Posted on 03/18/2013 7:09:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
With the election of Pope Francis, there has been an almost "catholic" attempt to determine if he is liberal or conservative. CBS claims he is a "staunch conservative" based on the fact that, as correspondent Allen Pizzey put it, he "opposes abortion, supports celibacy, and called gay adoption discrimination against children," not to mention his opposition to faux marriage.
Tingle Central's Chris Matthews said that the new pontiff is economically "progressive," which, if we were to be informed by actual statistics, should mean he wouldn't give one red cent to anybody. But none of these analysts will peg the pope because they're using the provisional to understand a man defined by an institution based in the perpetual. And the reality is this: the terms "liberal," "conservative," and "moderate" are, in the truest sense, meaningless in Catholic circles. And understanding why holds a lesson for all of us.
Republican Ohio senator Rob Portman recently announced that he now supports faux marriage, and other self-proclaimed conservatives, such as CNN News' Margaret Hoover, have long done so. On the other hand, conservative Cliff Kincaid was recently scored by Michelle Malkin's site Twitchy for writing, "There is no such thing as a 'gay conservative,' unless the term 'conservative' has lost all meaning," prompting Renew America's Bryan Fischer to accuse the Malkinites of "trying to redefine conservatism." But Kincaid gets it close to right and Fischer is wrong.
Conservatism never had enduring meaning because it was never truly defined in the first place.
Understand that all places and times -- that is, all modern times -- have had their conservatives. Europe has its conservatives, but their general attitude toward faux marriage ranges from support to blithe indifference, and they don't trouble much over abortion.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I completely disagree that the Pope is God’s representative of the Christian faith. But if that is what you believe then that is between you and God.
That recent one with Stephen Dorff and Val Kilmer is a great acting foray
A David Mamet style flick
Well done...tears too
I think it was called Felon
Peckerwood is not just prison talk though
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peckerwood
Same here. I’m not attacking anyone, I just disagree that the Pope or Catholicism is the core of Christianity. Christianity is not dependent upon the Pope or the Catholic Church, it is dependent upon Christ alone.
“So the Roman Catholic line runs through the empirical Roman line and the others trace back through the Hebrew/Greek line or something close to that? Do the other Orthodox Churches have their own Popes or equivalants?”
Almost, but not exactly; it depends on the root of the eastern church in question. The Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches have their own hierarchies with bishops and cardinals (though the titles might be different); I believe most Orthodox Churches have a Patriarch instead of a Pope (though Egypts Coptic Christians - not their Coptic Catholic counterparts - have their own Pope).
Eastern Catholics have some of the traditions of their Eastern Orthodox brethren - not just married priests, but also using icons instead of statues. While many Christians aren’t permitted to receive Communion in a Roman Catholic Church because they are not in union with Rome, the followers of the Eastern Catholic Churches may (because they are) and followers of the Eastern Orthodox Churches may because they are viewed as “valid” Churches (via Apostolic descent) that are simply not unified with Rome at this time.
One of my best pals attended Spring Hill college in Mobile
Rigorous
I didn’t mean to suggest the Pope is God’s representative. The Pope by virtue of being the Pope of the largest Christian religion on earth is recognized as the representative of our religion. I can’t think of anyone who would be on par with the Pope in any Protestant denomination of Christianity.
There are many things that the Catholic faith and I agree with to include being against homosexual marriage and abortion. It is the Catholic faith that takes the beatings for all Christianity in that regard. They maintain the standards when others have fallen away.
I admire that and I feel we should shed our differences and stand united.
I hope you are right
difference between a Roman Catholic and other Catholics? -- RC is a historical, confusing term. Basically all are Catholic i.e. belonging to Churches that acknowledge the Bishop of Rome as an earthly focal point are in the Catholic Church. This includes 22 rites like the Syro-Malabar, the Syro-Malankara, the Chaldean Catholic, the Maronite Catholic etc. and the largest is the Latin Rite
The term Roman Catholic can mean narrowly just Latin Catholic or widely all the 22 rites of the CAtholic Church. So, i prefer using the plain term Catholic
Is it like the difference between say a Anglican and a Baptist? - no, it's like say you have two southern Baptist groups and they have different ways of having a service. But they believe the same and hold together in the same grouping.
