Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Interview With Pope Francis In America Magazine


Basilisa Marie

Recommended Posts

Fidei Defensor

What I'm getting at is that the Church in the past has abused this "better understanding" nonsense to give themselves authority that they really didn't have. Jesus didn't speak in such complicated terms that one needs a special interpreter. If you want to follow Jesus, he will grant you the grace to do so.  I'm not saying that the Church itself isn't necessary, but claiming special understanding isn't. That's dangerously close to gnosticism.

Edited by tardis ad astra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah.  And he railed against the powerful.  The modern church schmoozes with the powerful all the time and then says something homophobic to feel edgy.  

No argument there. I think the Church should be much more forceful with the powerful, e.g., with Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi. Heck even men like former President Bush and current President Obama. It might be nice to have a person like St. Ambrose, who threatened the emperor with excommunication when he had 7,000 people killed in a town in Greece. I believe the emperor had to do penance before being readmitted to communion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No argument there. I think the Church should be much more forceful with the powerful, e.g., with Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi. Heck even men like former President Bush and current President Obama. It might be nice to have a person like St. Ambrose, who threatened the emperor with excommunication when he had 7,000 people killed in a town in Greece. I believe the emperor had to do penance before being readmitted to communion.

 

 

lol @ a Vice-President being powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus also had a tendency to turn over tables and call people "whited sepulchres." Let's not turn Him into the effeminate Christ of the mainline Churches.

 

Different approaches for different situations. Wouldn't Jesus have ostracized the adulterous woman at the well if he called her a whited sepulcher or flipped her bucket over?  And  wouldn't Jesus be giving a blind eye to the Pharisees if he didn't call them out in public? Different approaches for different situations.

 

For quite a while in my youth I thought that Jesus was as they depicted him, as a soft hippie. Later I discovered that he was actually God, and the manliest of men. What could be more manly than the truth, and the truth spoken in love? Let's not disparage love by calling it effeminate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a jerk.

I am not being a jerk when I point out something that is common knowledge. It is not my fault that you said something that was plainly contradicted by certain texts of scripture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not being a jerk when I point out something that is common knowledge. It is not my fault that you said something that was plainly contradicted by certain texts of scripture.

 

 

You missed the joke.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fidei Defensor

I am not being a jerk when I point out something that is common knowledge. It is not my fault that you said something that was plainly contradicted by certain texts of scripture.

Not you — Jesus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Different approaches for different situations. Wouldn't Jesus have ostracized the adulterous woman at the well if he called her a whited sepulcher or flipped her bucket over?  And  wouldn't Jesus be giving a blind eye to the Pharisees if he didn't call them out in public? Different approaches for different situations.

 

For quite a while in my youth I thought that Jesus was as they depicted him, as a soft hippie. Later I discovered that he was actually God, and the manliest of men. What could be more manly than the truth, and the truth spoken in love? Let's not disparage love by calling it effeminate.

I have no problem with different approaches being used, but I do doubt the wisdom of de-emphasizing the Church's constant moral teaching at a time when the greatest attack on the faith is focused primarily in that very area. It looks like a form of capitulation. No good will come of it, and it could actually result in a loss of faith by those who have fought the hardest for the Church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah.  And he railed against the powerful.  The modern church schmoozes with the powerful all the time and then says something homophobic to feel edgy.  

 

Pope Benedict is a great example of this.  He was supposedly morally courageous because he announced that he thought sodomy was gross.  He lashed out against a still largely stigmatized and persecuted segment of society and that was supposedly 'courageous.'  But when he met with Bush he didn't offer any public 'fraternal correction.'  He didn't call him out for instituting a system of international torture networks, for rushing into a war that killed tens of thousands of civilians and displaced and immiserated millions, for enacting economic policies that helped the rich soak up the wealth of a society.  No.  He let that little gnome hug him and use him as a prop to signify his role as a culture warrior for the religious right.  

 

That's why people find the Church repulsive.  

 

 I'm glad you love Pope Francis… I love him too. However, I'm sad that you have grossly mischaracterized Pope Benedict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with different approaches being used, but I do doubt the wisdom of de-emphasizing the Church's constant moral teaching at a time when the greatest attack on the faith is focused primarily in that very area. It looks like a form of capitulation. No good will come of it, and it could actually result in a loss of faith by those who have fought the hardest for the Church.

 

He's not de-emphasizing moral teaching.  That's something you miss because you have a sodomy-centric world view.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not you — Jesus.

Oh, that's even worse, you should never call Christ a jerk.

 

It's okay to call me names, because there is no eternal consequence to insulting me, and I don't really care what people think of me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fidei Defensor

Oh, that's even worse, you should never call Christ a jerk.

 

It's okay to call me names, because there is no eternal consequence to insulting me, and I don't really care what people think of me.

I think he can take it, he's been called worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fidei Defensor

He's not de-emphasizing moral teaching.  That's something you miss because you have a sodomy-centric world view.  

Resisting the urge to say "me too."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...