You don’t need to go to confession. You made a decision based on your own health goals. Just try not to buy things you don’t want to consume.I just went through my refrigerator and I noticed quite a few things with high fructose corn syrup. So I threw all of them away, but then I remembered what pope Francis said about wasting food. Would this be wasting food, even though they’re not good for you? Do I need to go to confession now?
So you consider any advocacy for the poor to be “liberation theology” then? I suppose we can throw thew whole of Catholic social teaching out of the window then, seeming that it’s only “liberation theology”.It grieves me to read of “wasting food” in the context of “stealing from the poor”.
This is the language of liberation theology which presumably was not going to become our zeitgeist however here we are. Is advocacy for the poor always justifiable? Re. Judas in John 12:5 Why was not this ointment sold for 300 pence and given to the poor?
Generosity and mercy towards the needy in God’s grace, but never make merchandise of the poor or forget first and last to honor God.
No, I don’t consider all advocacy for the poor to be liberation theology. It is nevertheless a significant part of Catholic social teaching; this is especially true among Latin American Jesuits.So you consider any advocacy for the poor to be “liberation theology” then? I suppose we can throw thew whole of Catholic social teaching out of the window then, seeming that it’s only “liberation theology”.
However Pope Francis has already made it very clear, in one of his first speeches as Pope, that that is not what he means by his advocacy for the poor. Perhaps you should be more clear that when you speak against the language used by the Pope you are not claiming that he himself thinks about this the wrong way but merely that you are worried some people may take it the wrong way(even though the Pope has already made it very clear it is not to be understod that way)?No, I don’t consider all advocacy for the poor to be liberation theology. It is nevertheless a significant part of Catholic social teaching; this is especially true among Latin American Jesuits.
The assumption that “advocacy for the poor = feeding the starving” is not valid.
There are many organizations that simply use the poor and starving as an icon in order to gain financial support and political power. It is sometimes used as an excuse to strip faith and freedom from the very people they pretend to help.
In such cases the poor are simply being used as if they are merchandise instead of being treated as people with immortal souls.
The Judas quote is simply to illustrate that the poor are sometimes used as an excuse for ulterior motives; Jesus rebukes this intent.
Catholic social teaching is distinct from Catholic works of mercy, the later being a true and most significant example of selfless and effective service for the glory of Jesus Christ towards the benefit of the needy.
It was not a follow-up. It was in his very first homily as Pope. He spoke against the failing to profess our faith, saying that without that profession of our faith we will become nothing but a charitable NGO.I guess Buddyroe needs to defend himself.
Please note I made no direct mention of Pope Francis, but rather my emphasis is placed on the meaning of words.
I will admit he was on my mind because of his recent well publicized quote including the phrase “stealing from the poor”.
My terminology is hard but I hope you will understand that I am not trying to be disrespectful.
It pleases me to learn that Pope Francis has clarified his intent in what he said, however I was not aware of that fact and I still have no specific knowledge what he said in follow up.
I still maintain the plain understanding of a phrase like “stealing from the poor” is a strong social justice polemic which warrants a counterpoint.
It is self evident the public reaction to his quote apparently made a clarification necessary.
I hope you all can agree with me that we should avoid using the needy to promote political causes.
If you look at the whole of that sentence though, I tried to show that I assumed you were not attacking the Pope by asking that the next time you attack words that he uses you clarify that you are not attacking the pope himself but only that the words used can be confusing without further clarification. I am sorry that you misunderstood me. As for believing that the Pope adheres to a condemned theology, seeing as you admit to having no proof and Catholics are called to give people the benefit of the doubt and not spread rumors about others or defame there character I suggest you refrain from making further accusations or implications that the Pope adheres to this theology on an open message board.Hello thewanderer,
Did you not write in response to me “…Perhaps you should be more clear that when you speak against the language used by the Pope…”?
Is it not reasonable that I should take that to mean as you say “I am attacking the Pope”?
You want me to be clear; very well I do believe Pope Francis to a significant extent embraces liberation theology.
This is my belief based on observation and assessments made by others e.g. Fr. Lombarbi, Leonardo Boff.
This is of course not a proven fact which I readily acknowledge.
Thank you for setting me straight on there being no follow up corrections by Pope Francis, my apologies for getting that wrong.