Posted on 07/19/2015 5:31:47 AM PDT by Kaslin
What a sycophant for the extreme left is this fool who will preside over the final destruction of the Catholic Church which began shortly after Vatican II.
Thank God for the Sedevacantists.
For the life of me I can’t figure out what the Catholic roommate had to do with this op Ed.
If Bruce wants to go at the Pope, then swing at him but find a better lead-in to the article
Final grade “ C”
Not to mention the Christians in the ME who are now routinely slaughtered by muzzies with nary a peep from this son of a bitch.
Pope Francis said this in the same speech:
"Today we are dismayed to see how in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world many of our brothers and sisters are persecuted, tortured and killed for their faith in Jesus""This too needs to be denounced. In this third world war, waged piecemeal, which we are now experiencing, a form of genocide - and I stress the world genocide - is taking place, and it must end."
1. First an activist media that controls the news.
2. That begat an activist judiciary that makes up law.
3. Now an activist clergy?
We are the only hope to stop this.
Besides the bad grammar, this is knotching up the stupid level. How can a 4th century bishop be speaking about capitalism when the word didn't even exist at that time?
That attitude is understandable, as if modern popes are valid then RCs are bound, among other things , to reject historical teaching and accepts Prots as (separated) brethren, uphold freedom of religion, suport seperation of church and state, apologize for certain conduct of the Inquisitions, and war against Climate Change.
Yet both medieval as well as modern Catholicism is the largest critical deformation of the NT church, while deciding the validity of Cath. teaching based upon your analysis of past teaching is contrary to the implicit assent to Rome which is required by past popes, and is to become Protestant in this regard.
The novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility means Rome can autocratically define herself, in which Scripture, Tradition and history only mean what she says in any conflict, which allows Rome to "reformulate" (redefine) herself as needed.
At best the connection is slim and casual. The article seems to be missing a paragraph or so. I guess wearing crosses=Catholicism=loyalty to the pope, which it is supposed to do.
A good economic lesson for Pope Francis. Something my late econ professor from St. Joe, Fr. White, could have explained to the pontiff.
Pope Francis: “And behind all this pain, death and destruction there is the stench of what Basil of Caesarea called “the dung of the devil”. An unfettered pursuit of money rules.”
IOW, he called the unfettered pursuit of money the dung of the devil.
1 Timothy 6: “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.”
I’m not a fan of this Pope, but he did not say what they say he said.
I think now impeding the free exercise of religion is the germane phrase; nothing I can find about separation (or seperation (sic)) in the 1st Amendment.
2 Thessalonians 3-10: For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.
The two scriptures do not conflict in the least.
All kinds of evils do spring from the love of money, and it is wrong to be a freeloader.
When the Pope speaks about matters of faith, he is infallible. When he talks about economics, he is obviously quite fallible.
I’m not that old and I can remember when the Church taught us children about the priests being tortured in Red China. This is a terrible turn.
“”The Pope railed against a system that “imposed the mentality at any price, with no concern for social exclusion or the destruction of nature””
Can anyone add an interpretation to that sentence? Beats me.
Bad translation or transcription?
Here’s probably what he meant to say: “imposed the mentality of making money at any price, with no concern for social exclusion or the destruction of nature”
Which I agree with. Too many conservatives forget that capitalism and the free market are utterly amoral, just like science.
Science is a method for finding out how the world works. Of itself it says nothing about how those facts are discovered or are used. Thus horrific experimentation on unwilling humans is a perfectly scientific method. You can’t use science to prove it’s wrong. Morality in science has to come from outside science.
Similarly, the free market system, the term I prefer to capitalism, does not in and of itself have any morality. Slavery, drug markets and child prostitution are all perfect examples of the market in action. The market is simply the most efficient method we’ve found for providing what people want efficiently. It has nothing to say about what they will want or the methods used to satisfy those wants.
Any morality in a market, as in science, has to come from outside.
Sorry Bruce, it is so, the Pope is a commie. He Doesn’t deserve to be called “Sir”, “Your Holiness” or anything like that.
*rme*How can the Holy Father be a Communist, who are Atheists and don't believe in God?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.