His actions so far seem to be appealing to protestants like myself. - that is good news, because he repeats the same teachings as Benedict and JP, but his style is simpler and if it warms the relationships between us, that's good :)
I am sensing that this is an unwelcome change to the Catholic faith. - of course that depends on who you ask, but to me at least, there is no change to core dogma which remains as it has been for 2000 years, the only change is a welcome one of ways of doing things.
just as JPII and Benedict warmed up relations with the Orthodox, let's hope Pope Francis warms up relations with varioius non-Catholic western Churches. Maybe we never completely see eye-to-eye, but at least we see the common points and stop sniping at each other.
false.
The Church clings to the truth and has done so for 2000 years
This is glorious news. At the very least we can argue as brothers in Christ, not fight like enemies. Hallelujah!
And that's a fact, even if you don't like it, that Moslems, Hindus etc see the Pope as the figurehead on earth of Christianity.
Hey, I feel the same when Hindu friends look at Gene Robinson and think that "Christianity" accepts gay bishops etc. -- however much we argue among ourselves, outsiders, whether Hindu or secularists, they see us as one as the same
hmmm... not quite.
As Christianity spread, it first was based in Jerusalem and decisions were made in council (the council of Jerusalem).
But then in 69 AD Jerusalem was destroyed and then there were 3 leading Churches that together led Christianity were Rome, Alexandria and Antioch.
then Constantinople came in around 374 AD when Theophilius made Christianity the religion of Rome
The basic streams come from these 4 churches: Rome, Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandria
from Antioch we have the Assyrian/Syrian Church in 800 AD was actually larger than the Church under the Bishop of Rome and geographically larger than any.
The Catholicos of the Assyrian Church, based in Ctesiphon in Iraq was the spiritual head of Christians in Syria, in Iraq, in Persia, in Yemen, in Oman, in Bahrain, in Kerala (India), in northern india, in Tajikistan, among the Uighurs (yes the people of western China were once a nestorian Christian country before they became Moslems), all the way to Mongolia - one Mongol tribe, the Naimans, were Christian
This Church was crucified by Islam and now survives as the Assyrian Church of the East, the Chaldean Catholic Church, the Syro-Malabar Church and the Syro-Malankara Church (the latter 3 are Catholic, the first two are based in Iraq, the latter two in India)
The line from alexandria leads to the Oriental Churches -- the COptic Church, the Ethiopian Church, the Syrian Church, the Armenian Church
At one point Alexndria was the theological center of Christendom. Then Islam came....
From Alexandria you have the Eastern Orthodox and from Rome the Catholics
The Assyrian Church has a Catholicos as the head (the Cathlicos of Baghdad)
the Coptic Church has the Pope of Alexandria
The Eastern Orthodox have Patriarchs (and technically the Pope too is a Patriarch, the Patriarch of th West)
Well, I as a Catholic believe we can and we HAVE learnt a lot from you, our fellow Christian brothers. learning goes both ways.
Note that wolfman23601 called the pope the administrator here, and did not use the words "in charge". You can you read administrator and read "in charge", but the word administrator doesn't necessarily mean the all-encompassing "in charge boss" but can mean just a manager of the the day-to-day, to anything. Words can have different meanings -- English is not too precise...
“The ONE in charge of Christianity is Jesus — congratultions, you believe as we Catholics do. And we have Christ present in each mass in the Eucharist.”
Not exactly as you do. Christians knowledgeable in what the Bible says knows that “where two or more are gathered in my name (Jesus), there I am in the midst of them.” -Matthew 18:20
Christians don’t need to go to a Catholic Church and be at mass to experience Christ’s presence.
Sure, there are a lot of misinformed people who think that the Pope is the figure head of Christianity, but just because a lot of people are misinformed, that doesn’t make it true.
Christ is my “head” and the Bible is my guide, via the Holy Spirit of Christ. It is on those foundations I base my life on and I won’t trumpet a falsehood just because a majority might think it’s true.
Note that a figurehead is not the “head” — as per the very dictionary meaning. And it’s not just misinformed people, it’s the majority if not all non-Christians.
You speak to my heart brother.:-)
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.