Skip to comments.Pope says weapons manufacturers can't call themselves Christian
Posted on 06/21/2015 12:36:05 PM PDT by windcliff
Print Leave us a comment
By Philip Pullella
TURIN, Italy, June 21 (Reuters) - People who manufacture weapons or invest in weapons industries are hypocrites if they call themselves Christian, Pope Francis said on Sunday.
Francis issued his toughest condemnation to date of the weapons industry at a rally of thousands of young people at the end of the first day of his trip to the Italian city of Turin.
"If you trust only men you have lost," he told the young people in a long, rambling talk about war, trust and politics after putting aside his prepared address.
"It makes me think of ... people, managers, businessmen who call themselves Christian and they manufacture weapons. That leads to a bit a distrust, doesn't it?" he said to applause.
He also criticised those who invest in weapons industries, saying "duplicity is the currency of today ... they say one thing and do another."
(Excerpt) Read more at trust.org ...
One of the Vatican officials said the world population needs to be around 1 billion to protect the environment. I am waiting for the pronouncement on how that will happen.
“weapons manufacturers can’t call themselves Christian”
Rather, those who call Jorg Bergoglio “pope” can’t call themselves Christian”. There hasn’t been a valid pope since Pope Pius XII.
This pope needs to go. Im Catholic and I find him an embarrassment.
No need to worry. He isn’t a valid pope. There hasnt been a valid pope since Pope Pius XII.
I think he slept through history class, and chimed up for the political science of Marx.
I see the vision of a world teeming with "the desperate poor" as an eschatological power play to force Messiah's hand.
Silly old man!
Pope Frankie would do well to go back and reread “Rerum Novarum”, the encyclical letter of Pope Leo XIII.
“People who manufacture weapons or INVEST IN WEAPONS INDUSTRIES are hypocrites if they call themselves Christian, Pope Francis said on Sunday.”
Everyone should examine the list of companies and industries receiving money via 401(k) plans, employer pension plans, etc. I expect they’d be surprised to see many weapons-related names on the list. What should they do... cancel all savings and investment accounts?
Sounds exactly like a liberal politician here.
Sort of like owning priceless treasures, jewels and art worth tens of billions, yet demanding others give more?
The Globalist are making their move....
The hypocrisy is stunning.
No need to worry. He isnt a valid pope. There hasnt been a valid pope since Pope Pius XII
But how could anyone hold to those concepts, thinking they were still "Catholic" (and thus also --- possibly thinking all "Protestants" were wrong from the beginning of the Protestant Reformation) without leaving and taking the name, or better put, the adjective catholic with them?
The position which bomb-throwers like Ann Barnhardt seems to take is illogically sedevacantist, similar to the illogical expressions of individuals such as Rev. Anthony Cekada in his own apparent agreement with sedevacantistism/sedeprivationism, when Cedaka turns to Rev. Donald J. Sanborn as a source.
For example, from that same link which "Repent and Believe" provided http://www.traditionalmass.org/issues/#c which I assume is Cedaka, or at least has his editorial approval (nothing hinders, bwaahahaa!) he endorses self-defeating contrariness such as;
What about the Vatican II popes?
FAQs from "Vatican II, the Pope and the Mass" by Rev. Donald J. Sanborn
1. If what you are saying is true, what does it say about the Vatican II popes? It says that it is impossible that they be true Catholic popes.
2. Why can they not be true Catholic popes and true Catholic bishops?
They cannot be true Catholic popes because it is impossible that the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, which is Christ's authority, give to the universal Church false doctrines, false liturgical practices, and false disciplines.
3. Why cannot the authority of the Roman Catholic Church give to the universal Church false doctrines, false liturgical practices, and false disciplines?
Precisely because it is the authority of Christ. The Pope is assisted by the Holy Ghost in the promulgation of dogma and morals, and in the enactment of liturgical laws and pastoral disciplines. In the same way that it is unimaginable that Christ could promulgate these errors or enact these sinful disciplines, so it is unimaginable that the assistance which He gives to the Church through the Holy Ghost could permit such things. Hence, the fact that the Vatican II popes have done these things is a certain sign that they have do not have the authority of Christ.
Vatican II was indeed officially conducted & supported by RCC popes, both during and after (albeit not entirely without some criticisms).
If the RCC was in error previous to Vatican II, then there goes infallibility for 'ex cathedra' right out the door. If in error since Vatican II, then good-bye all the same to infallibility, even when squeezed & very tightly limited.
How then could it be logically possible, if Vatican II is seriously wrong, and that those popes during and since then be all invalid, while at the same time the RCC is being claimed to act with the "authority of Christ", for the RCC, in the persons of it's foremost bishops, ministers & theologians conducted, then approved & adopted documents produced in those 'Church Council' sessions as official, as surely as *they*, in college of Cardinals isn't it(?), elected all the popes since that college and method of election to office of Papacy, has been the way of the RCC to select it's own leadership, for many long centuries.
Maybe, just maybe the perceived-to-be RCC model and ecclesiolgy is itself central to the problem?
Somethings amiss, that should be obvious enough to anyone. I not sure that pointing towards other ecclesiastical organizations failings (either real or perceived) at this point, would make things any better...
Like his predecessor John Paul II, Benedict XVI was present at all four sessions of the Second Vatican Council from 1962 to 1965. Whereas Karol Wojtyla took part as a bishop, the young Joseph Ratzinger did so as a theological expert. During and after the council he taught successively at the universities of Bonn (1959-1963), Münster (1963-1966), Tübingen (1966-1969), and Regensburg, until he was appointed Archbishop of Munich in 1977. In 1981 he became prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a post he held until the death of John Paul II in April 2005.
In his many publications Ratzinger continued to debate questions that arose during the council and in some cases expressed dissatisfaction with the councils documents. In this respect he differs from Pope John Paul, who consistently praised the council and never (to my knowledge) criticized it.
Some may have found refuge in what they like to refer to as the hermeneutic of continuity, but the phrase itself is something of a mirage.
When the haze of special pleadings is swept away, then details (some significant) can seen to have evolved and changed, at times leaving stated positions & teachings which went before (and had produced particular attitudes widely held to be and repeated to be "truth" within RCC realms) or the latter changes (aimed at adjusting attitudes within the RCC, for example; as for ecumenicism) to be strikingly at odds with one another, the differences worked out only with loads & loads of blathering talkety-talk (oftentimes including special pleading) when those differences are caught sight of, and more closely examined.
Yep. I'm thinking there really aren't a whole lot of people who give a flying (expletive deleted) what the pope says anymore.......
I sure as hell do not.
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.