He just did again go against the teachings of the church when he stated with his signature that "pluralism and diversity of religion is God's will"! I will continue to pray for him that he repent and find Gods mercy, but the more he speaks the more we see a man who plays both sides of the field, while the church is suffocating.
Indeed, Why not quote him on contraception? You do realize this pope has said contraception can be used in special circumstance to avoid pregnancy, right? https://www.catholicnews.com/servic...ntraceptives-may-be-lesser-evil-pope-says.cfm A "watchman" who turns a blind eye is no watchman. Who says that speaking out against what is wrong is "spanking" the pope. Absolutely absurd.
You've begun to contradict yourself. You are quite angry that Pope Francis is not clear on Church teaching and aren't afraid to be blunt. Fine. But when I say that Catholics who are leaving the Church cannot do that, but should remain within the Body of Christ and pray for and work for the correction of bad teaching, suddenly you want that to be watered down. You justify and relativize it. You're doing the very thing you condemn the Pope for. As Pope Pius XII said, They, therefore, walk in the path of dangerous error who believe that they can accept Christ as the Head of the Church, while not adhering loyally to His Vicar on earth. —POPE PIUS XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (On the Mystical Body of Christ), June 29, 1943; n. 41; vatican.va This isn't me scoffing at Traditionalists. I am one. Every faithful Catholic is. Is it not charity to repeat such truths, Brian? “…We declare, state and define that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff.” —POPE BONIFACE VII, Unun Sanctum, 1302 Is it sinful and damaging for me to strive to help other Catholics remain in communion with the Pope, while still preaching 2000 years of Tradition, which is what I'm doing? As Jesus said to St. Catherine of Siena: “…no one can excuse himself, saying: ‘ I do not rebel against the holy Church, but only against the sins of evil pastors.’ Such a man, lifting his mind against his leader and blinded by self-love, does not see the truth, though indeed he really sees it well enough, but pretends not to, in order to deaden the sting of conscience. For he sees that, in truth, he is persecuting the Blood, and not Its servants. The insult is done to Me, just as the reverence was My due.” To whom did He leave the keys of this Blood? To the glorious Apostle Peter, and to all his successors who are or shall be till the Day of Judgment, all of them having the same authority which Peter had, which is not diminished by any defect of their own. —St. Catherine of Siena, from the Book of Dialogues Last, there is not a single prophecy from Our Lady that says that the Pope will deceive the Church. Not a single one. On the contrary, there are many prophecies, like Fatima, that speak of his martyrdom; or in Fr. Gobbi's revelation, of remaining in communion. However, I would argue that Pontificate of Francis and the fact he often does things contradictory to what he teaches IS part of the trials that the Church must undergo. In fact, it may get much, much worse. There is no guarantee that we won't have a pope who, like Peter of old, makes pastoral mistakes that scandalize. That is arguably already the case. Or the sexual abuse scandals may very well implicate him and other high ranking officials, as it's already begun to do (McCarrick).
Mark, At times, I fret and then I remind myself to trust in Our Lord. I also believe that because we care about our Church, some of us worry at times. With that said, what you have stated about the times we are living in and the extremely quick dissemination of information is also the reason why it is so important for Pope Francis to clarify the Church's teaching whenever possible especially when his words are so quickly disseminated and are often the cause for confusion. Mark, I believe that MOG members are probably some of the most fervent prayerful group that you could ever meet but we are also concerned about the Church and many of the things that we see occurring in the world. I wonder what Cardinal Sarah would say today. I'm sure that he would tell us to pray for the pope and he would stand by the statement that you have highlighted above from May 16th, 2016 but I think that he has already voiced his concerns also if not directly towards the pope, indirectly. Here is an article from September 29 ,2017 in which the writer points out many concerns that Cardinal Sarah has for the Church and for the world which may also include some of the statements and actions of Pope Francis. I don't agree with absolutely everything that the writer has stated but I do believe that the article makes several important points. Cardinal Sarah castigates Francis regime in ‘The Power of Silence’ https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/...mplied-rebukes-of-francis-papacy-in-the-power I also remember when the following occurred in regard to Pope Francis and Cardinal Sarah, https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-publicly-corrects-cardinal-sarah-over-new-liturgy-rules .
