Posted on 12/28/2014 9:06:22 PM PST by Arthur McGowan
I like to call him Pope Bad Translation the 1st.
Arthur is right, your list is mostly baloney.
1. The Church never said the world is flat. Ever. Find me where it said that.
2. The Church never supported the Nazi party, in fact the encyclical “Mit Brennender Sorge” was very unusually published in German was taken by all (including Nazis) as an attack on them.
3. The only folks who owned Bibles before printing were clerics and rich people, who generally could read Latin. The common man couldn’t afford a handwritten book or read his own language anyway. All the same, the Bible was translated into English hundreds of years before the Reformation.
4. As Arthur noted, everyone prosecuted heresy, from pagans to Protestants.
5. The Inquisition only did the fact-finding in prosecutions of heresy—the actual executions were handled by the state. And it was far more responsible in its response to witchcraft than, say, Protestant Salem.
6. The Church fighting the “Enlightenment”—what specifically are you referring to?
7. That the earth was the center of the universe was a common scientific belief since antiquity. That did not come from the Church. And anyway, how could the earth be the center of the Universe if the world was flat (see #1)?
Yes...finally.
That’s a good one !
The truth is poverty is very good at reducing pollution output. Poor people can't consume much energy if they can't afford it. Taking wealth from investors and giving it to consumers (minus a 50% government overhead shave) will both increase pollution and decrease investments in efficiency. From a green perspective that plan is completely insane.
I’ve never been a big fan of Fatima or, for that matter, of the many apocalyptic private revelations that seem to refer in one way or another to a disastrous papacy and possibly even an anti-Pope. But I’m beginning to wonder.
Bergoglio is not a very well-educated man and certainly not much of an intellect, but he is ambitious and loves power. He is known to have been angling for the Papacy since the prior conclave, where he received a number of votes, probably from the same Cardinals who are his inner circle (Danneels, Murphy-O’Connor, Maradiaga and Kasper) or the other cardinals lobbied by them. Most of them are now retired and are over 80, so they can’t vote in a conclave again. But the members of this geriatric band all hang out in Rome and have immense power now.
In Argentina, Bergoglio was known to be political, arbitrary and vindictive in his handling of diocesan affairs, and as Pope, he is still settling some scores in Latin America. And of course he and his friends are forcing out good bishops, replacing them with nobodies, at best, and moving non-complicit cardinals out of positions of responsibility.
I think he knows that at some point, resistance will arise, and he has been moving very quickly to neutralize it in advance. The only question to me is if he will overtly go beyond a point that makes it clear that he has rejected the teachings of the Church in favor of his own, thereby opening the way for an institutional challenge to his papacy.
We’re I a Catholic and if one of my fundamental beliefs was that the Pope was infallable then I think I’d be changing up religion over this.
I can’t wait for the Pope Francis sycophant Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review write another piece trying to explain that Francis did not mean what he said. This is coming from a regular mass attending Catholic. Here’s a deal Your Excellency. When my energy, gas, etc bills double, triple, or whatever due to what you are supporting how about I reduce the amount I give at the Sunday collection and other special fundraisers by the extra amount I have to pay.
Infallibility only applies when the Church does a teaching on an issue of doctrines related to faith and morals. The Pope can say whatever he wants about climate change, economics, etc and I as a regular Mass attending Catholic is free to give him the middle finger.
Well said.
He is promoting the religion of global warming. He said he didn’t want the constant harping on the wrongs of abortions, but he sees nothing wrong with joining the evil and destructive religion surrounding the false premise of global warming.
No, they will continue to just think he is a “bad” pope.
I’m sure he’ll just retire like his predecessor. Give it time.
But who would do that? Most of the hierarchy is much like him.
I'm not sure how well-educated this Pope is, but the Jesuits are probably the best educated priests in the Church. Obviously, they lean way left.
When I first heard that the man-made climate theorists were going after carbon dioxide, I thought they must be talking about the release of carbon monoxide. Why would they be going after plant food? It doesn't make any sense.
All this stupidity on climate change has changed the focus from a real problem - pollution - to one that isn't real. From what I understand, China had to shut down a lot of factories for months to host the Olympics.
When I was growing up some cities spewed horrible pollutants. You can travel through the same cities and never smell anything in the air (with the exception of L.A.). Our rivers are cleaner, the Great Lakes are cleaner, our chemical and paper factories are cleaner. But if the socialists concentrated on pollution they would have to go after China, India, and other countries. How could they blame the USA, if they concentrated on pollutants only. I think that's when they decided to make up the climate change theory and give the USA a prominent role in causing climate change.
Don’t forget Vatican II. It’s no coincidence that that happened at the same time.
> “You are assuming a degree of intellectual honesty in the Pope that I believe he long ago demonstrated does not exist.”
And you are posting from ‘The Guardian’, a notorious leftist rag. How intellectually honest is that?
I could post a YouTube video from MSNBC where a panel rages on about how racist in America Whites are to Blacks, how white cops kill little black boys nearly every day, with ‘confirming’ statements from Al Sharpton as well as statements of ‘sympathy’ from Obama, how intellectually honest would that be?
I remember articles of a similar type you posted here which claimed earlier this year of a forthcoming new policy from the Pope of accommodating homosexuals. The articles were very similar quoting ***certain Bishops*** who were in favor, and quotes from homosexuals in support for the forthcoming new Catholic policy. After hundreds of articles in the leftist press building momentum for Catholic acceptance of homosexuality the results were opposite of what leftist journalists had advocated and the failure of the Catholic Church to accommodate was hung on certain ***conservative*** Catholic Cardinals.
It is obvious to me that the leftist press is whipping up stories using fake support from the Catholic Pope and quoting left-minded Bishops to boost its agenda.
I read the article you posted and it quotes “Bishop Marcelo Sorondo”. What is revealing is the report that “Sorondo told Cafod, the Catholic development agency, at a meeting in London”.
Cafod is London based and is notoriously leftist in its approach. There is a cult of people in London of which Cafod is included that are beyond redemption. And some of them are idiot aristocrats, crazy loons when it comes to science. I know one of them quite well and it is appalling how he defends Climate Change as Anthropomorphic even though his background is in banking. When I gently try to tell him of the scientific misconduct at UEA and the blatant deletion of data to support a false narrative, he ends the discussion and tells me he wants no more of what I am saying. And he is representative of a group in those parts that Sorondo is having lunches with.
So here’s Sorondo ostensibly being wined and dined in certain aristocratic circles of London reacting that his Pope’s “gonna do something about it” and of course The Guardian is reporting the minute by minute play in this leftist echo chamber. I’d like to see Sorondo and Cafod’s comeback response to someone like Lord Monckton but I guarantee you they will keep away from Monckton’s circles.
So we will see if Pope Francis sides with Sorondo and his new friends in Cafod against what The Guardian calls “conservative right-wing resistance”. My guess is the Pope will not be reflecting Bishop Sorondo’s misrepresentations but rather will be emphasizing how industrial nations must do more for the poor etc.
Just damn.
http://catholicclimatecovenant.org/catholic-teachings/pope-francis/
What I want to know is why the Catholic Church is spending all this money on climate change and not on the evils of aborting a baby that God has given you.
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.