Posted on 09/01/2015 10:09:34 AM PDT by CharlesOConnell
"When did you stop beating your wife?" is the position of the logical fallacy, the Loaded Question. The answer "I never started" improperly grants the question the dignity of the reasonable.
"Pope tells priests to pardon women who have abortions ... overruling hardline traditionalists within the Catholic Church" screams the headline from APF by Jean-Louis de La Vaissiere.
He writes from the Vatican, without knowing anything about his subject.
Prior to this declaration, only the Pope himself could pardon the sin of abortion.
"Sins which the priest has no authority to absolve are called reserved sins. Absolution from these sins can be obtained only from the bishop, and sometimes only from the Pope, or by his special permission. "
Prior to this declaration, absolution for abortion was reserved to the Pope.
No "hardline traditionalists" I’m aware of in the Catholic Church have sought to deny abortive Mothers the sacrament of mercy.
I should know, I’m one of those "hardline traditionalists". I also maintain a Rachel’s Vineyard web page for my local Catholic Diocese.
And I have held baby showers for 250 low income Moms since 2009.
Maybe Messieur de La Vaissiere would like to learn something about his subject before pronouncing authoritatively upon it.
Yes it does, taunter...
“I do not recall reading that anywhere in the Bible.”
I did. John 20:19-23.
Call Him a “taunter”: Matthew 22:29.
Abortion, the murder of the most innocent, incurs an automatic excommunication. The priest confessor must go to the bishop to get this lifted prior to absolution. For the Year of Mercy, the Pope has given this ability to all priests in the hopes that women will seek forgiveness and reconciliation with God.
No, I’m pretty sure I remember right about “Our Father Who art in heaven... Forgive us our trespasses...”
Jesus taught it, I pray it.
I do not recall the Pope being their. If you abstract the words, which is more logical, anyone can forgive sins, which makes more sense than one man having that authority.
“Jesus taught it, I pray it.”
Jesus also taught John 20:19-23. But you decided not to do what Jesus taught.
“I do not recall the Pope being their.”
Apparently you don’t recall much about the Bible. John 20:24 indicates all the Apostles other than Thomas (and Judas of course) were there. That means Peter was there. That means the first pope was there.
“If you abstract the words, which is more logical, anyone can forgive sins, which makes more sense than one man having that authority.”
Nothing is more logical than simply taking the words for what they say. And the power given to the Apostles was not give to everyone by Christ, but was given to the Apostles alone. Anyone can say he forgives a sin against himself, but who has the power to forgive or retain sins against others? God does. And God gave that power to the Apostles (John 20:23).
“That means Peter was there. That means the first pope was there”
Sorry, Peter was there, no pope for another 300 years. Time to move on away from this circular, re-occurring claim.
“Sorry, Peter was there, no pope for another 300 years.”
False. Peter was the first pope.
“Time to move on away from this circular, re-occurring claim.”
Time for anti-Catholics to stop making things up out of thin air like this ridiculous “no pope for another 300 years” nonsense.
I am not so much anti-Catholic as I am pro-Jesus, pro-Bible, and pro-Truth. You my friend are free to believe what you want, so may I. I just prefer to talk directly with the Father and the Son without anyone’s assistance.
“I am not so much anti-Catholic as I am pro-Jesus, pro-Bible, and pro-Truth.”
No. If that were true you would not have said much of what you said.
“You my friend are free to believe what you want, so may I. I just prefer to talk directly with the Father and the Son without anyone’s assistance.”
So you claim to talk to the Father without the Son’s assistance? John 14:6. Once again we see that you apparently aren’t as pro-Jesus, pro-Bible, and pro-Truth as you claim.
My claim is simple, follow Christ. Maybe you should read the Bible more since the Father and the Son are one and yes I do talk to the Son to get to Father, just not the human flavor of the day from Rome.
You can let this go if you want. You will not convert me, nor I you, but I will say whatever I want/believe with impunity...
I learned a long time ago that it’s futile to bring that pesky Bible into these forums, as Catholics do not believe the Bible. They’ve told me that. They like little bits and pieces if those certain passages back up what their Dear Leader dictates, but Dear Leader is the final authority. (It’s what cults do.) Conversely, Christians believe that the Bible, God’s Word, is the Final Authority.
Something I’ve always wondered when it comes to Peter = Pope. If that were true, and Peter spoke Greek and/or Aramaic (or Hebrew), why is all the Catholic stuff in Latin? How many years did it take to “abracadabra” it into Latin?
I have not thought thought about the Latin angle. Good point.
Even Catholic scholars nowadays admit there is no evidence for a “Pope” in the 1st century, so it seems like you are the one spouting nonsense.
“My claim is simple, follow Christ.”
Then follow His way of forgiving sins after His resurrection. John 20:19-23
“Even Catholic scholars nowadays admit there is no evidence for a “Pope” in the 1st century, so it seems like you are the one spouting nonsense.”
No orthodox Catholic scholar says there is no evidence for a Pope in the first century, so you’re sitting with heretical scoffers. Thus, you are the one spouting nonsense.
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.