Posted on 02/10/2019 9:45:16 AM PST by ebb tide
I would say: it's apparently a really stupid act of diplomacy. Papal diplomacy is is no way (properly) a theological treatise nor a source of doctrine. Papal diplomacy --- and this has been the case for millennia --- falls, shall we say, notoriously outside of the special protection of the Holy Spirit.
Plus, it's, as stated, stone-cold heresy not only to Catholics but even to the Muslims, which is what makes it a *stupid* act of diplomacy.
But others will say, no, it was an official theological proposal by the Holy See. Therefore we have to at least respect it. And blah-blah-blah.
Still others say "It doesn't really mean what it seems to mean. There is such a thing as God's permissive will (He permits sin) and God's positive sovereign will (He always wills truth and good, cannot will lies and evil.)"
However a person may close one eye, tilt his head sideways and quint with the other eye, this will not do.
Grammatically, he was putting "pluralism and diversity of religions" on the same plane as "nationalities,races, sexes" and so forth. God may indeed will diversity of sexes (precisely two, male and female, neither more nor less) and diversity of races (whatever that means: my husband says he is already at least four races: Anglo-Saxon-Scotch-Irish)...
... but that in no way compares with different freakin' RELIGIONS, some of which explicitly, and centrally, uphold Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, and others which explicitly and in so many words, deny Him.
We're in a melluva hess. I am somewhat of a fancier of Catholic history --- once the shock passes, it tends to sober one -- but this is actually worse than anything that has ever beset us, because the apostasy is at the top. What do you do when the apostasy is at the top? When the main global opponent of Catholicism is the top Catholic? When the most effective and implacable opponent of the Papal Magisterium, is the pope?
We shall see, won't we? It could be The End, after all --- I don't say that loosely, I'm no Joachim of Fiore--- but that would be terrifying and wonderful.
God is still God; He has not been taken by surprise by this appalling development; He's certainly seen this kind of thing before. We shall see how He rescues His Bride THIS time.
Lord have mercy (40X)
I see, though at least once you did say that he was not. But its not really about just you but about those who deny that "Bergoglio" is the pope, which I thought you do. Does not that essentially make one a Sedevacantist?
I have claimed he's a heretic, just as the Catholic priest, Martin Luther, was one; both heretics.
So you and your class also subscribe to the "once a Catholic, always a Catholic" fantasy even for those whom Rome considers to be apostate?
Apparently the Catholics on this board have decided that they and they alone are the arbiters of who is and is not a heretic with no reference to their church body.
While screaming bloody murder about Your Own Personal Interpretation Of Scripture and condemning us for it.
Hypocrisy; isn’t it such a wonderful thing?
Yep; if any one of us had posted even 1% of the Pope-bashing pieces that I see on FR every day by ‘faithful Catholics,’ we’d have been banned years and years ago.
In fact, many WERE banned for decrying Francis.
I wonder what would happen if these threads started getting reported for Catholic bashing.
I am into YOPIOS, like assurance of salvation. 👍 Everyone should try it. They will like it. If they don’t want to do that, I fail to see where that is my problem. 😁😆😂🤣🇵🇭
The fun thing about YOPIOS is that it means that we’re allowed to believe that the Apostles actually meant what they wrote, and not that they wrote in some super-double-plus-secret code that REALLY means the complete opposite of what the Apostles actually wrote, and we need to have the Pope interpret Scripture for us.
Actually, since many other Catholic posters have proclaimed that the Pope is not Catholic then it seems threads about this pope can lose the Catholic Caucus label because they are about a non-Catholic. Meaning what the bishops can not do (without the pope's consent), RC FReepers have, if only in their little group here.
You make a good point. But we already know why threads get that label - they don’t like hearing from REAL non-Catholic Christians. ;o)
Hard to see how considering we’ seen that very thing happen.
Yeah, whatever happened to * Once a Catholic always a Catholic *?
I guess it depends on if they need the numbers for bragging rights.
Staggering......
Oooops....
I believe where we started is that I fall under #2 of your points-that it was an official theological proposal. I’m not sure what it would mean for the Pope or the Church to offer a “diplomatic” solution to Muslims. Is it just a sham-a lie-to appease someone? Hardly Christian. Nor do I believe God has two different types of will. He tolerates our sinful and rebellious behavior to act out His divine will. But apparently Catholics don’t even know what it means any longer when a Pope signs something on behalf of Catholics. That is the real shame here.
As a Protestant, I would say apostasy started a long time ago at the top in the Catholic Church. But for years I have been discussing on this board the dangers of the Catholic structure and what happens when peoople place their faith into a few people at the top to make their doctrine. While our salvation is based on Christ alone, God hold each of us personally responsible for correctly understanding and passing on His Holy Word. We are not to take lightly the scriptures but to make sure we are faithful in its presentation.
Origen
"If someone from this people wants to be saved, let him come into this house so that he may be able to attain his salvation. . . . Let no one, then, be persuaded otherwise, nor let anyone deceive himself: Outside of this house, that is, outside of the Church, no one is saved; for, if anyone should go out of it, he is guilty of his own death" (Homilies on Joshua 3:5 [A.D. 250]).
Cyprian of Carthage
Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress [a schismatic church] is separated from the promises of the Church, nor will he that forsakes the Church of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is an alien, a worldling, and an enemy. He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his mother" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 6, 1st ed. [A.D. 251]).
"Let them not think that the way of life or salvation exists for them, if they have refused to obey the bishops and priests, since the Lord says in the book of Deuteronomy: ‘And any man who has the insolence to refuse to listen to the priest or judge, whoever he may be in those days, that man shall die’ [Deut. 17:12]. And then, indeed, they were killed with the sword . . . but now the proud and insolent are killed with the sword of the Spirit, when they are cast out from the Church. For they cannot live outside, since there is only one house of God, and there can be no salvation for anyone except in the Church" (Letters 61[4]:4 [A.D. 253]).
Lactantius
"It is, therefore, the Catholic Church alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth; this, the domicile of faith; this, the temple of God. Whoever does not enter there or whoever does not go out from there, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. . . . Because, however, all the various groups of heretics are confident that they are the Christians and think that theirs is the Catholic Church, let it be known that this is the true Church, in which there is confession and penance and which takes a health-promoting care of the sins and wounds to which the weak flesh is subject" (Divine Institutes 4:30:11–13 [A.D. 307]).
Jerome
"Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church" (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386]).
Then he could be a FReeper!
Could he still be a CHRISTIAN though?
REALLY???
Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.[1]
Pope John XII (955–964), 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 (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy
Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy
Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.[2]
Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[3]
Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors' reserves on a single ceremony[4]
Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
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.