Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nicklin' and Dimin' Pope Francis
Vivificat - from Contemplation to Action ^ | 29 May 2013 | Te骹ilo de Jes鷖 (@vivificat)

Posted on 05/29/2013 7:53:41 AM PDT by Te骹ilo

David Gibson wrote a very good piece for the Religious News Service which was republished by the Washington Post’s On Faith blog which I think you all ought to read. It is titled Is Pope Francis is a heretic? No, but he does raise questions and here’s an excerpt:

Drawing of Pope Francis
courtesy of Graphic New
s
Speaking on Wednesday (May 22), Francis said that as human beings created in the image of God, everyone has a “duty to do good.”

“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists,” he said, answering his own query. “Everyone! And this blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the blood of Christ has redeemed us all!”

Cue the jaw dropping and head scratching. Atheists were pleasantly surprised, conservative Catholics were dazed and confused, and the pope’s comments raced around the Internet; for a while they were the second-most shared piece on Reddit.

So was Francis preaching a form of “universalism”? That is the unorthodox teaching that says, essentially, that all faiths are equal and all are going to heaven, especially if you are nice to people here on earth. It’s also a heresy that Francis’ predecessor, Benedict XVI, spent a career quashing every time he thought he thought he spied a hint of it in some theologian’s writings.

But the short answer to the question is easy: No. Francis was only affirming the doctrine that Christ redeemed the whole world. Whether people accept that belief is another matter.
In fact, popes going back to Leo XIII in 1891 and up through John Paul II – not to mention authoritative texts from the official Catholic Catechism and the Second Vatican Council – have said the exact same thing Francis did…
Please, continue reading here.

Commentary. I think that every Catholic should pay attention to what Pope Francis says and how he says it, without erecting oneself as a judge over the Successor of Peter and presuming to measure his intellect and thought by self-righteous convictions as to what the Pope and the Church are or ought to be. Tragically, there are many in the Catholic blogosphere – here’s but one example – who think themselves qualified to render condemnatory judgments against Pope Francis. They are otherwise good Catholics with whom I would agree about many things, but not in this instance.

Considering that Pope Francis is the Successor of Peter one should be inclined to grant him all benefit by thinking that it is his wish that everything he says be received with the meaning intended by the Mind of the Church. “Nicklin’ and dimin’” everything Pope Francis says in a quest for doctrinal error is a sign of an insecure and immature Catholic conscience. We should all pray not to fall into this temptation.

I like Pope Francis’ simple approach. May be he’s aiming at the simple-minded and if that applies to me I would call that real spiritual progress.

Maybe if we were less like Simon the Pharisee (Luke 7:40) and more like Nicodemus (John 3) we would understand Pope Francis better. May the Holy Spirit grant this grace to all of us.


TOPICS: Catholic; General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: popefrancis
Typos. Blunders. Mine. Fixed on the blog as soon as detected.
1 posted on 05/29/2013 7:53:41 AM PDT by Te骹ilo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: YellowRoseofTx; Rashputin; StayoutdaBushesWay; OldNewYork; MotherRedDog; sayuncledave; ...

PING!


2 posted on 05/29/2013 7:54:26 AM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo; Mrs. Don-o; Anoreth
I like Pope Francis’ simple approach. May be he’s aiming at the simple-minded and if that applies to me I would call that real spiritual progress.

I agree with you, and I like your article. It's as if many people are thinking, "If he doesn't do everything exactly as I would do it in his position, then he's a bad Pope." To paraphrase the "National Sarcasm Society" t-shirt, "Like he needs your support."

(I didn't see any typso, but the reflections are weird in here today and the cats have smudged the monitor.)

3 posted on 05/29/2013 8:04:24 AM PDT by Tax-chick (The Commie Plot Theory of Everything. Give it a try - you'll be surprised how often it makes sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
I think that every Catholic should pay attention to what Pope Francis says and how he says it, without erecting oneself as a judge over the Successor of Peter and presuming to measure his intellect and thought by self-righteous convictions as to what the Pope and the Church are or ought to be.

Ping for later

4 posted on 05/29/2013 8:07:09 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo

Hi Teo..

what all the “critics” miss is that Francis said “...and the blood of Christ has redeemed us all!”

