A Traditionalist Defends Pope Francis

Catholic in Brooklyn ^ | October 6, 2013

[BlatherNaut]

“why these beautiful meditations are not included. I, for one, would be interested in understanding why it is not”

The theological significance of the number three (e.g. the 3 Persons of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Family, the Lord’s 33 years on earth, etc.) is also reflected in the 3 sets of mysteries. Thus the 4th set is optional.

[miserare]

Not true.

It is not binding doctrine unless it is Ex Cathedra.

When it comes to gays, my opinion is as good as his.

[cothrige]

I am sorry but you are mistaken in that. Not everything the popes teach is infallible, and yet it is still binding. Much that popes promulgate can be altered by future popes, meaning it obviously isn't infallible, but Catholics are still required to give religious submission to these teachings. Consider that since 1850 there have only been two infallible papal teachings promulgated, those regarding the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary, and yet we listen and obey to all the rest of what popes teach and say. Were you obedient to the teachings and proclamations of Benedict XVI or JPII? And yet they said nothing definitively Ex Cathedra, though I think one could make a good argument about JPII and women priests. Were we free to ignore all of their teachings? Was nothing they said binding on us, even when it affected canon law? No, I think you have to reconsider what you are saying. The teaching of popes is binding even when not Ex Cathedra. Of course, should the teaching be contrary to the faith then I think the situation changes, though perhaps some would disagree with me. I choose to go with St. Basil who said "It is right to submit to a higher authority whenever a command of God would not be violated."