Skip to comments.Pope Francis: The end of ‘fortress Catholicism’?
Posted on 08/03/2013 2:47:42 PM PDT by ebb tide
Something unexpected and extraordinary is happening in the Catholic Church. Pope Francis is rescuing the faith from those who hunker down in gilded cathedrals and wield doctrine like a sword. The edifice of fortress Catholicism in which progressive Catholics, gay Catholics, Catholic women and others who love the church but often feel marginalized by the hierarchy is starting to crumble.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Is he peddling “The One World Religion”?
But I repeat myself.
Don’t blame it on the Post. Blame it on the USCCB.
The author, John Gehring, was an Assistant Director for Media Relations at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
OK. See tagline.
No, not the end. We are only beginning.
“And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
Neither the gates of Hell nor Pope Francis will prevail against It!
A Catholic in rebellion against the Pope is a Protestant - by definition.
If you are a Catholic, your duty is to study, understand and obey the Pope. He is your teacher, you are his student.
Don't like it? Then find the courage to admit you're not a Catholic.
A question must be asked.
Why do you not accept Pope Francis?
He is a man of deep faith in Jesus.
How true. But, as a CHRISTIAN, your duty is to study, understand and obey God, as led by the Holy Spirit, through the Scriptures. He is your teacher, you are his student. Jesus Christ is your ONLY role model.
There, tally, fixed it for you...
Romans 7: 4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code. ...
I am a Roman Catholic. And will obey the Pope always when he speaks ex cathedra on faith or morals.
On other matters, such as permitting homos as priests or respecting the teachings and values of Islam, I have the option to respectively disagree.
See post 13.
On other matters, such as permitting homos as priests or respecting the teachings and values of Islam, I have the option to respectively disagree.
LOL, check your catechism. You may question, but not disagree. And the Church decides WHAT you may question, and WHAT the answers to your questions are. If you reject these constraints, you are rejecting the authority of the Church. If you cannot accept the teachings, you require confession, penance, and contrition, as well as prayer about your stubbornness and ego.
YOU do not decide the teachings of the Church. You want to play it both ways - you want to choose what to follow and what not to follow, and at the same time you want to hide behind the Church's teachings and not own them as your own when that conveniences you. And you want to claim the Church supports you in this.
Hey, I don't really care what you do. But instead of being a CINO, why don't you find your integrity and just accept that you're a Protestant. Because the issue is extremely simple - obedience. Catholics are obedient, period. And to strip out the Pope and claim to be a Catholic is the very definition of hypocrity.
I am a Roman Catholic. And will obey the Pope always when he speaks ex cathedra on faith or morals. On other matters, such as permitting homos as priests or respecting the teachings and values of Islam, I have the option to respectively disagree.
Not every opinion of the pope carries the weight of Catholic doctrine.
LOL, and NO opinion of a non-Cardinal has ANY authority to reject ANYTHING the Pope teaches.
And even the Cardinals have to jump through all sorts of hoops to challenge him.
So as a non-Cardinal Catholic, you have ZERO authority to challenge the Pope on something you don't like.
” Catholics are obedient, period.”
You might mention this to most of the world’s catholics, which seem to ignore what they do not like - including not showing up except for weddings and funerals.
1) Catholics are Christians. They are, in fact, THE Christians.
2) “But, as a CHRISTIAN, your duty is to study, understand and obey God, as led by the Holy Spirit, through the Scriptures.”
Where does the New Testament say “your duty is to study, understand and obey God, as led by the Holy Spirit, through the Scriptures.” Please cite an exact verse for me with all of those facets. Thanks.
3) “Jesus Christ is your ONLY role model.”
Jesus is THE role model, but not the only one: 1 Corinthians 4:9-16. You might want to read your Bible more often.
Someone is in for a shock when he learns the Pope is still Catholic.
“Some have falsely accused gay priests of causing the clergy sexual abuse crisis.”
79% of the victims in the United States were boys between the ages of 11-16. There’s no homosexual component to such behavior? Virtually all the priest-abusers, if not all were either homosexual or bi-sexual at the least. Most people of the homosexual orientation don’t abuse children but one study found that 25% of them admitted without revealing their identities that they were involved with minors under 18.
“Pope Francis clearly rejects that ugly slander.”
How tiresome it has already become how liberals interpret Francis through a liberal prism. Rarely do they actually quote him, they only interpret what he supposedly really means. Where are these people when Francis’ daily homilies do nothing but preach orthodoxy and give specific examples of sins and faults we need to overcome?
I have every authority to challenge the Pope on issues which lie outside the Magisterium of the Church.