He did not say the blood of Christ ‘saved’ us all.

It is sad that they don’t understand the difference.

Lurking’


5 posted on 05/29/2013 8:11:37 AM PDT by LurkingSince'98 (Catholics=John 6:53-58 Everyone else=John 6:60-66)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Thank you! Your cats have good discernment - or so I pray. ;-)

~Theo


6 posted on 05/29/2013 8:15:54 AM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo

Based on my personal history, I am generally distrustful of the Jesuits. He seems to be doing a good job teaching and spreading the good news, and hopefully he is a good administrator, but I would like it if he keeps his nose out of politics. In all likelihood he is a European-style socialist.


7 posted on 05/29/2013 8:16:03 AM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkingSince'98

Thank you!

I can’t understand either what’s this pretension held by many Catholics that they can judge the Pope at every instance. Beats me!

~Theo


8 posted on 05/29/2013 8:17:22 AM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo

The cats know that the best way to get food in their bowl is to jump on the keyboard when I’m trying to FReep.


9 posted on 05/29/2013 8:36:03 AM PDT by Tax-chick (The Commie Plot Theory of Everything. Give it a try - you'll be surprised how often it makes sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo; Tax-chick
We get enough "Hermeneutic of Suspicion" from the LCWR. How tiresome to get that same yapping and butt-sniffing from from Real CatholicsTM.
10 posted on 05/29/2013 8:38:18 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Jesus thrown everything off balance." - Flannery O'Connor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LurkingSince'98
It is sad that they don’t understand the difference.

Even a small amount of bible study will show you there is no difference...Any one to get redeemed will be saved first...

But the short answer to the question is easy: No. Francis was only affirming the doctrine that Christ redeemed the whole world. Whether people accept that belief is another matter.

So the Catholic doctrine is wrong...Jesus did NOT redeem the whole world...Jesus 'showed up' to redeem the whole word but it hasn't happened...Some in the world will ultimately be redeemed...It's just more ignorance of scripture...

What's comical is that there are so many defending (by making excuses for) your pope, but we don't get a peep out of your pope...

11 posted on 05/29/2013 8:41:58 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; Te贸filo

As Jesus said ... you know, that guy that so many people got all offended at and they were sure they knew what God wanted better than He did ... “A man’s foes will be those of his own household.”


12 posted on 05/29/2013 8:44:22 AM PDT by Tax-chick (The Commie Plot Theory of Everything. Give it a try - you'll be surprised how often it makes sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo

I don’t understand the frenzy here. The issue isn’t whether all mankind is “redeemed” by Christ’s death; it’s whether or not individuals choose to take advantage of it. The Pope didn’t imply that all men, including atheists, would get to heaven, merely that they were certainly eligible. I think back to “Keys of the Kingdom” (A. J. Cronin)—the heroic Scots atheist doctor who just couldn’t grasp the notion of God but spent and gave his life caring for the poor. How could we ever accept that God would fail to reward such an individual?

There’s more to this, of course; but I think it’s above the pay-grade of most reporting on it.


13 posted on 05/29/2013 9:10:14 AM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkingSince'98

It would further the discussion if you, or anyone else, would define and differentiate redemption and salvation using Scipture.


14 posted on 05/29/2013 9:16:53 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mach9

I agree with what you say.

I think that some people get some sort of morbose pleasure from criticizing the Pope - any Pope, at any time, for very little things. That’s why they do it repeatedly, because doing so stimulates the pleasure centers of their brain. I can’t find no other explanation.

~Theo


15 posted on 05/29/2013 9:21:34 AM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
Francis was only affirming the doctrine that Christ redeemed the whole world. Whether people accept that belief is another matter.

I'm still uncertain what is the hubbub about his saying Christ redeemed the whole world. Is this really new to people?

1 John 2:2 ESV "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

Francis is in the company of the Apostle John. That's not really a bad place to be.

16 posted on 05/29/2013 9:27:57 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo

Amen. And, thank you. I have had this opinion since he was elected.


17 posted on 05/29/2013 9:41:55 AM PDT by redhead (NO GROUND TO THE DEVIL! Use Weaponized Prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
"1 John 2:2 ESV "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." Francis is in the company of the Apostle John. That's not really a bad place to be."

