quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Everyone has to pick a side, and this POS has made is very evident which side he stands on. If he wants to drag the catholic church into the camp of the enemy, so be it. I do not see that ending well but whatever.

The next president should as one of his first efforts remove the tax exemption of the Catholic church nationwide. Ya wanna play in the political world, so be it, but you're going to pay taxes on every penny you collect from parishioners and/or from investments of the church.

I assume you would include all churches with any political activity or statements. Which is most of them.

Yep, no exceptions. 'All' churches need to sign an agreement that they will stay completely out of politics to be granted their tax exemption. Anyone with a controlling interest in the church (the pope in this example) who opts to exhibit arrogance by breaking that agreement costs the church their exemption. Simple.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Comparing Floyd to the Samaritan requires that Floyd was acting intentionally to benefit another, and if the parallel is to be close, to benefit another who we would not ordinarily expect the benefactor to help.

Of course, Floyd did none of what happened to make him notable intentionally and certainly didn't do any of it to benefit anyone else. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time and what happened to him was the result only of his bad choices and bad luck. I hesitate to call him a victim, but it certainly wasn't intent to help anyone that motivated him.

I can't believe we're even chatting about this. The Pope's comparison is absurd and asinine, and doesn't tie to any form of rational thought. The man is a clown, a socialist POS clown, but a clown none the less. I have always been delicate with my views of the pope and the catholic church in the past just because I might have disagreed with a statement or position the pope took. But no pope in my lifetime has been less 'pope-like' than this clown. He is nothing more than a liberal/progressive politician with his actions being every bit as damaging to society.

Between the German Pope changing all the prayers...and the Socialists Pope...

I recall why I haven't been to Church in a bit.

I have posted this several times before, but the Conclave that chooses the next Pope will look almost nothing like the one that installed good ol' Father Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Not all Cardinals are "Cardinal-Electors"... just the ones who haven't yet turned 80 when the office vacates.

So the ones who elected John Paul II had all aged out by the time Benedict stepped down. Many of those who replaced them in voting came up in the 60s and more than a few had "liberation theology" and leftist leanings from back in the day. Know how current-day American higher education is completely saturated and controlled by worthless hippies from the 1960s? Because of age restrictions for Cardinal-Electors, THAT generation of the Church had a lock on the last Conclave.

(Funny thing: Jorge Mario Bergoglio was decidedly ANTI-leftist when it benefited him during the Latin American "dirty wars" of the 1970s and 1980s. Compassionate Francis was absolutely, totally in bed with dictators, torturers, architects of disappearances and massacres, and military juntas when doing so helped preserve the privileges and prerogatives of the Church when he was Bishop of Buenos Aires. But like George Soros being a collector for the actual Nazi Party, this doesn't seem to get a lot of press these days. It's almost as if the press weren't... objective?)

So who will elect the next Pope? Answer: Predominantly Cardinals who came into the priesthood during JPII's papacy, who were heavily influenced by his philosophy and doctrinal leanings, and who are currently VERY unhappy with SocialistPope's performance as Christ's Vicar on Earth. Kindly reflect that virtually every "counter-revolution" is bloodier and more long-lasting than the actual revolution, and consider what this will mean for the Church's direction under the next Pope.

Were anyone to look for it, they would find quite a bit of published dissent from Cardinals and Bishops. Actual criticism of Francis is oblique-- because you still don't pee directly onto the shoes of the office-holder-- but still clear, and comes from individuals in fairly influential quarters (think Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, etc.)

quote:

Were anyone to look for it, they would find quite a bit of published dissent from Cardinals and Bishops. Actual criticism of Francis is oblique-- because you still don't pee directly onto the shoes of the office-holder-- but still clear, and comes from individuals in fairly influential quarters

Yes, it's out there... and I'm thankful for it. It's mostly below the surface but it's brewing. More and more Catholics DO NOT like this pope.

Sadly, it does not matter that Catholics on the whole do not approve of this pope, any more than conservatives and now moderates from both parties do not approve of Biden. This is a leftist socialist/communist attack on the entire globe. The powers behind this attack will not willingly go away. They will have to be driven out. While everyone is being successfully divided, this will be difficult to have occur.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
You need to dial that back a bit.

