Silencing of Traditional Bishops by Pope Francis

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maximilian75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mrsdizzyd said:
You might have noticed I have contributed to this thread, and I consider that cartoon a contribution as well. I asked Max a question that included the cartoon. I asked him why he was posting this potentially Pandora’s Box question. He answered, and I didn’t push the issue. I’m not sure where the rule violation would have occurred? I like to use pictures, memes, gifs, and emojis are a part of my responses. I use them frequently, but they rarely ever stand alone without some kind of question or discussion to go with them. There are a finite number, so you are likely to see them more than once.

Additionally, I think it has had its desired effect. As with all satirical cartoons (as with the story of pandora’s box itself) it’s a caution. You are welcome to ignore it if it bothers you.
Click to expand...
The cartoon, and Mrs’ question caption, was totally appropriate. I like this far more than tedious, prolonged posts.
 
You are certainly allowed your opinion, but you can’t expect that others will communicate exactly how you wish. We are different people with different communication styles. Likewise, I understand why you object to me pushing back. As I said, I asked Max a question which he answered. I’m not sure why this needs to be a “thing”. The thread has been proceeding along just fine.

Anyway, we are now very off topic, so we should stop. If you want to discuss it further, feel free to PM me.
 
CilladeRoma said:
It could be that it is because the European influence around the world is not looked at with great affection, especially in Latin America.

We are a “universal Church” not a western European Church, and it seems to me, and others that I know, that many people who consider themselves “traditional” only look at the western European influences on the Church and deem them to be the only correct options.
Click to expand...
Actually I think the Pope and the people he appoints are very much Western European in outlook. I think he and they are very much out of touch with the view from Africa, Eastern Europe, and the “conservative” thought in the USA, such as The prolife movement (now regarded by Rome as the far Right).
 
Last edited:
commenter said:
conservative” thought in the USA, such as The prolife movement (now regarded by Rome as the far Right).
Click to expand...
I have a problem with the “pro-life” movement. In the US, for the most part “pro-life” means anti-abortion, and nothing else. There is much more to being “pro-life” than protesting abortion, it’s about the dignity of all human life, cradle to grave, which sadly, is not the agenda of most pro-life group’s I know of who are only concerned with stopping abortion.
 
I was hoping someone would illustrate the current politically correct thinking in Rome now.
 
And just what exactly is that supposed to mean?

Pro-life is much, much more than just being anti abortion.
 
Last edited:
The prerequisite to enjoying that human dignity of which you speak is to be alive. So the first order of business is to fight for the actual right to LIVE, and HOW you live is a whole separate question that falls more under the social justice umbrella, not pro-life movement.
 
I suppose it involves being against the death penalty, among other things?
 
What politically correct thinking? Could you be more specific?

Pope Francis is clearly pro-life, as he is against abortion, death penalty and organised crime.
 
Last edited:
Euthanasia, abortion, access to medical care and the death penalty all fall under “pro-life” issues.
And sadly, I know far too many people, including Catholics, who think that the death penalty and euthanasia are just fine.

How can anyone reconcile that attitude as “pro-life” just because those same people are “anti-abortion”?
 
Last edited:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Death penalty is not mentioned though… 🤔
 
Last edited:
Dictionary’s definitions don’t always define an entire (and dynamic) movement. I’m sure you will find various heresies and oversimplifications in the dictionary.
 
In my opinion, yes, as the central philosophy of the Pro-Life movement is to defend the dignity of Human Life in all forms (at least it’s what I’ve heard from more learned PL people).

I think it is only moral to deliberately kill in self-defense or a really violent situation with other people’s life directly jeopardized
 
Last edited:
Euthanasia is part of pro-life, but we don’t focus on it as much because it’s not as widespread an issue. I don’t believe 60 million people were euthanized in recent decades, but sadly that’s the number aborted in the US alone, so thus all the focus in that area.
 
I know the reasons people give I just don’t agree with them. If we are going to claim to be pro-life, it must be across the board or it’s meaningless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top