Thank you, xzins!

18 posted on 05/29/2013 9:43:20 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Jesus thrown everything off balance." - Flannery O'Connor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
I can’t understand either what’s this pretension held by many Catholics that they can judge the Pope at every instance.

I see it as larger than just the Pope. We've seen many examples of this in the Religion Forum, of Catholics standing as judge over many aspects of Catholic thought:

Is it dissent to challenge a lay Catholic's beliefs? Is there anything to which a lay Catholic, or even a non-Catholic, may hold a priest, bishop, Cardinal or Pope accountable to? Who/what decides and defines what constitutes dissent? If you have any explanations or theories, I'd love to hear them.
19 posted on 05/29/2013 9:44:11 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I don’t believe that verse has the universal meaning that you and others give it.

“He is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but also for those of the whole world.” How are we to understand that? This is obviously a critical question.

Is this universalism? Does this mean that Jesus has literally propitiated God for the whole world? Does the whole world mean the whole world? Has Jesus actually satisfied God’s justice for everybody who has ever lived? If so, then where is hell in that? Where is condemnation? Why are all the warnings and why preach the gospel?

The answer is this is not a statement of universalism. It is not telling us that the atonement was literally made for everyone. What is it saying? I’ll tell you what it’s saying. John was in particular Jewish and primarily wrote to a Jewish audience. In Galatians 2:9 the Apostle Paul describes his first meeting with the other Apostles. He writes, “When James, Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship that we should go to the heathen and they to the circumcision.” Did you get that? So in Galatians 2:9, James, Peter and John make it clear that their ministry is to the circumcision, to the Jews.

John was an Apostle to the Jews. The recipients of his epistles would be predominantly, if not completely, Jewish. He is saying to this Jewish audience, who completely understand propitiation because they understand the sacrificial system, they understand the function of the Mercy Seat, they understand Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. And what they understand about it is to be learned from several verses in Leviticus, listen to this, verse 17 of chapter 16, “When the high priest goes in to make atonement, no one shall be in the tent of meeting until he comes out that he may make atonement for himself, for his household...listen carefully...and for all the assembly of Israel.” The Day of Atonement had limitations. It applied only to Israel, only to the people of Israel. It was a sacrifice for Israel. It went on for centuries as their unique Day of Atonement. John says here, “Jesus Himself is the propitiation, Jesus Himself is the sacrifice, Jesus Himself is the bloody offering upon the Mercy Seat of God and not for our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world.” The normal, national, limitation of the Day of Atonement for Israel is no more. In the Jewish context, they understood Day of Atonement, they understood the language of propitiation. John is telling them that the sacrifice that Jesus offered is not just for the nation Israel, it’s now for the world because the Lord is calling out a people for His name from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

Jesus on the cross offered an atonement for those in Israel who would repent and believe and those throughout the world who would repent and believe. It is not a universal appeasement of God. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Judas because when Judas died, he went to his own place to pay for his own sins. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Herod. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Pilate. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Adolph Hitler. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of the mob that screamed for His blood. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of all that mass of humanity that show up at the Great White Throne and are cast into the Lake of Fire forever and ever where they will give their satisfaction to the offended Law of God. But He did pay for the sins of all who will believe in Israel and the world. The point is, it went beyond their normal provincial idea of propitiation. And He didn’t just make salvation an option, He actually purchased salvation for all who repent and believe because they are called by God. It was an actual substitution.


20 posted on 05/29/2013 11:19:03 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt

Here is what John Piper had to say on 1 John 2:2, to wit,

“The final word of the text is that we must not keep this consolation for ourselves alone. “And he is not the propitiation for our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world.”

“John does not mean that all God’s wrath against the sins of every person in the world has been propitiated, because then every person in the world would be saved. “He who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him” (John 3:36). The wrath of God is propitiated only for those who obey the Son of God. (Cf. Romans 3:25.)

“What John means can best be seen when we compare the closest parallel to this verse in his writings, namely, John 11:52. Caiaphas predicts the death of Jesus like this: “He prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.” Or as Jesus says in John 10:15–16, “I lay down my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have that are not of this fold; I must bring them also.”