Where on earth did you get the idea that every word that comes out of the pope's mouth is infallible teaching? That's an error more common to non-Catholics. But who am I to judge?
It is common on FreeRepublic to use the Leftist media as a reliable source when what they say furthers a Freeper's agenda or sets his hair on fire.
That being said, the Holy Father could use some training in dealing with the press. He's like a bull in a china shop, bless his heart.
Um... I’m sorry, but do you know the catechism?
The reason I asked, is it spells out that what ebb tide says is particularly true:
A. Homosexuals are NOT allowed to be priests, and that by practicing homosexual sex they are sinning, and that unless they confess their sins and pay penance—which includes no more homosexual sex, they are no longer Catholics.
B. Islam is not preached against in the catechism, but the catechism states that ONLY through Jesus does any human gain salvation period. So yeah, it we may be asked to respect Islamics, we KNOW that Islam is not—and never will be—the Way. The only Way is through Jesus Christ (hold on to your hat) Our (Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox) Lord.
Those two points are straight from the catechism, which spells out Catholic doctrine.
Catholic doctrine is set by a cooperation or overlap of Bible, Apostolic teaching, and Papal authority.
All 3 must be in agreement.
To make a Doctrinal change which contradicts Scripture and Apostolic teaching (called “Holy Tradition” with a capital “T”) the Pope would essentially have to single handedly re-write portions of the bible AND history.
I believe he is guided by the Holy Spirit, like many true Christian leaders are today. Therefore, he will not even attempt to make such a change. You belief may differ, but that is mine, fully stated.
What a pope can and cant change
If a pope is infallible, why cant he do anything he wants like do away with priestly celibacy?
Pope John Paul II, for example, altered the long-standing rule for electing a new pontiff from a two-thirds majority vote to a simple majority. Then Pope Benedict XVI changed it back.
But the presumption of a free-wheeling Holy Father misunderstands both infallibility and the office of the papacy.
"There are theological and logistical limits on the changes [the pope] can make," writes Ann Rodgers of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. "He cant create new doctrine out of thin air."
Popes are "servants of the churchs settled tradition," papal biographer George Weigel, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., told Rodgers, "not the traditions masters."
The pope can govern the church, and even overhaul the Vatican, Rodgers writes, but he "must answer to its doctrine as a [U.S.] president answers to the Constitution."
As to the popes infallibility, it is widely presumed to mean any statement or position he takes. Not so, Rodgers explains.
"In order to make an infallible declaration, a pope must clearly address the worldwide church from the throne of Peter, saying that he is defining a matter of faith or morals that every Catholic is required to assent to," the award-winning journalist writes. "The doctrine at stake must already have strong roots in tradition, have wide support from bishops and the faithful, and be compatible with Scripture."
So far, there have been only two such declarations, both involving the Virgin Mary. The first, issued in 1870, declared that Jesus mother was a product of "Immaculate Conception," meaning that she was conceived without original sin. The second, made in 1950, referred to the "Assumption of Mary," that she was taken into heaven rather than lying in a grave.
If the pope reversed traditional teachings on, say, womens ordination, Rodgers sources say, "the bishops and faithful of the world would realize he had fallen into heresy and disregard him."
Peggy Fletcher Stack
I'll be the first to say, given that line above, and then reflecting on Obama, that perhaps I shouldn't have used it in my previous post! So let me amend it:
The pope can govern the church, and even overhaul the Vatican, Rodgers writes, but he "must answer to its doctrine as a Republican [U.S.] president answers to the Constitution."
...starting to crumble.
Oh, these clowns only wish, as they continue to peddle their lies about the Church.
...the Holy Father could use some training in dealing with the press.
Amen to that. Apparently, he does not realize that they are just lying in wait, ready to pounce and distort everything he says.
I dispute this statement. The Pope does of course have the vocation to teach, govern, and sanctify as principal pastor; but so do we all, thanks to our Baptism, and according to our state in life.
However the Pope is not to be thought some sort of all-purpose oracle or master guru. His prudential judgments are not necessarily better than those of other people of similar training and experience; his grip on church administration, discipline and guidance may be very good or poor, depending on his particular talent or lack thereof; and his is in no way an innovator, but rather more a conservator of the faith which has been handed down from the Apostles.
It is good to have a filial loyalty to a good pastor, and our Popes --- in my lifetime --- have been good ones, but not perfect.
Our Savior is Jesus Christ our Lord. The Pope is servus servorum, not dominus dominorum.
Amy body that follows a man-inspried religion belongs to a cult, not to God! Christians are any people that follow God's Word and seek His face. You can post all your catechism-based drivel but it does not meet the test of FAITH in Christ. Yours is faith in men, singularly a man proclaimed to speak for God, but who is indeed just as fallible as any other man/woman.
