in the value of their message, person, or deeds.
I will tell you what the pope said. Chew on it for a while and you’ll see that it makes sense.

Rejecting the message because you reject the messenger doesn’t make sense

I found this very helpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top