“In other words there are children of God, or sheep, scattered through the whole world. As John says in Revelation 5:9, Christ was slain and by his blood didst ransom men for God from every tongue and tribe and people and nation.” He did not ransom everybody. He gave his life a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). He did not propitiate the wrath of God against everybody. But he laid down his life for the sheep. They are scattered throughout the world in every tongue and tribe and people and nation.

“No one who enjoys the forgiveness of Jesus can be content to hog it for himself. He is not the propitiation for our sins only. There are other sheep that are scattered throughout the whole world. Their sins, too, are covered. And the last commandment of Jesus was, “Go make disciples out of them from every people.”


21 posted on 05/29/2013 11:19:56 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt

And here is what Arthur W. Pink had to say on 1 John 2:2.

THERE is one passage more than any other which is I appealed to by those who believe in universal redemption, and which at first sight appears to teach that Christ died for the whole human race. We have therefore decided to give it a detailed examination and exposition.

“And He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). This is the passage which, apparently, most favors the Arminian view of the Atonement, yet if it be considered attentively it will be seen that it does so only in appearance, and not in reality. Below we offer a number of conclusive proofs to show that this verse does not teach that Christ has propitiated God on behalf of all the sins of all men.

In the first place, the fact that this verse opens with “and” necessarily links it with what has gone before. We, therefore, give a literal word for word translation of I John 2 :1 from Bagster’s Interlinear: “Little children my, these things I write to you, that ye may not sin; and if any one should sin, a Paraclete we have with the Father, Jesus Christ (the) righteous”. It will thus be seen that the apostle John is here writing to and about the saints of God. His immediate purpose was two-fold: first, to communicate a message that would keep God’s children from sinning; second, to supply comfort and assurance to those who might sin, and, in consequence, be cast down and fearful that the issue would prove fatal. He, therefore, makes known to them the provision which God has made for just such an emergency. This we find at the end of verse 1 and throughout verse 2. The ground of comfort is twofold: let the downcast and repentant believer (1 John 1:9) be assured that, first, he has an “Advocate with the Father”; second, that this Advocate is “the propitiation for our sins” Now believers only may take comfort from this, for they alone have an “Advocate”, for them alone is Christ the propitiation, as is proven by linking the Propitiation (”and”) with “the Advocate”!

In the second place, if other passages in the New Testament which speak of “propitiation,” he compared with 1 John 2:2, it will be found that it is strictly limited in its scope. For example, in Romans 3 :25 we read that God set forth Christ “a propitiation through faith in His blood”. If Christ is a propitiation “through faith”, then He is not a “propitiation” to those who have no faith! Again, in Hebrews 2:17 we read, “To make propitiation for the sins of the people.” (Heb. 2:17, R. V.)

In the third place, who are meant when John says, “He is the propitiation for our sins”? We answer, Jewish believers. And a part of the proof on which we base this assertion we now submit to the careful attention of the reader.

In Galatians 2:9 we are told that John, together with James and Cephas, were apostles “unto the circumcision” (i.e. Israel). In keeping with this, the Epistle of James is addressed to “the twelve tribes, which are scattered abroad” (1:1). So, the first Epistle of Peter is addressed to “the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion” (1 Pet. 1:1, R. V.). And John also is writing to saved Israelites, but for saved Jews and saved Gentiles.

Some of the evidences that John is writing to saved Jews are as follows. (a) In the opening verse he says of Christ, “Which we have seen with our eyes . . . . and our hands have handled”. How impossible it would have been for the Apostle Paul to have commenced any of his epistles to Gentile saints with such language!

(b) “Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning” (1 John 2:7). The “beginning” here referred to is the beginning of the public manifestation of Christ-in proof compare 1:1 ; 2:13, etc. Now these believers the apostle tells us, had the “old commandment” from the beginning. This was true of Jewish believers, but it was not true of Gentile believers.

(c) “I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known Him from the beginning” (2:13). Here, again, it is evident that it is Jewish believers that are in view.

(d) “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us” (2:18, 19).