Yours is the world's largest cult.
1. a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
the worship of idols; the worship of images that are not God
Not all the Popes have been good people. It is okay to disagree with them.
Pope Stephen VI (896897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.
Pope John XII (955964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
Pope Benedict IX (10321044, 1045, 10471048), who “sold” the Papacy
Pope Boniface VIII (12941303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy
Pope Urban VI (13781389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.
Pope Alexander VI (14921503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.
Pope Leo X (15131521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors’ reserves on a single ceremony
Pope Clement VII (15231534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
I hate it when that happens.
Catechism of the Catholic Church = Catholic doctrine.
Ah, the government school education is showing.
“...that follows a man-inspried religion belongs to a cult, not to God! Christians are any people that follow God’s Word and seek His face.”
That’s us. We follow His Word - we wrote it in fact under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit - and we seek His face.
“You can post all your catechism-based drivel but it does not meet the test of FAITH in Christ.”
I posted a verse from the Bible that showed St. Paul knew he was a role model. I guess you consider the Bible drivel.
“Yours is faith in men, singularly a man proclaimed to speak for God, but who is indeed just as fallible as any other man/woman.”
No, my faith is in Christ and He sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church. Your sect latter day, recent, and man-made. It was not founded by Christ.
“Yours is the world’s largest cult.”
No, but the apparent desperation in that silly accusation shows you have no chance of even appearing to know anything.
Also, we don’t worship Mary. She isn’t God. To be a false idol, we would have to worship her as God. We don’t worship her, and we know God is the Trinity.
You have failed. You will continue to do so.
And remember, St. Paul says he’s a role model. You denied scripture.
In other words, someone who like those liberal priests who sneered when the Catholic Catechism was published twenty years ago.
You can disagree with the pope on some matters. What you can’t do is ignore him on faith and morals.
Typical of somebody with nothing to say. You claim a superiority based on a typographical error. You also claim not to worship Mary. Both of those statements are based on faith in RC's catechism teachings.
You also revert to atypical claims of following Christ, yet you pray to Mary, do you not? Veneration is worship!
Paul's letter to the Corinthians continues:
1 Cor :16 Therefore I urge you to imitate me. 17 For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church....
Not quite the way you represent it! But, again, that is atypical...
The bad Popes strengthen my faith. They show that even if a pope’s personal life is reprehensible, the Lord still won’t allow him to formally teach an error in faith and morals. My faith is also strengthened by Pope Paul VI going against most of the world and probably a majority of Christendom with Humanae Vitae in 1968. Sadly, “a majority” of Christians is now most Christians.
“Typical of somebody with nothing to say. You claim a superiority based on a typographical error.”
No, I merely pointed out the obvious. Was I wrong in my conclusion about a government school?
“You also claim not to worship Mary.”
Actually, there too, I simply stated a fact. I made no claim. The fact is I do, have not, and will not, worship Mary.
“Both of those statements are based on faith in RC’s catechism teachings.”
No. The first comment is based on you. Again, was I wrong? Do tell. The second comment is based upon personal experience. The fact that the catechism backs up the second comment is actually irrelevant here.
“You also revert to atypical claims of following Christ,”
Revert? Atypical? Are you sure you know what “atypical” means? It wouldn’t make sense to use both words on the same subject. Revert means to go back to something. Atypical means something is not typical, not expected. How can someone “go back” to what is “not expected”?
“yet you pray to Mary, do you not? Veneration is worship!”
No, veneration is not worship. As any dictionary will tell you veneration is “to honor (as an icon or a relic) with a ritual act of devotion.”
“Paul’s letter to the Corinthians continues: 1 Cor :16 Therefore I urge you to imitate me.”
“Not quite the way you represent it!”
Actually it is EXACTLY the way I represented it. St. Paul was telling the Christians of Corinth to follow him as a role model.
“But, again, that is atypical...”
Again, I don’t think you know what the word “atypical” means. You just claimed I misrepresented a verse and that that is not typical for me. I agree it isn’t typical - in fact I have never misrepresented a verse - but it is hilarious that you undercut your own attempts are argument by using words you apparently don’t understand. Sciolism is a sad thing. Look it up if you don’t know what that is.
“LOL, check your catechism. You may question, but not disagree. And the Church decides WHAT you may question, and WHAT the answers to your questions are.
My catechism doesn’t say anything about permitting the ordaining of homos; nor does it say anything about respecting the teachings and values of Islam.
Whose catechism are you reading? Rembert Weakland’s? Or is it Bernadin’s “Seamless Garment” catechism?
Don’t address me. Address the USCCB which employed him.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.