Posted on 05/26/2019 11:11:17 AM PDT by ebb tide
And make no mistake about it! According to Pope Francis, this "efficientism" is a bad thing. I mean, really really baaad!
From Brietbart we read. It is a mistake for the Church to try to hold onto old traditions or to have clear answers for everything, Pope Francis said Thursday
and even worse, Jesus intentionally omitted telling his disciples many things so that the Church would learn to renounce the desire for clarity and order
Boys and girls, can we say "blasphemy"? What else do you call it when you falsely and deliberately claim that Jesus did not want clarity and order in His Church?
He mentions that Jesus never spoke of the Gentiles observing Jewish dietary laws - but that doesn't mean His will wasn't made plainly clear. At the Last Supper, Our Lord told His disciples that He had many things to tell them, but they couldn't bear it yet. The Holy Spirit would reveal them - and presumably clarify them. We would do well to recall that during the time of the Apostles, public revelation was still being announced. That process ended with the death of John the Evangelist.
So now the pope is trying to claim that Jesus is deliberately ambiguous, just as he himself is! Is he trying to refashiion Our Lord into his own image and likeness? Maybe in addition to blasphemy, we might also be talking about idolatry. He certainly does seem to be paving the way for more insults and injuries to the Traditions and Sacred Deposit of Faith. Will we be talking of female clergy? Communion for adulterers? Coddling of homosexual perversions and crimes? Banning of the Traditional Latin Mass? The elevation of envirowhackism and "immigration" invasions to de facto infallible dogma? I'm sure this list isn't exhaustive. All these will be greasing the skids towards hell for countless souls.
If any progressive accuses me of "efficientism", I will loudly proclaim GUILTY AS CHARGED!
Ping
Yeah, like the stupid stuff in the Bible about miracles,crucifixion,baptism,10 commandments, beatitudes,loaves and fishes. All that traditional nonsense should be dumped. That man is sent from the devil.
Big Media will fawn and credit popie Frankie with this at the end of the year.
Pope is a gnostic
What’s needed is a few decades
of President Harding’s ‘normalcy.’
One should ask him if ‘efficientism’ meaning eliminating purgatory?
The term’s been around since at least 2006: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=152224
Got any Catholic sources that have used it before?
What's next? valley girls for womyn deacons?
Pope Soros.
“Got any Catholic sources that have used it before?”
Why would I need any? The point is that the term is NOT NEW. Thus, the article is mistaken on that point.
“What’s next?”
God only knows, but you’ll probably be posting more errors since that’s what you usually do.
” valley girls for womyn deacons?”
Are you volunteering?
You quoted a goofy website.
Show me “efficientism” in a legitimate dictionary. Otherwise, go back to your valley.
Why would I need any?
Because Jorge Begoglio claims to be a catholic and because I had assumed you are a catholic, which I'm beginning to doubt about the both of you.
“You quoted a goofy website.”
And you haven’t?
“Show me “efficientism” in a legitimate dictionary.”
You’re relying a blog - that isn’t even right on the topic.
“Otherwise, go back to your valley.”
When you become perfect, let me know. Until then I’ll just settle for being right more often than you are - as shown in this thread yet again.
“Because Jorge Begoglio claims to be a catholic ...”
Well, I don’t know if he’s ever claimed to be “catholic”.
But he certainly claims to be Catholic.
“...and because I had assumed you are a catholic,”
Well, I am Catholic, not “catholic” since with you I have no idea what that would mean seeing how little you seem to know about words and their meanings.
“which I’m beginning to doubt about the both of you.”
Doubt away. You having doubts means absolutely nothing, of course.
Read your own home page. It's the perfect example of a narcissist.
“Read your own home page. It’s the perfect example of a narcissist.”
You claiming I’m a narcissist is ironic. In any case, I was still right and the article you posted was still wrong. Narcissist or not, that won’t change.
Enjoy.
Narcissists think they’re always right.
Thanks for proving my point.
“Narcissists think they’re always right.”
I don’t think I’m always right. I’m just right much more often than you are.
“Thanks for proving my point.”
Well, your implied point was wrong. You were wrong again. Again.
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.