These brethren to whom John wrote had “heard” from Christ Himself that Antichrist should come (see Matthew 24). The “many antichrists” whom John declares “went out from us” were all Jews, for during the first century none but a Jew posed as the Messiah. Therefore, when John says “He is the propitiation for our sins” he can only mean for the sins of Jewish believers.*

In the fourth place, when John added, “And not for ours only, but also for the whole world”, he signified that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of Gentile believers too, for, as previously shown, “the world” is a term contrasted from Israel. This interpretation is unequivocally established by a careful comparison of 1 John 2:2 with John 11:51, 52, which is a strictly parallel passage: “And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also He should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad”. Here Caiaphas, under inspiration, made known for whom Jesus should “die”. Notice now the correspondency of his prophecy with this declaration of John’s:

“He is the propitiation for our (believing Israelites) sins.”

“He prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation.”

“And not for ours only.” “And not for that nation only.”

“But also for the whole world”-That is, Gentile believers scattered throughout the earth.

“He should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.”

In the fifth place, the above interpretation is confirmed by the fact that no other is consistent or intelligible. If the “whole world” signifies the whole human race, then the first clause and the “also” in the second clause are absolutely meaningless. If Christ is the propitiation for every-body, it would be idle tautology to say, first, “He is the propitiation for our sins and also for everybody”. There could be no “also” if He is the propitiation for the entire human family. Had the apostle meant to affirm that Christ is a universal propitiation he had omitted the first clause of verse 2, and simply said, “He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.” Confirmatory of “not for ours (Jewish believers) only, but also for the whole world”-Gentile believers, too; compare John 10:16; 17:20.

In the sixth place, our definition of “the whole world” is in perfect accord with other passages in the New Testament. For example: “Whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the Gospel; which is come unto you, as it is in all the world” (Col. 1:5,6). Does “all the world” here mean, absolutely and unqualifiedly, all mankind? Had all the human family heard the Gospel? No; the apostle’s obvious meaning is that, the Gospel, instead of being confined to the land of Judea, had gone abroad, without restraint, into Gentile lands. So in Romans 1:8: “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world”. The apostle is here referring to the faith of these Roman saints being spoken of in a way of commendation. But certainly all mankind did not so speak of their faith! It was the whole world of believers that he was referring to! In Revelation 12:9 we read of Satan “which deceiveth the whole world”. But again this expression cannot be understood as a universal one, for Matthew 24 :24 tells us that Satan does not and cannot “deceive” God’s elect. Here it is “the whole world” of unbelievers.

In the seventh place, to insist that “the whole world” in 1 John 2:2 signifies the entire human race is to undermine the very foundations of our faith. If Christ is the propitiation for those that are lost equally as much as for those that are saved, then what assurance have we that believers too may not be lost? If Christ is the propitiation for those now in hell, what guarantee have I that I may not end in hell? The blood-shedding of the incarnate Son of God is the only thing which can keep any one out of hell, and if many for whom that precious blood made propitiation are now in the awful place of the damned, then may not that blood prove inefficacious for me! Away with such a God-dishonoring thought.

However men may quibble and wrest the Scriptures, one thing is certain: The Atonement is no failure. God will not allow that precious and costly sacrifice to fail in accomplishing, completely, that which it was designed to effect. Not a drop of that holy blood was shed in vain. In the last great Day there shall stand forth no disappointed and defeated Saviour, but One who “shall see of the travail of His soul and be satisfied” (Isa. 53:11). These are not our words, but the infallible assertion of Him who declares, “My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure” (Isa. 64:10). Upon this impregnable rock we take our stand. Let others rest on the sands of human speculation and twentieth-century theorizing if they wish. That is their business. But to God they will yet have to render an account. For our part we had rather be railed at as a narrow-minded, out-of-date, hyper-Calvinist, than be found repudiating God’s truth by reducing the Divinely-efficacious atonement to a mere fiction.

* It is true that many things in John’s Epistle apply equally to believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Christ is the Advocate of the one, as much as of the other. The same may be said of many things in the Epistle of James which is also a catholic, or general epistle, though expressly addressed to the twelve tribes scattered abroad.


