Francis On Homosexuals: “The Lord Will Save Everyone” (Video)

Gloria TV ^ | January 5, 2022 | Gloria TV

[marktwain]

Confirmation of what I have always believed, that the Catholic doctrine of the papacy and papal infallibility is irrelevant in modern times. Disagree with the Pope? No problem, just label him a bad Pope. Every Catholic his own Pope I guess.

There have been lots of bad popes. The doctrine of papal infallibility has always been severely limited.

Good Catholics have disagreed with the pope for many reasons over millennia.

[jmacusa]

That’s the exact same thing I learned in Catholic schools of that era.

Most of the nuns terrified us by telling us that during Lent if we ate meat on a Friday that was it, we were going straight to hell.

[armydoc]

Yeah, I get it. He didn’t say “Simon Says” so the statement (and the man) can be ignored, ridiculed, mocked, whatever. My point is that the papacy has become functionally irrelevant.

[Campion]

"Papal infallibility" does not mean that everything a Pope says (or really anything that he _does_) is infallible. We've explained that multiple times, I think.

Pastor Aeternus (Vatican I) set out four conditions for papal infallibility to come into play:

1. The Pope must be addressing the whole church (a news conference on an airplane already flunks this test) ...
2. He must be speaking in his role as Pope of the universal church, not, e.g., as a private theologian ...
3. He must be teaching _definitively_ ("I think that" is not teaching definitively; "you must believe this or you are outside the Church" is) ...
4. a doctrine (not some disciplinary or prudential legislation, but something required for _belief_) concerning faith or morals.

(Except for canonizations of saints, which are a separate case,) +Francis has never taught anything infallibly. "Not infallible" does not necessarily mean that Catholics are free to ignore it, but that +Francis or a later Pope (or Council) could change or revoke the teaching.

[armydoc]

Yes, I agree; that is my point. Papal infallibility is a paper tiger. It was only invoked once, in 1950, since the doctrine was formalized. It will never be invoked again. A Pope has no incentive and every disincentive to invoke infallibility. Without it the Pope is just a man, just a figurehead who can be dismissed, derided and mocked by Catholics with impunity since they have deemed him to be a “bad” Pope. Guess what, if the next Pope is a “good” Pope in the eyes of conservative Catholics like yourself, he will be dismissed, derided and mocked by liberal Catholics. My point is that the Pope is functionally irrelevant with regards to Catholic doctrine.

[MurphsLaw]

Concur. I am not no fan of Catholicism, not just this pope, but asserting someone said or meant what they did not, in context, is a problem ...

Thank You, for that voice of reason. It is a much needed one.
If you ever did, become a fan, I know for sure the ORG would be better for it...!

[ebb tide]

If you ever did, become a fan, I know for sure the ORG would be better for it...!

Apparently, your ORG isn't the Catholic Church.

[Maris Crane]

I don’t know how much more the Catholic Church can take of this lunatic.

He is supposed to deal with the beliefs of the Church and nothing else. He is all over the board talking incessantly about things which do NOT concern him.

The Cardinals had better do something about this cancer in the Vatican.

[NetAddicted]

Good catch.