Posted on 11/03/2017 11:55:48 AM PDT by ebb tide
The popes and priests are supposed to be Alter Chistus, “Another Christ”.
So you are stating that a pope can be an evil pope, an evil Christ.
Can Christ be evil? How can you wrap your minds around a Christ that is evil?
I outright reject that an evil person like so many of your popes have been should be labeled as another Christ. It makes God evil. And I do not see that any person is obligated to follow an immoral or evil man who is claiming to be another Christ. Such a man is a false Christ and does not deserve or warrant anyone’s fidelity.
The Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul, gave us many clear instructions on the qualifications for men in leadership positions within the church and how to deal with immorality within the church, and there is NO allowance for such men in the body of Christ.
I don’t care who they claim to be or who elected them or whatever. Any man who claims to be another Christ who is evil or immoral is NOT of Christ and NO ONE is obligated to follow him.
The fact that the Catholic church has not only allowed and tolerated such men for so long, but actually puts them in positions of leadership CONTRARY to Scripture, is enough proof to me that the Catholic church is not of God. Because they are not following Him in obedience.
I honestly do not think we can have this conversation because you guys do not even understand Catholicism 101. If you don’t understand the basics of the Faith especially with respect to the papacy, I can not discuss the more complex issues we now face in the Church. I do not say this to be disrespectful. I just don’t have the time nor the energy to teach you all that you need to know just to begin to understand the Crisis. There is plenty on the internet if you truly want to learn more. This might be a good place to start:
http://www.cmri.org/97prog6.htm
It’s pretty clear cut.
Evil men have no place in leadership within the church, per God.
Any body that calls itself a church that has evil men in charge is not of God.
And that applies to non-Catholic churches as well.
I understand Catholicism well enough having been raised in it and having family members who were priests and a nun.
So I know its claims. But I can also read and what I read in Scripture disqualifes much of Catholicism from being classified as the body of Christ.
And that does not apply to the Orthodox, who as far as I can see, at least make an effort to adhere to Scriptural principles.
Actually, you don’t understand it.
I do.
I believe God over and above man.
This is what I mean by "basics". Please go learn them.
I realize it does not mean that they cannot sin, but for crying out loud, we’re not talking about a godly man who at least TRIES to live a godly life, and admits to his sin and repents and confesses it.
You mentioned evil popes, men who live a life of evil, a life of habitual sin.
Read 1 Timothy 3, Titus 1, and 1 Corinthians 5.
Also in Revelation 2 & 3 Jesus gives the churches He addressed very specific instructions about issues in each church and how to deal with them with the warning that if they didn’t do as He said, HE would take care of it Himself.
There is no excuse or justification for presenting to the world someone to be a representative of Christ, ANOTHER Christ, who is that evil and that immoral as many of your popes have been and then demand submission and fidelity to him.
It completely corrupts the image of God to men and grossly misrepresents the character of God to mankind.
Born again believers (Prots as Cathoilcs like to lump us together as) are regularly castigated here for easy believism and that when we state that we are justified by faith alone, without works, it gives us a license to sin without compunction. Yet we see Catholics put up with and defend the papacy and the church that put those men there and tolerates them.
How Catholics cannot see the mental disconnect is beyond me.
I personally have been a member of a denomination which has removed members for things like adultery and extortion and has removed pastors from the pulpit and yanked their credentials for garden variety adultery, not anything near as bad as some of the abominable lifestyles that many Catholic popes have lead.
The issue never has been whether or not the men in leadership are perfect or not. No man is and nobody seriously expects anyone to be so. We all know better.
The issue is the inaction and outright disobedience of any church to follow the simple, clear commands in Scripture outlined by God, the Holy Spirit, in how to deal with sin in the midst of the church.
And any organization which does not follow that is not a part of the body of Christ, not matter what they call themselves, how long they’ve been around, or what claims they make about their history or leadership, or their hearing from God.
I do not accept that kind of duplicity from televangelists, who are also known for living extravagent and immoral lifestyles or live in that kind of blatant disobedience to the clear, unequivocal commands of God, either.
Indeed!
Let’s do a thought experiment here. Say you get called into a church court and told that you have to recant all your posts on FR about Francis or else you’re excommunicated?
I will assume that you will prefer to be excommunicated by Francis than give up your faith that you hold so dear, yes?
Last post here. The issue I am driving at is that an “evil” man (”bad”, “sinful”, etc) is still pope. A manifest heretic is not still pope and in the case of Francis, probably never was pope. To be clear, I am not defending bad or evil popes.
HA.
Bahahah.
So are you saying that you’d rather submit to Francis than get excommunicated?
Is that what you’re saying?
Is it? Because your refusal to answer seems to suggest that you would.
Go play your little “thought experiments” in your own mind.
I refuse to play with you. I’m a Catholic.
An unrepentant sinner is still Pope, even when unrepentant?
What? Or are you saying something different?
If you didn’t want to respond, why’d you reply at all?
You could have just ignored me.
Heck, I was even trying to be respectful today until you started insulting me, considering that the post I was replying to from you at least LOOKED respectful. I try to match my replies to the level of respect and emotion that I’m replying to, and here I thought that we could actually try to talk about things.
Instead comes the extreme emotional reaction. And now I know that my simple question struck a serious nerve.
Looks like we once again asked the unanswerable questions.
Wait..... what have we here?
I thought Francis was not a legitimate pope, but rather a heretic and apostate and it was the duty of faithful Catholics to resist him instead of submit to him.
So does an apostate, heretic pope who Catholics claim is not a legitimate pope still have the power to ex-communicate someone?
I guess it’s easier to admire martyrs for the faith than to be one.
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.