22 posted on 05/29/2013 11:21:50 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Those are great questions. I, for one, am insulted by those who would label lay Catholics like myself as “enjoying” criticizing the Pope. I don’t enjoy it one bit. Perhaps those Catholics should take a hard look at themselves because they come off pretty self-righteous and superior when they talk like that.

I also really do not understand the thinking by some Catholics that the Pope can never be wrong. Um, yes he can. Nowhere does the Catholic Faith state that he is infallible whenever he speaks. Also, just because someone is questioning the Pope does not necessarily mean that person thinks he is wrong, per se.

In reality, many of us lay Catholics who do this are very disheartened by the state of our Church and I would argue that those who do not see some of what we see/question are blind to it. But, I don’t say that to be superior because I once defended any and every negative, questioning comment about any Church leader and gave this or that excuse for why something was said/not said or done/not done.

Something is amiss in our Church and I am done defending the actions/inactions of our leaders. However, I will continue to defend Church teaching to the day I die. Let no one be mistaken. Any criticism on my part of any Church leader is no reflection on the Truth that is the Catholic Faith.


23 posted on 05/29/2013 1:17:51 PM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mach9
I think back to “Keys of the Kingdom” (A. J. Cronin)—the heroic Scots atheist doctor who just couldn’t grasp the notion of God but spent and gave his life caring for the poor. How could we ever accept that God would fail to reward such an individual?

You could start by reading what God has to say about it...If this fella did not trust in Jesus, he is not counted with Body of Christ...He will stand before the Great White Throne Judgment and if his righteousness is equal to that of Jesus, he stands a chance of staying out of hell...

I realize it's hard if not impossible for you guys to grasp but those within the Body of Christ are not judged the same way as those outside the Body of Christ...

24 posted on 05/29/2013 2:23:31 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt

It is not universalism to say that Jesus is the atoning sacrifice for all sins. It means that the price has been paid at the cross for all sin, that no sin can now stand in the way of anyone’s salvation.

The sacrifice opened the way to eternity for those who receive Him. “As many as received Him, to them gave He power to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name.” (John 3:6)

In other words, salvation comes to those who believe. “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

As repeated the other day, an illustration a past freeper friend used to use: I can buy you a ticket to Hawaii, can tell you about it, can tell you it’s waiting for you at the ticket desk at the airport, but if you don’t believe me, then you’re not going to get on that flight. Nevertheless, that ticket has been purchased whether you avail yourself of it or not.


25 posted on 05/29/2013 6:32:59 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: xzins

You can’t stop with John 1:12, you must go on to the next verse.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Those born again (saved eternally) are not born of their own will (their choice to receive Him), but through the will of God.

Take a look at Acts 13:48
“And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”

Notice it says “And as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” Those who were ordained to eternal life were the ones who believed.”

Notice also it does not say that all who believed received eternal life. That would make salvation by choice, or will of man, but we know salvation is by grace.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-9)

You said: “In other words, salvation comes to those who believe. “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Of course I too believe that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved, I just don’t believe men who are dead in trespasses and sins will ever choose to call upon His name. The Bible makes it clear, rebellious sinners don’t want God. They may want religion, a salve for their conscience, but they don’t really want God, they don’t want the truth of Christ. Apart from a work in the heart performed by God (being born again), no man would ever believe.

“For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot.” (Romans 8:7)

“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9)

Genesis 6:5 & 8:21 – “The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually... from youth.”

From Romans 3:
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

John 3:20 - “For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.”

Psalm 10:4 - In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him…

Isaiah 65:1 - “I was ready to be sought by those who did not ask for me; I was ready to be found by those who did not seek me.

Isaiah 64:7 - There is no one who calls upon your name, who rouses himself to take hold of you; for you have hidden your face from us, and have made us melt in the hand of our iniquities.

Can the natural man comprehend the gospel or come to saving knowledge of God on his own?

•1 Corinthians 2:14 - The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

•2 Corinthians 4:3-4 - our gospel is veiled... to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

•1 Corinthians 1:18,21-24 - For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles

Matthew 11:27 - “no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

Can men of themselves accept God’s gift of salvation? Do men choose God or come to Him on their own?

•John 3:27 - John answered, “A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven.”

•John 14:16-17 - “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him.”

