Conservatives defend Pope Francis (Robert George, Mary Ann Glendon, Card. Chaput)

Cruxnow ^ | November 20, 2014 | Inés San Martín

[Salvation]

For later.

[ebb tide]

Never fear. Francis says the 2000+ year old Church has a year to mature (to his standards, perhaps?).

[ohioman]

I miss Benedict because this pope is a socialist fraud.

[Salvation]

Oh really?

Read this:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3229297/posts

[ohioman]

Whatever. Bring back Pope Benedict.

[ebb tide]

What are you aiming for? An infinite loop?

[CodeToad]

The College of Cardinals elected the devil himself. Nothing is more evil than thieves that steal using the force of government to buy the favors of others. That is socialism, communism, liberalism and this Pope embraces such garbage.

[piusv]

George also underlined the interreligious aspect of the conference, with people of faith coming together “across the historic line of religious divisions to bear witness to the common belief that marriage is the union of man and woman open to life.” It was a running joke during the gathering that the non-Catholic speakers were the most powerful ones, with speeches from former chief rabbi of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth, Lord Jonathan Sacks, and the Rev. Richard Warren, senior pastor of Saddleback Church. Both received standing ovations. Anthony Fisher, the newly appointed bishop of Sydney, Australia, who attended the gathering and described it as the best Vatican-organized conference he has attended in the past 15 years, saw truth in the joke. The Jews and the Evangelicals were the best, they spoke very inspiringly, but that’s good for us, it’s like an injection of hope,” he said. “I’d really like for those Jews and Evangelicals to be at the next synod [on the family, scheduled for October 2015],” Fisher said.

How disgusting. A true Catholic bishop, St John Fisher, must be rolling around in his grave. Of course not literally because he is in Heaven for witnessing to the true Catholic Faith, not the false Vatican II religion that prides itself on false ecumenism.

[Mrs. Don-o]

“The devil himself”? No. Francis is no on his team.<p

Tagline.

[livius]

It would be fine to use “apostolic” as a sort metaphorical expression on a political blog. People can be described as conservative about all sorts of things: politics, religion, even their haircuts and clothing styles!

[Mrs. Don-o]

It is particularly mistaken to be invoking the great St. John Fisher in this matter. As a scholar he was open to the wisdom of humanists like Erasmus and constructively conversant with some of the men who formed the early beginnings of the Reformation. He was murdered for defending the indissolubility of marriage (King Henry VIII and Queen Catherine) and for rejecting the odious Act of Supremacy.

If Robbie George, Glendon and Chaput want to ally with humanists and Protestants also in defense of marriage, I think Fisher (and More and, what the heck, Erasmus) are beaming down their approval from around the Heavenly Throne.

[piusv]

No, actually it’s quite apt to invoke St John Fisher for this matter. He would not have agreed with taking part in Vatican II’s false ecumenism because prior to Vatican II it was condemned.

[Mrs. Don-o]

St. John Fisher would appreciate true ecumenism but not, I trust, false ecumenism.

(Talk about a tautology.)

I think he'd appreciate the assistance of allies who wanted to defend marriage. And that's what the conference was about: not denying doctrines, not merging un-mergeable faith communities on the basis of ambiguities and platitudes, but defending Marriage: which is a matter of Natural Law even before it is a matter of Canon Law.

“A good man is not a perfect man; a good man is an honest man, faithful and unhesitatingly responsive to the voice of God in his life.” - St. John Fisher

[piusv]

I guess you don’t care what Pope Pius XI said in Mortalium Animos that I have now posted at least two times.

These sorts of conventions or meetings CAN NOT be approved by Catholics. St John Fisher would not have approved this interreligious conference.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Your supposition against my supposition.

I'll see your St. John Fisher and raise you Pope Pius XII. He attended and addressed many meetings of medical professionals and researchers, doctors, nurses, midwives, etc. to discuss all aspects of medical and moral responsibilities. These were not exclusively Catholic groups, and were addressed as well by non-Catholic speakers both in scientific and in ethical aspects of their work --- whose contributions Pope Pius was aware of and appreciated.

He interacted with members of scientific conferences, both teaching them and learning from them --- and not all were Catholic.

Pope Pius XII not only did not bar such meetings with non-Catholics, but positively encouraged Catholic participation. He never suggested that the contributions of non-Catholic speakers were invalid; on occasion he quoted them.

Kind of like Catholics and non-Catholics meeting to think, speak and work together on the defense of Marriage.

[Running On Empty]

Thank you for posting this thread and thank you for the posts you have made in the “conversation”.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thank you for your kind words.

[piusv]

So you’re comparing scientific and scientific-related discussions with agreeing on certain moral doctrines.

Apples and Oranges.

Do you agree with Pius XI or don’t you?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Do I agree with what? I need a statement, a proposition to be agreed with or disagreed with.

I will state here and now that I agree with the overall pattern of respect, dialogue, and alliance as exemplified by POpe Pius XII and Robert George.

[piusv]

I’ve posted the statement from the encyclical numerous times. What Pope Pius XII has done in the past does not contradict Pius XI because the former pope’s actions concerned science matters and the latter pope’s actions concerned moral doctrines.

You seem to believe that interreligious meetings on agreed moral doctrines is something that either one of them would condone. Please offer evidence that either one would do so.