Posted on 01/27/2017 9:56:52 PM PST by ebb tide
Every day I pray for Pope Francis. And every day (I am exaggerating, but only slightly), the Pope issues another reminder that he does not approve of Catholics like me.
If the Holy Father were rebuking me for my sins, I would have no reason to complain. But day after weary day the Pope upbraids me—and countless thousands of other faithful Catholics—for clinging to, and sometimes suffering for, the truths that the Church has always taught. We are rigid, he tells us. We are the “doctors of the law,” the Pharisees, who only want to be “comfortable” with our faith.
The Roman Pontiff should be a focus of unity in the Church. Pope Francis, regrettably, has become a source of division. There are two reasons for this unhappy phenomenon: the Pope’s autocratic style of governance and the radical nature of the program that he is relentlessly advancing.
The autocratic style (which contrasts sharply with promises of collegial and synodal governance) has never been quite so evident as this week, when he has tossed aside the independent and sovereign status of the Knights of Malta. Writing of that remarkable coup in the Wall Street Journal, Sohrab Ahmari observed that it “has divided the church along familiar lines.” Ahmari (a recent convert to Catholicism) continued:
As with other recent disputes—communion for the divorced-and-remarried; the status of the Latin Mass; Vatican engagement with China’s Communist regime—conservatives are on one side and Pope Francis is on the other. But a Pope should not be on “one side” of disagreements within the Church. Certainly the Roman Pontiff must make decisions and set policies. But unlike a political leader, he is not expected to bring his own particular agenda to his office, to promote his own allies and punish his opponents. Whereas we expect President Trump to reverse policies of President Obama—just as Obama reversed policies of President Bush—we expect a Pope to preserve the decisions of his predecessors. Because Church is not, or should not be, divided into rival parties.
Every Pope makes controversial decisions, and every controversial decision leaves some people unhappy. But a prudent Pontiff avoids even the appearance of acting arbitrarily. Mindful of the fact that he serves as head of a college of bishops—not as a lone monarch—he does his best to propose rather than impose solutions to pastoral problems.
Although he exercises enormous authority within the Church, a Pope also acts under considerable restraints. He is empowered to speak for the universal Church, but in a sense he forfeits the ability to speak for himself. The Pope cannot be partisan. He is expected to settle arguments, not to start them. At the Council of Jerusalem, St. Peter set the standard for his successors: hearing out the arguments on both sides and then rendering a judgment (in this case, ruling against the stand that he himself had previously held).
By its very nature the Pope’s role is conservative, in the best sense of that word. He is charged with preserving the purity and clarity of our faith: a faith that does not change. Since our fundamental beliefs were set forth by Jesus Christ, no prelate can question them without subverting the authority of the Church that our Lord founded—the same Church that gives him his only claim to authority. While he is the supreme teacher of the Catholic faith, the Pope can only teach what the Church has always taught: the deposit of faith that has been passed down to him from the apostles. He can speak infallibly, but only when he proclaims and defines what faithful Catholics have “always and everywhere” believed.
In short the Pope cannot teach something new. He can certainly express old truths in new ways, but if he introduces actual novelties, he is abusing his authority. And if his “new” teachings conflict with the established doctrines of the Church, he is undermining his own authority.
Many faithful Catholics believe that with Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis has encouraged beliefs and practices that are incompatible with the prior teachings of the Church. If that complaint is accurate, he has violated the sacred trust that is given to Peter’s successors. If it is not accurate, at a minimum the Holy Father owes us explanations, not insults.
I could see the Catholics having a field day with that.
And going on and on about the folly of following a mere man.
I think that would fall under the definition of cognitive dissonance...
You’d think.....
Good article, thanks for posting.
Long gone are the days when we sighed and said “Oh, that is his Latin American personality, he speaks too fast before he thinks”. We have seen a consistent, well-planned and autocratic pull to the left.
Psst, you CAN know the Truth and it doesn’t take a pope or council of bishops or some ex cathedra pronouncement to find it or know it.
And it’s simple and will set you free from the convoluted morass of rules and regulations and sacraments and legality that any church would impose on you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Truth
I’m not sure I get your point. St. Paul was a lesbian?
Can't have that!
Let's instead; follow what a large group of them have assembled together:
the Roman Catholic church!
I guess I should have included this: The Pope is sounding like a Protestant.
You didn’t agree with me. You keep claiming Catholics wrote the Bible and I called you on it.
Pope Francis has become indistinguishable from Barack Obama.
And how do you know that what the pope and ecumenical councils in union with him ever formally define is infallible? Because it has been defined by such a council, thus categorizing their assertion of ensured infallibility as being assuredly infallible.
Next question: Is this ensured magisterial infallibility essential for knowing what is God?
And what is the basis for this? Does being the historical magisterial discerners and stewards of Divine revelation, and inheritor of promises of God's presence and preservation mean that such must be infallible?
Reread my post 47.
It says plainly, and I quote myself, and copy and paste it.......
“You know, the book that Catholics claim their church wrote.”
Reading comprehension lessons might be a help for you.
When you show me more than one Catholic poster who has actually said that, I’ll apologize.
To: ebb tide
Reread my post 47.
It says plainly, and I quote myself, and copy and paste it.......
“You know, the book that Catholics claim their church wrote.”
Reading comprehension lessons might be a help for you.
92 posted on 1/29/2017, 9:46:02 PM by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
I think this may be what you're looking for.
To: metmom WVK said he reads the Bible THROUGH four times a year, not reads it four times a year. I begin to see why Catholics have a hard time understanding Scripture.
what's the difference...every book I read I read through.Cover to cover, that's through....don't hunt and peck, read through....and I don't do it four times a year.
Catholics have no problem at all understanding scripture....they wrote it.
667 posted on 10/3/2013, 8:19:11 PM by terycarl [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
That’s only one.
Fundamentalists (five major points of conflict with Catholicism)
Fundamentalists and Catholics agree that this point of contact is Christ. We also agree that the Bible is a divinely inspired, infallible and authoritative means for us to know Christ. But we disagree about other means, especially the Church and its relation to the Bible. Fundamentalists take Scripture out of the context of the historical Church that wrote it, canonized it, preserved it and now teaches and interprets it. To Catholics, that’s like taking a baby out of the context of its mother.
1 posted on 1/3/2010, 4:53:57 PM by NYer [ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse]
Ok.
Now I’ll apologize for those few ignorant Catholics who think the Catholic Church, and not the Holy Ghost, authored the Bible.
How could Catholics have written the Old Testament?
I think you owe metmom an apology. What she posted was correct and you suggested she was wrong.
From the Catholic Encyclopedia:
The Bible, as the inspired recorded of revelation, contains the word of God; that is, it contains those revealed truths which the Holy Ghost wishes to be transmitted in writing.
This pope is a small part of your problem.
Revelation 2:18-29
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.