•John 1:12-13 - But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

•John 6:44,65 - “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

•Romans 9:16 - So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
Who supplies faith/belief/repentance?

•Acts 16:14 - One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.

•1 Corinthians 3:6 - I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth.

•Acts 5:31 - “God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.”

•Acts 11:18 - When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”

•Philippians 1:29 - For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should... believe in him

•Acts 18:27 - When he arrived, he greatly helped those who through grace had believed

•Ephesians 2:8-9 - For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

•Romans 12:3 - For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.

•2 Timothy 2:24-25 - And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, [etc.]... God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth

•1 Corinthians 12:3 - no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.

•2 Peter 1:3 - His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence

Can men do anything to help themselves?

•Colossians 2:13 - And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses

•Ephesians 2:1-2, 4-5 - And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked... But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved

God bless, FRiend!


26 posted on 05/29/2013 7:56:25 PM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

You know, I do have answers to all those questions. But someone will then challenge my answers and we’ll go in circles.

There are two important things we must consider: objective reality (”the things are they really are”) and subjective apprehension (what people “think” at various levels of certainty about the nature of those things). This latter one depends, not only on one’s intellectual preparation, but also on one’s assumptions, presumptions, opinions, self-image, life experiences, misconceptions, misperceptions, wounds, and of course, sins, propensities to certain sins, weaknesses, etc. There’s also the world, the flesh, and the devil, and the noise, confusion, and disorders they create. The mutual interactions of all these currents yield the cacophony you complaint about.

The way to tackle these is by purification of the soul, mind, emotions, and senses. One needs to live in a state of constant repentance and conversion. Paradoxically, *faith* - understood as loving knowledge of God and humble intellectual assent to the truths he reveals - is the medicine for our condition, and one that in most of us works progressively, slowly, with some occasional flashes of direct intuition into the true nature of things.

Despite these undeserved graces, the person of faith will be challenged by others in different stages of spiritual development. No matter. Criticism will make us humble and, paradoxically (again), it will helps along the way.

That’s all I have to say about that. :-)

+JMJ,
~P.


27 posted on 05/30/2013 6:32:05 AM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
You know, I do have answers to all those questions. But someone will then challenge my answers and we’ll go in circles.

LOL that is how it works, isn't it?

The way to tackle these is by purification of the soul, mind, emotions, and senses. One needs to live in a state of constant repentance and conversion. Paradoxically, *faith* - understood as loving knowledge of God and humble intellectual assent to the truths he reveals - is the medicine for our condition, and one that in most of us works progressively, slowly, with some occasional flashes of direct intuition into the true nature of things.

Despite these undeserved graces, the person of faith will be challenged by others in different stages of spiritual development. No matter. Criticism will make us humble and, paradoxically (again), it helps along the way. That’s all I have to say about that. :-)

Good words, Teo.

28 posted on 05/30/2013 10:09:37 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt
I just don’t believe men who are dead in trespasses and sins will ever choose to call upon His name

Thank you, .45 for all of those excellent verses from Scripture.

Nor do I believe that those dead in trespasses and sins will ever choose to call upon His name. I believe that, as with Lydia, The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message (Ac 16:14)

However, I do believe that Jesus is the Light. In fact, John 1 - 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9 The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world." Jesus gives light to "every man".

Some receive, as did Lydia. Some, however, resist, as Stephen said, Acts 7 - 51 "You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Those who resist are not among those who believe and are justified. "For those He foreknew He predestined..." Those who receive are those He foreknew and ordained to eternal life. Those who resist "shall not see life but the wrath of God abides on them."

NONE of the above, however, does not mean that the sacrifice of Christ did not atone for all sin. All of the above can be true, and Christ STILL have died for all sin. "Not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

29 posted on 05/30/2013 1:17:14 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: xzins

If I haven’t said lately that you are one of my favorite people on FR, well ... you are one of my favorite people on FR!


30 posted on 05/30/2013 2:16:49 PM PDT by Tax-chick (The Commie Plot Theory of Everything. Give it a try - you'll be surprised how often it makes sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
Emancipated Pope

Mundabor's Blog

(snip)We are being punished. The utter madness of the “springtime of the Church” triggered the present decay; both in an earthly, practical, causal way and in a more general way, as Divine Punishment as just consequence of the arrogance of clergy – and countless followers – thinking they could reinvent Catholicism and make it sexy, easy, popular, and outright comfortable.