Okay / roger.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 46and2,

As a roaming Catholic, I had to go find my Bible and reread about the Good Samaritan.

I could not find where the Good Samaritan did robberies, held pregnant women at gun point, threatening them, nor any use of Fentanyl. Or any other illegal narcotic.

Then again, I'm not infallible. It sure is getting difficult to turn the other cheek these days. Regards 18DAI

Mmm...helping a guy on the side of the road and burning and looting over the death of a low life, thug drug addict. Makes perfect sense really, they're practically the same thing.

Has Pope Francis invited Detroit gangbangers to tag the Vatican walls and ceilings with their visual social poetry?

Exodus 20:4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

I've always said the church will play the harlot to the beast.

Isn't that verse about not making false idols to worship?

I don't see how putting a face on a coin counts, unless you're making a sneaky reference to people worshipping money.

Taken literally and without context, the translation you posted is a blanket ban on all photography and representational art of any kind.

quote:

Originally posted by maladat:
Isn't that verse about not making false idols to worship?

Well, the render unto Caesar fits a bit better, but you need to apply the coveting and worship of mammon first.

I just got right to the point as I figured most already knew what led to putting the graven image of your supposed infallible religious leader on currency. Turns him into an idol over an icon.

Not trying to be disrespectful, just pointing out a glaring hypocrisy.

When any pope speaks 'ex cathedra', that is when he is considered to be speaking infallibly. Any other comment by a pope, as in Francis' saying George Floyd was acting as a good Samaritan is just a personal opinion and nothing more. Francis is just a mouthy liberal as are all liberals. As an aside, Jesuits were historically banned from the papacy until Pius VII restored them in 1814. Today Francis is a true follower of Ignatius Loyola as shown by his meddling in the courts and governments. In reading his biography it is easy to see how he has played the game. My opinion; he is not a very 'holy' person.

clipper1, appreciate your post, the doctrine of “infallibility” is obviously misunderstood.

quote:

The dogma was proclaimed, following bitter disputes, by the first Vatican council in 1870. The doctrine of papal infallibility means that the Pope cannot err or teach error when he speaks on matters of faith and morals ex cathedra, or “from the chair” of the Apostle St. Peter—that is, in his role as supreme teacher of the church.

In the 103 years (now 151) since Vatican I, this authority has been used only once, in 1950, when Pope Pius XII solemnly defined The new dogma of the Virgin Mary's bodily assumption to Heaven.

Vatican I and infallibility

This message has been edited. Last edited by: TMats,

TMats, if you ever attended a catholic school you knew never to offend a nun with a wrong answer to a catechism test. So some things stay with you for forever, lol

quote:

Originally posted by clipper1:
TMats, if you ever attended a catholic school you knew never to offend a nun with a wrong answer to a catechism test. So some things stay with you for forever, lol

Yes, I did. I was taught by Servites (Servants of Mary).

1950 remains the last dogmatic papal declaration ex cathedra, it was by Pope Pius XII and concerned the assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into heaven.

IIRC, if you roll a 20 two times in a row, it makes you infallible for one round of play. That or three sevens, maybe. The rules can be confusing.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Thank you, reloader-1.
These threads start out as legitimate criticism of the current pope. I'm critical of the pope. I've actually started a thread or two critical of the pope.
But they always seem to devolve into general Catholic bashing.

And, the usual suspects have arrived with their "whore of Babylon" diatribes and/or atheistic BS.

quote:

It's annoying but my faith isn't threatened by this pope or anyone else.

Nor is mine, but it would be nice if certain people would simply educate themselves before posting. The ignorance/brainwashing is astounding and at times it is somewhat troubling in that the Church founded by Jesus Himself is fair game, yet Judaism and sects/cults begun by nutjobs who woke up one day and decided they were prophets are "hands-off".

It's tiresome.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
...it would be nice if certain people would simply educate themselves before posting. The ignorance/brainwashing is astounding and at times it is somewhat troubling in that the Church founded by Jesus Himself is fair game, yet Judaism and sects/cults begun by nutjobs who woke up one day and decided they were prophets are "hands-off".

It's tiresome.

Fair game? Christianity? In this forum? And what's this about other faiths or beliefs being "hands off"? Again, you're referring to this forum?