Not at all! I believe that also. It’s killing me watching friends leave the Church BECAUSE OF THE WORDS AND ACTIONS OF THEIR OWN POPE! It does them no good to say “they’re just poorly catechized” and they obviously “have weak faith” when it’s their own pope who is driving them away. Your pollyannish approach to keeping them in the barque of Peter by telling them to deny or ignore that which is blatantly obvious will NOT keep them in the barque of Peter! Only admitting to the singular gravity of this period, and possibilities that will preserve the promises of Christ in regard to Peter, will keep thinking orthodox Catholics sane and their faith intact.
'The notion that, unless one spanks the pope on a forum or their social media, they are somehow a compromised Catholic, is nonsense' With respect Mark , this is a straw man argument. You are misrepresenting an argument in order to overcome it. Who has said that, 'everyone' , must 'spank the Pope on social media or become a 'compromised Catholic'? This is so profound a distortion as to be an actual invention. I am saddened that you are reduced to inventing something like this to the point of caricature. I have a huge respect for you and am surprised at this kind of dishonest approach. As t what Our Lady says I can only echo what Cardinal Burke has said recently in regards to Our Lady of Akita. That Bishop, would oppose Bishop, Cardinal would oppose Cardinal. This is actually happening as I write. Why is this Mark? Why is this happening under the reign specifically of Pope Francis? What is going wrong here? As to Our Lady telling us to put up and shut up. Again this is a distortion. If she was that kind of Lady she would have told her Son to put up and shut up in his critique of the then religious authorities the Pharisees and Sadducees and He would never have died on the Cross for speaking out. I have no idea where you get the idea that put up and shut up is part of the authentic Catholic spiritual tradition . It is not.
His statement on the plane is not ex cathedra. It is a theological argument. Other popes have done the very same thing on different topics, such as Benedict XVI, John XXII, Honorius, etc. It's an interesting argument, but it in no way condones birth control as a means of preventing birth. It may prove to be a statement that can't hold true. But that doesn't invalidate everything else he has said that is true. Please don't twist my words. What I said is that there is a tendency here, and elsewhere, to castigate those who don't share your views that the Pope is doing as much harm as you say. Yes, I'd say he's done harm, and have said so in several blogs, including my most recent. But I also know priests who have told me that Francis has led people back to confession after decades. I know of very orthodox theologians and professors who have been deeply moved by some of Francis' words. I know priests who have become less worldly and bolder in proclaiming the Gospel because of Francis. And I myself have found many gems in his homilies and exhortations that have helped me to help others become more faithful Catholics. Christ still speaks through Francis, despite his flaws. To cease to listen for the voice of Jesus in our weak shepherds is a mistake. My point is this: don't attack those of us who don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Remaining in communion with the Pope also means trying to understand him, defending him when justice demands it, and correcting him when truth insists upon it.
I think we are at a point where unless more faithful hierarchy continue to speak up and make clarification where needed, we poor lay people will continue to fight with what we know against what is being said and done by our pope that is off the wall and all the while refusing to clarify anything controversial he has said, which leaves both laity and clerics gasping for some oxygen of truth. It's as you said earlier Mark, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth and has from the beginning if his papacy.
I have never told anyone at anytime to deny or ignore something that sounds contradictory, but to find out if that's what the Pope meant. That's the teaching of the Catechism, Brian. To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way: “Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.” —CCC, n. 2478 (St. Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, 22.)
Well, here is my response to Amoris Laetitia that totally reaffirms Veritatis Splendor and, in fact, those bishops who interpreted Amoris Laetitia according to Tradition: https://www.markmallett.com/blog/2018/01/16/the-anti-mercy/ This is what we can do as laity. The fact that our bishops are often too silent, doesn't help. The fact that Francis won't answer the dubia, doesn't help. The fact that there are entire bishop's colleges promoting heretical interpretations, doesn't help. The fact that Fr. James Martin gets a free pass, doesn't help. But Jesus Christ, the builder of the Church, is permitting it all. It is for the purification of the Church. In order to free men from bondage to these heresies, those whom the merciful love of my Most Holy Son has designated to effect the restoration will need great strength of will, constancy, valor and confidence in God. To test this faith and confidence of the just, there will be occasions when all will seem to be lost and paralyzed. This, then, will be the happy beginning of the complete restoration. —Our Lady of Good Success to Venerable Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres, on the Feast of the Purification, 1634; cf. catholictradition. org
And neither are the quotes that you provided ex cathedra - and so what, what difference does that make? No one is challenging papal infallibility here. And yes, his argument was very much that birth control could be used as a means of preventing birth, please don't insult anyone's intelligence. His statement is flat out wrong and a very grave danger to any who adhere to it. How am I twisting your words? Frankly, I think you are doing an adequate job of doing that yourself. No one is asking you to throw the baby out with the bathwater. No one is arguing to leave the church. What people want is the ability to call a spade a spade. That's truth. That's charity.
