“Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

What's Up With the Synod ^ | OCT 10, 2015 | Hilary White

[ebb tide]

“So this guy (the heretic, Marx) who threatened as above is now basically saying “Oh we are unified with the Pope and whatever the Pope decides, everybody must go along with. You know, for unity’s sake.”

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

No power will rest where it always been with God The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Is the pope Catholic?

[Ann Archy]

It always does....Pray that the RIGHT side of his brain is in gear and not the LOONEY LEFT SIDE!!

[A CA Guy]

Not very IMO. For sure a far leftist though.

[metmom]

Before you know it, some priest is going to come along and try to get the church back to its roots by calling for reform from the immorality that is infecting it.

Oh, wait a minute........

[Mark17]

😂😆😎😋

[ealgeone]

Oh we are unified with the Pope and whatever the Pope decides, everybody must go along with.

From what catholics have told us on this board....isn't that what they believe?

[ealgeone]

Before you know it, some priest is going to come along and try to get the church back to its roots by calling for reform from the immorality that is infecting it.

Oh, wait a minute........

LOL!

[metmom]

From what catholics have told us on this board....isn't that what they believe?

Depends some on the Catholic you are talking to at the moment.

I didn't think they had the option of disagreeing with the pope who they claim is vicar of Christ.

If he is the representative of Christ on the earth, then wouldn't going against him equate to going against Jesus Himself?

[kinsman redeemer]

LOL

[kinsman redeemer]

When I saw the following, all my original concerns were allayed.

Pope Francis delivered an unscheduled intervention in the synod yesterday morning. He instructed synod fathers that they should consider the Ordinary Synod to be in perfect continuity with the Extraordinary Synod. He told them that they were to consider only three synodal documents as formal documents of the synod; these were his own opening address at the Extraordinary Synod, the Relatio Synodi of the Extraordinary Synod, and his own closing address of that synod. The heterodox nature of the Relatio Synodi, which received the Holy Father’s personal approval, was discussed by Voice of the Family in our Analysis of the Final Report of the Extraordinary Synod.

It did, however obviously raise new questions.

< /sarc>

[Elsie]

I didn't think they had the option of disagreeing with the pope who they claim is vicar of Christ.

No, no!

That's MORMONs!!!

---

 

---

---

 

"Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the 'prophets, seers, and revelators' of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostacy..."

(Improvement Era, June 1945, p. 354)

 

 

 

Reinforced here......

 

MP3 File

This is the audio clip of Dallin H. Oaks, current Mormon Apostle leader, from the PBS documentary, "The Mormons", declaring unequivocally:

"IT'S WRONG TO CRITICIZE LEADERS OF THE (MORMON) CHURCH, EVEN IF THE CRITICISM IS TRUE."

 

---

 

Don't criticize?

 

Dallin H. Oaks, Mormon Apostle 

 

 

 

And here:

 

Temple Recommend Questions:

 1 Do you have faith in and a testimony of God the Eternal Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost?

 2 Do you have a testimony of the Atonement of Christ and of His role as Savior and Redeemer?

 3 Do you have a testimony of the restoration of the gospel in these the latter days?

 4 Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?

 5 Do you live the law of chastity?

 6 Is there anything in your conduct relating to members of your family that is not in harmony with the teachings of the Church?

 7 Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

 8 Do you strive to keep the covenants you have made, to attend your sacrament and other meetings, and to keep your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel?

 9 Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen?

10 Are you a full-tithe payer?

11 Do your keep the Word of Wisdom?

12 Do you have financial or other oblgations to a former spouse or children? If yes, are you current in meeting those obligations?

13 If you have previously received your temple endowment:

     Do you keep the covenants that you made in the temple?

     Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?

14 Have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities but have not been?

15 Do you consider yourself worthy to enter the Lord's house and participate in temple ordinances?

 

 

 

 

---

---

Oh, they can say that their leaders were NOT speaking for GOD when they said    WHATEVER    but that's NOT the same as criticizing!

---

---

 

( Remember fellow Christians:  the Mormon's criticize US because they've been taught that they CAN'T criticize ANY of their leaders; so they HAVE to vent somehow! )

[Elsie]

“Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

When the Prophet speaks: the thinking has been done.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"If he is the representative of Christ on the earth, then wouldn't going against him equate to going against Jesus Himself?"

If you had a grasp of history (which I think you do, some, like all of us), you would know the limitations on that sort of statement.

To put it briefly, it's like what Pope John Paul II said in his Ordinatio Sacramentalis on a particular disputed topic:

"We declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

Get that? There are areas in which the Pope has no authority whatsoever. That would be (in the case above) changing the matter or form of a Sacrament, or anything else was handed down to us by Christ through the Apostles.

Hence, nothing that is against Christ could be "authoritative" coming from the Pope, or from all the Bishops and Cardinals, or from any person or organ of the Church. You know, as we do, that there have been bad popes. None of them had any authority to lead people away from Christ.

We've also had many, many reformers. I mean real reformers, not people who split.

[caww]

Looks like the gangs all in agreement.

[metmom]

Luther didn’t split.

He tried reform and the Catholic church ex-communicated him for his trouble.

[Montana_Sam]

The Pope is protected by the Holy Spirit from teaching erroneously only on matters of faith and morals. But in those matters, he is required to speak the truth. He has the authority to change basic rules in how matters are practiced, but he has no authority, nor will the Holy Spirit allow him, to falsify the faith.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Yes, Luther did initially try to reform the Church, and his excommunication in 1521 need not have lead to his permanent rupture from the Church. As you no doubt know, emperors, kings, nobles, bishops, clerics of every rank, all sorts of people were excommuncated over the centuries, and ended up reconciled with the Church, sometimes year later and sometimes in much shorter order.

In Canon law, excommunication is a "medicinal penalty" intended to invite the person to change behavior or attitude, repent, and return to full communion. It has sometimes imposed illegitimately (since human beings are sometimes unjust!) but, more often, rightly and lawfully. Excommunication does not "undo" membership in the church; excommunicated Catholics are still Catholics, not banned from the assembly, not banned for instance from Mass, but still under the obligation to attend Mass (!) though not to receive Communion.

Not a few saints, later canonized, were excommuncated for some period in their lives. Examples are St. Hippolytus, St. Columba, St. Athanasius (yes, that Athanasius), St. Joan of Arc, St. Hildegard of Bingen, and St. Mary Mackillop. Athanasius and Hildegard were certainly reformers, and are now considered Doctors of the Church.

I think Luther's chosen course was to defiantly blow up his excommunication into a permanent rupture. Both the "Pope" side and the "Luther" side made errors of judgment; his was his decision to, as I said, split. And of course, writing pamphlets urging German princes to take up arms and make war on the Church and on the peasants was a definite no-no.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Get that? There are areas in which the Pope has no authority whatsoever. That would be (in the case above) changing the matter or form of a Sacrament, or anything else was handed down to us by Christ through the Apostles.

In other words, you are saying that if the Pope comes out and asserts that divorcees can receive communion, that you have no obligation to believe official church teaching? But as for your implication that the Catholic Church can't change any of these official doctrines: they do it all the time! See Vatican II. The trick is that they just assert that their obvious changes are really in continuity with the past, even the whole kissing of Korans fad, despite previous Popes calling such activity anathema.