Posted on 09/03/2021 12:01:38 PM PDT by MurphsLaw
Memorial of Saint Gregory the Great, Pope and Doctor of the Church
Luke 5:33-39
Friends, in today’s Gospel, people ask Jesus why he doesn’t encourage fasting among his followers. Jesus’ answer is wonderful: “Can you make the wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them?” (That’s a typically Jewish style, by the way, answering a question with another question.)
This great image of the wedding feast comes up frequently in the New Testament, most obviously in the wedding feast at Cana narrative. And it is echoed in the tradition. Jesus is the wedding of heaven and earth, the marriage of divinity and humanity; he is the bridegroom and the Church is the bride. In him, the most intimate union is achieved between God and the world.
Could you imagine people fasting at a wedding banquet? Could you imagine going into an elegant room with your fellow guests and being served bread and water? It would be ridiculous! The mark of the Christian dispensation is joy. Exuberance. Delight. God and the world have come together. What could be better news?
It was Bobby Barron, the heretic, who told a Jew, Ben Shapiro, that Jesus Christ is only "the privileged route to salvation".
No. The Catholic view — go back to the Second Vatican Council, [which] says it very clearly. I mean, Christ is the privileged route to salvation. I mean, God so loved the world He gave His only Son that we might find eternal life. So that’s the privileged route. However, Vatican II clearly teaches that someone outside the Christian Faith can be saved.
It's funny how all the modernists only go back to the Second Vatican Council and no further. It's as if their new religion began with VC II.
Both you and Barron are wrong for preaching there are other ways, besides Jesus Christ, to salvation.
It’s heresy.
They are not at all difficult to answer; and I believe you and Bobby Barron have absolutely no understanding of the "Deposit of Faith". It's in the Apostles' Creed; have you heard of it, Murph? "I belive in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church".
The Catholic Church has answered it. Beroglio’s, Barron’s and your answers are wrong as is VC II.
There was a Catholic Church, long before y’all’s “New Pentecost”.
Father Berg also outlined problems that arose after the Second Vatican Council, as theologians on both the left and the right radicalized one another. In the end those on the right came to the conclusion that the documents of the Council should be read as a break with the pre-conciliar Church (a “hermeneutic of rupture”), while those on the left, in their triumphalism, reached the same conclusion, seeing the documents of the Council as a radical departure which thankfully left behind the pre-conciliar Church. In this common conclusion, both parties ultimately decided not to do the more difficult work of finding the “hermeneutic of continuity,” which Pope Benedict XVI said must be present. He then reviewed the solutions offered by Pope Benedict XVI to these problems, as well as the many gifts to the Church provided during his pontificate.
When will that "difficult work of finding the "hermeneutic of continuity" come to a conclusion, Murph?
And why has is it been so difficult, if not impossible to do so?
So much for finding that difficult "hermeneutic of continuity", Murph.
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.