Posted on 08/03/2018 9:55:47 PM PDT by unlearner
All Catholics pray for the pope at every mass. Many pray for him in their private prayers also.
Actually, for the Roman Catholic the problem is a bit more serious than that.
Their own canon law says they are not to publicly incite hatred toward the Apostolic See.
Can. 1373 A person who publicly incites among subjects animosities or hatred against the Apostolic See or an ordinary because of some act of power or ecclesiastical ministry or provokes subjects to disobey them is to be punished by an interdict or other just penalties.
Catholicsstraightanswers.com defines the Apostolic See to mean:
The Holy See is also interchangeable with the term “Apostolic See.” The Code of Canon Law provides the following definition: “…The term ‘Apostolic See’ or ‘Holy See’ applies not only to the Roman Pontiff but also to the Secretariat of State, the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church, and other institutions of the Roman Curia, unless the nature of the matter or the context of the words makes the contrary evident” (#361).
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-does-the-term-holy-see-mean/
In other words...ebbtide, and others, who post articles critical of their pope, are breaking their own canon law.
Ironically, they are doing the very thing they routinely condemn Luther for. The irony is not lost.
Further, when the Council of Trent's rulings on who is to interpret Scripture are taken into consideration the lay Roman Catholic is unable to determine on their own the true and accurate meaning of a verse from Scripture:
Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,--in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, --wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,--whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,--hath held and doth hold; [Page 20] or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published.
Where does all of this leave the lay Roman Catholic?
1) they cannot criticize their pope
2) they cannot ascertain the meaning of a verse from Scripture on their own and have to rely upon the Church...the Apostolic See...the very office they are condemning.
The lay Roman Catholic is at the mercy of the "Church" to instruct them in this manner.
Per Unam Sanctam, the Roman Catholic has to obey their pope. They have no choice.
It's too bad Luther did not have the advantage of the internet in his time to bring all of this information forward. The outcome of the Reformation may have been completely different.
Yet, I learned the rules within months.
Yes fer sure.
But it is good that they see that their pope is corrupt and very un Christian.
But they stay in their denomination.
Don’t they know that the fish rots from the head down?
There is really something fishy about their exalted Vicar of Christ (eww that’s so wrong!)...lots of stink
Ha ha LOL!
If a poster is going to be this careless or ambivalent to the rules of Free Republic, it would be my opinion the poster should not be allowed to use the caucus thread any longer.
You defended non-Catholics posting on Catholic caused threads with this, "Some times OTH (Other Than Catholic) posters post on Catholic caucused threads because many of them don’t qualify for the Catholic caucus designation."
You just said you don't check as to what qualifies as a caucus.
I know I've caught several of your caucus threads that broke the caucus rules.
I had thought you had bowed out of this dialogue.
I see I was wrong.
I know, right.....man up and say it in the open for the world to see and judge!
Speaking for others now, are you?
Imagine that.........
Yet you admit the following:
It's not up to a poster to determine what qualifies as a caucus.
You don't play these public debate games very well.
I think I just sunk your battleship.
Say what??
Has it ever occurred to you that just maybe we might agree with the opinions posted and would like to say so???
On the other hand, there have been Catholic Caucus threads posted that did NOT obey the Caucus rules and were sneakily trying to slip past the Moderator. I'd guess that this has happened FAR more frequently here. I know I've exposed a few myself and have successfully challenged their categorization. Maybe THAT is what irks some so much?
If your church is OK with gays or if it believes in evolution, you are not going to a Christian church.
Badgering, lol! Because you fibbed, right?
And I see the little posse has arrived to help you out. How do you guys work that out? Does a smoke signal go out behind the scenes? Unheard of in Catholic freeper-land.
I said no such thing. It was I who posted the caucus rules to unlearner.
I got unceremoniously uninvited from a caucus thread one time years back for that exact thing.
It was about a priest who lost his job for standing his ground about something he believed and I had a lot of respect and admiration for that kind of character.
My posts were positive and I was booted and told by the Catholics that it wasn't because of the content of my posts, but it was because of who I was.
So they don't even allow others the opportunity to agree with them and yet complain that all we do is criticize.
You can't win with some folks.
I’ll bite:
What.
From my experience, "No". And this thread has confirmed it.
Have you ever considered people may read threads they’re interested in?? That paranoia will destroya.
Yet Roman Catholicism allows their members to believe in evolution.
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.