Um, sorry Padraig, but I deal with hundreds of letters and comments every month. There are some Catholics who accuse me of compromising the faith because I think that we should live the teaching of the Catechism (that I just quoted above), that is, give the Pope "the benefit of the doubt." I have spoken personally to others, including a major American apologist, who likewise has been shunned for providing an orthodox interpretation of the Pope's words. It's these kinds of extremes we need to avoid. The Pope is not our enemy. He is our brother. He is our father. We ought to help him in any way we can, because that will help Christ.
I find it puzzling that Pope Francis often contradicts his own words. For example, you site his quotes on abortion, but he has also publicly sung the praises of a radical non-repentant abortionist: "Despite her abortion advocacy, Emma Bonino was praised by Pope Francis in 2016 as a “forgotten great” because of her work with refugees. Between her abortion activism and being an abortionist herself, Bonino is directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of roughly six million Italian babies between 1968 and today." (Lifesite News, 7/28/2017) For years I gave Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt, thinking that perhaps he's taking the prodigal son approach by reaching out to everyone but orthodox Catholics. But I think the weight of evidence suggests otherwise. There are many credible authorities questioning him, like Archbishop Vigano and the dubia cardinals. I am not claiming the pope is evil; I do not have the information or authority to do so. Just as the Jews did when Jesus came, we Catholics need to make prudential judgements regarding events within the Church. If we don't, we could be lost as many of them were. The great battle is here that you, Mark, and others have anticipated. An anti-church exists within the true Church and its aim is destruction.
This is true Mark. No one here is challenging Papal Infallibility. No one is talking about leaving the Church. This is another straw man argument. You are putting words in other people's mouths in order to defeat them. This is unworthy of you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man." The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.[2][3]./ Straw man tactics in the United Kingdom can be known as an Aunt Sally, after a pub game of the same name, where patrons threw sticks or battens at a post to knock off a skittle balanced on top.[4][5]
Actually, you're right. It's been a while since I read the article. It refers to the suppression of pregnancy so as to avoid passing disease to a child in such an "emergency." Again, it is a theological argument that may be wrong—and if he's wrong, then he needs to be corrected. But Francis has also reaffirmed the Church's teaching elsewhere. Don't just point to one thing he's said as if this is his only position. That is dishonest. Actually, Brian is defending people who've left the Church.
Pretty confusing, isn't it. As one professor said to me, "Pope Francis seems to lack a certain ‘holy fear’ of scandal.”
Oh yes, he can wax eloquence when talking about the evils of abortion....but what does it mean when he praises abortionists as greats? This is the pope who said he was gonna create messes in the church? Remember? He is just doing what he promised. He came in with an agenda and is simply implementing it. Capisch?
I didn't say they were challenging papal infallibility. The point is that not every word uttered from such a colloquial pope means his pontificate, or other orthodox teachings, should not be heeded, thrown out with the bathwater. And sorry, reading the comments here, there is a definite sense that people are no longer listening to Christ speaking through his Vicar. I get it. He's confusing. But don't criticize or condescend to those of us who do. It's unworthy of them as well, Padraig. I hear plenty of others putting words in my mouth too, which is a sign that this conversation is no longer serving to build anyone up....
I'm not pointing out only the wrong (actually it was you who only presented one side). The fact that you can't get to the second topic of which you said we should quote the pope is extremely problematic. And I am not hating the pope for saying so. One more thing, it is not a "theological argument that may be wrong," It is FLAT OUT WRONG to use birth control as he suggested (he was talking about couples in Zika threatened areas). Let's call that spade a spade. And then - when all know what is going on - show them a path through this storm. Help those at risk of being swept away, don't ignore the current.
Actually Mark I have a feeling you are not arguing with us, you are actually arguing with yourself. That you are deeply unhappy with the position on this matter you have taken yourself. Tell me I am wrong?
