Posted on 07/17/2017 8:08:32 AM PDT by ebb tide
“Francis is more interested in leftwing politics than in Catholic theology”, George Neumayr, contributing editor of The American Spectator, states talking to Tom Woods on July 14th on tomwoods.com. Woods describes Francis as a result of John Paul II who - as he puts it - appointed "absolutely terrible people" as bishops: "Catholics have suffered under Bergoglios for decades now”.
Neumayr agrees that a lot of the liberal bishops were appointed by John Paul II and Benedict XVI. He sees Francis as the “culmination of a century” of liberalism and modernism in the Church.
For him it is "highly unlikely" that Francis, who in his theology is “more a Protestant than a Catholic” will convert to Catholicism. Instead, the realistic scenario is that Francis will produce division and chaos, "Catholics will have to decide whether they guard the faith over papolatry.”
And: “The Cardinals have to declare that Francis is a bad pope who must be resisted.”
I’m not expecting you to be an expert in infallibility, but don’t go tossing around ridiculous notions that a few minutes of reading would dispel you of.
Here. Read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility
Basically, from the beginning till now, when a Pope solemnly officially defines something as a dogma, it’s infallible. When he just says what his opinion is as a person, *even if it’s theological*, then it’s not.
Peter was the head of the Apostles with the power to bind and loose and the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, but that didn’t mean that Paul—who had none of those things—couldn’t correct him. Same principle here.
“whenever the Church “defines” a teaching it doesn’t mean that it wasn’t always held or taught.
Historically, it is because there are competing views. Often considered a threat to the Papacy.
“AMEN!! The Crusaders SAVED Christianity!!!”
Well, no.
You presume that every man fighting was a believer in Christ. What the Pope promised was a sweeping forgiveness for anyone who fought in battle. That is not a NT teaching.
"All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested." Pope Urban II
Yes, competing, heretical views.
Yet there is nothing in the NT about fighting in battle for the forgiveness of sins. Yes...this is a Papal novelty.
There's a great deal though about faith in Christ being required for forgiveness of sins.
A Roman Catholic would know that if they were to read the New Testament.
Yet lost the Holy Land.
Jihad, my ass, eagleone....you are an anti-Catholic....period. .
And proving yet again that the Roman Catholic is usually the first to resort to profanity or the personal attack when the argument goes against them.
Show me where any NT writer promised forgiveness of sin for fighting in battle.
I'll go get some popcorn while you look.
Get on a thread about your own religion.......what is your SECT of Christian? And don't say "Christian" and be a coward...fess up to what you are
It is Christian. Just like the disciples were called at Antioch.
You should pay closer attention to what Jesus said on the topic.
Which would make good sense, if you believed what those disciples believed. But you don't.
N.B. Jorge Bergoglio was not only ordained a bishop under Pope John Paul II, JP II also elevated him to the college of cardinals.
You should pay closer attention to what Jesus said on the topic.
I have.
9If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. 1My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. 1 John 1:9-2:2 NASB
Which would make good sense, if you believed what those disciples believed. But you don't.
I do....and Christian Jihad isn't part of it. Nor is having to go through Mary part of it.
Except that Luther had no idea what the church's roots were. Instead, he made it up on the fly.
Imagine the gall, expecting the Catholic church to get back to the Bible that Catholics claim it wrote.
But the Catholic Church never wavered from the Bible. It was the Protestant Reformers who invented doctrines not found in the Bible. They even when so far as to redefine what was the Bible, removing books that did not support their novel ideas.
You mean like those passages that say we have to go through Mary to get to Jesus?
Or that she's the Queen of the Apostles?
Or that she is our only mediator in Heaven?
Or those that promise forgiveness of sins if you die in battle?
ealgeone:
No, that is a simple view of it. My take is this, I will only pay attention to Pope Francis “if” he calls a Church Council (i.e. Vatican III), period. Other than that, the only time I will pay attention to Pope Francis is when I hear he has passed on and the Bishop of Rome is vacant and a new Pope is to be elected.
There have been a many of great Catholic saints who challenged Popes without causing schism (not that I am anywhere near a saint). Saint Catherine of Siena comes to mind.
Crusades were a legitimate war of self defense and response to centuries of muslim invasions. If it were not for the Catholic Church, Europe would have become Muslim 1,000 years ago. So the war to protect the Church and Europe was just, those who fought were given a form of penance for their sins.
To compare it to Jihad is nonsense.
so you’re your own little pope? got it.
To compare it to Jihad is nonsense.
I don't disagree the Crusades were important battles to be fought.
What I do disagree with is the Pope's promise of forgiveness of sins for those who die in battle.
Those who believed in Christ already had forgiveness of their sins.
Those who didn't believe in Christ did not and the Pope couldn't confer forgiveness just for fighting. But that's what he did.
It's Roman Catholic Jihad.
Then when did the novelty start? What year? What Pope?
ealgeone:
No, nothing he is saying relates to Doctrine. He can’t change doctrine and quite frankly doesn’t say much in that area. He wants a pastoral Church that is not seen to be at war with secular culture, rather than Pope John Paul II who took on say the culture of death (abortion, euthanasia) directly in his public speaking. Francis doesn’t do much that, rather, He makes statements about economics, global warming, politics, world affairs, the European Union, Brexit, etc, etc.. So what? His opinion on those or just that, sort of like the Dude telling Jesus Quintana at the bowling ally, “hey, that’s like your opinion man”
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.