31 posted on 05/30/2013 6:08:09 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
Pope Francis And The Confused Mind
32 posted on 05/30/2013 6:14:46 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

What a nice thing to say, Tax-Chick. In fact, it’s definitely the nicest thing anyone’s said to me today, perhaps this week, and maybe even this month.

Blessings on you and on all who rely on our Lord Jesus.


33 posted on 05/30/2013 6:53:04 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: xzins

You’re welcome. It just crossed my mind while I was reading through the thread, and I thought, “Life’s too short not to tell people when you think they’re excellent.”

Have a good weekend!


34 posted on 05/31/2013 3:43:15 AM PDT by Tax-chick (The Commie Plot Theory of Everything. Give it a try - you'll be surprised how often it makes sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
"Considering that Pope Francis is the Successor of Peter one should be inclined to grant him all benefit by thinking that it is his wish that everything he says be received with the meaning intended by the Mind of the Church."

Do you believe in salvation outside the Catholic Church? Pope Francis does; here's just one example:

Pope Francis 'dismissed Anglican branch as quite unnecessary'

How much "benefit" will you give him?

35 posted on 06/01/2013 11:20:35 AM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

I give the benefit of the doubt to the Successor of Peter any time over and against private opinion to the contrary. This benefit consists in this: everything he says is to be understood as consistent with Catholic teaching unless he directly, explicitly, and unequivocally expresses the contrary, with the intention to bind the Church to what he says.

~Theo


36 posted on 06/04/2013 12:57:04 PM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

Thank you for re-sharing the URL. Mundabor’s was the vacuous blog post I criticized on my post.

But you didn’t get that far down, didn’t you?

~Theo


37 posted on 06/04/2013 12:58:41 PM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
And you ignore the heresy he spouts off the record. Gotcha! Cherry pick what you will, Teo! Protestants are known to do that also.
38 posted on 06/04/2013 6:23:34 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo
"This benefit consists in this: everything he says is to be understood as consistent with Catholic teaching unless he directly, explicitly, and unequivocally expresses the contrary, with the intention to bind the Church to what he says."

Do you realize the above statement means the pope can speak with forked tongue, and according to you, we are obliged to believe everything he spouts until he speaks ex cathedra and overrules himself?

Teo, I have many past, holy popes, who did exercise their authority to speak directly, explicitly, and unequivocally the Catholic truth, to rely on. I'm sorry you refuse to give them any credence; yet give P. Francis, who refuses to exercise the same authority, benefit of the doubt with his ecumenical follies promoting Salvation outside the Church. If Pope Francis states tomorrow that there is no Hell nor Heaven, will you believe him until he speaks ex cathedra? You can't worship this Pope as infallible at all times and ignore the past Popes.

39 posted on 06/04/2013 7:18:37 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

I only worship God. I *love* this Pope as the Succesor of Peter that he is. I’m sorry to see that you don’t.

You’ve made me think. Usually, folks who underline “extra ecclesia nulla salus” speak from experience, since they themselves have at least one foot outside her. Perhaps I should listen to them, speaking as they are from experience.

You are a confused should soul. Repent, and return to the Catholic Church in soul and mind, as well as in body.

+JMJ,
~Theo


40 posted on 06/09/2013 6:58:19 AM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Te贸filo

Never left the Catholic Church, bubba. Nor, did I underline anything, or say I didn’t love the Pope as you have falsely stated.

My soul, mind and body are all Catholic and your ad hominems are puerile.

But I am glad I made you think; it’s about time you did so.


41 posted on 06/12/2013 7:38:16 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

Yes! I think! Thank you for noticing. There is more: *I think with the Church*

Sadly, you don’t. Your words demonstrate it. You need to search conscience and confront the truth of what you are saying.

Return, return to the Church. Stop sowing confusion among the People of God.

+JMJ,
~Theo


42 posted on 06/13/2013 5:44:52 AM PDT by Te骹ilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson