MacNN Forums (http://forums.macnn.com/)
-   Political/War Lounge (http://forums.macnn.com/political-war-lounge/)
-   -   What's the deal with Pope Francis? (http://forums.macnn.com/95/political-war-lounge/503954/whats-the-deal-with-pope-francis/)

 
The Final Dakar Sep 12, 2013 10:53 AM
What's the deal with Pope Francis?
Wasn't around to start this a few months ago, and now he's added more fuel to the fire. Compared to his organization and predecessor this guy is a flaming liberal.


Pope Francis Says Atheists Who Do Good Are Redeemed, Not Just Catholics
Quote
"The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can... "The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone!".. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”
Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven - Europe - World - The Independent
Quote
In comments likely to enhance his progressive reputation, Pope Francis has written a long, open letter to the founder of La Repubblica newspaper, Eugenio Scalfari, stating that non-believers would be forgiven by God if they followed their consciences.

Responding to a list of questions published in the paper by Mr Scalfari, who is not a Roman Catholic, Francis wrote: “You ask me if the God of the Christians forgives those who don’t believe and who don’t seek the faith. I start by saying – and this is the fundamental thing – that God’s mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience.

“Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience.”


Seems pretty damned reasonable to me.
 
subego Sep 12, 2013 05:16 PM
I've found, on more than one occasion (not even counting the Padre from TWiT), the Jesuits "get it", more than a lot of other orders.
 
lpkmckenna Sep 12, 2013 05:28 PM
"God’s mercy has no limits"

The world would be a better place if more believers actually believed this.
 
subego Sep 12, 2013 05:28 PM
I daresay the Jesuits feel if you truly have God in your heart, the rules you need to follow are apparent to you, and don't necessarily follow how the mortal institutions of God have decided to write the rules.

I like the Jesuits.
 
subego Sep 12, 2013 05:32 PM
Typical Jesuit response:

Q: Do you have a problem with masturbation?

A: Nope. Works every time.
 
Chongo Sep 13, 2013 12:20 PM
Sorry folks. Pope Francis isn't saying anything new.

Quote
Did the pope really say something new here? Is he really opening up the Church in a way that departs from its past teaching? Not really. Here is one of the opening paragraphs from John Paul II’s encyclical, Veritatis Splendor:

The Church knows that the issue of morality is one which deeply touches every person; it involves all people, even those who do not know Christ and his Gospel or God himself. She knows that it is precisely on the path of the moral life that the way of salvation is open to all.The Second Vatican Council clearly recalled this when it stated that “those who without any fault do not know anything about Christ or his Church, yet who search for God with a sincere heart and under the influence of grace, try to put into effect the will of God as known to them through the dictate of conscience… can obtain eternal salvation”. The Council added: “Nor does divine Providence deny the helps that are necessary for salvation to those who, through no fault of their own, have not yet attained to the express recognition of God, yet who strive, not without divine grace, to lead an upright life. For whatever goodness and truth is found in them is considered by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel and bestowed by him who enlightens everyone that they may in the end have life”
St Paul's Epistle to the Romans
Quote
9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek.
11 For God shows no partiality.
12 All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.
13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.
14 When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them
16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus
The Catechism of the Catholic Church
Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 3 SECTION 1 CHAPTER 1 ARTICLE 6
 
Shaddim Sep 13, 2013 01:26 PM
I like the guy, actually makes me want to go back to a Latin mass.
 
The Final Dakar Sep 13, 2013 03:31 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by subego (Post 4247463)
I've found, on more than one occasion (not even counting the Padre from TWiT), the Jesuits "get it", more than a lot of other orders.
I'm afraid I don't know what the Jesuit designation means.


Quote, Originally Posted by lpkmckenna (Post 4247469)
The world would be a better place if more believers actually believed this.
Word.


Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4247591)
Sorry folks. Pope Francis isn't saying anything new.
If people are acting like its new, than the church hasn't done a very good job communicating it.


Quote, Originally Posted by Shaddim (Post 4247612)
I like the guy, actually makes me want to go back to a Latin mass.
He's certainly been a breath of fresh air, particularly in contrast to Ratzinger.
 
andi*pandi Sep 13, 2013 03:56 PM
He seems like a nice human being. I like this bit, "But do good: we will meet one another there."
 
Chongo Sep 13, 2013 04:19 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by The Final Dakar (Post 4247639)
If people are acting like its new, than the church hasn't done a very good job communicating it.
They have, most people weren't listening.
 
The Final Dakar Sep 13, 2013 04:24 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4247645)
They have, most people weren't listening.
This feels like a waste of time... but how?

Edit: What's your sig in reference to?
 
Chongo Sep 13, 2013 04:56 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by The Final Dakar (Post 4247648)
This feels like a waste of time... but how?
JP II's encyclical Veritatis Splendor was released in 1993. The Catechism,(under the direction of then Cardinal Ratzinger) in 1992

Quote
Edit: What's your sig in reference to?
One example: Prostitution is is legal in many parts of the world. Just because it's legal does not mean using their "services" means I am not commiting the sin of fornication/adultry.
 
subego Sep 13, 2013 08:21 PM
Re: Jesuit

I'm sure Chongo or Shaddim can do a better job, but I'll give it a shot.

Different Catholic orders show their devotion to God in different ways. The Benedictines for example, are monks, so their devotion is turned inward.

The Jesuits were founded by a soldier, which gives the order a distinct character. Jesuits have the nickname "God's Marines".

As such, they're evangelical missionaries. Part of the soldier deal is you can get sent anywhere at any time. If you want to plant life-long roots in a community, you join a different order.

Another key tenet of the order is its members should do something secularly useful, therefore they approve of the idea seminary is a "graduate level" or later educational experience. They actively fill their ranks with people who have had an extensive secular life, and one way they want their members to tend to their flock is by continuing those secular activities.

This stress on secularism, not just in terms of the people the order recruits, but in terms of how secular activities are considered an important part of missionary evangelicalism, makes the order less hidebound than others.
 
Laminar Sep 14, 2013 12:54 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by The Final Dakar (Post 4247648)
This feels like a waste of time... but how?

Edit: What's your sig in reference to?
Every time another state considers legalizing gay marriage, my Facebook gets flooded with "You can change man's laws but you can't change God's laws." I figure it's something of that sort.
 
Mrjinglesusa Sep 14, 2013 08:03 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4247650)
One example: Prostitution is is legal in many parts of the world. Just because it's legal does not mean using their "services" means I am not commiting the sin of fornication/adultry.
That's not what you are referring to and you know it. Go ahead, you can say what you really mean. Everyone knows what you are referring to even if you are afraid to admit it.

Quote, Originally Posted by Laminar (Post 4247703)
Every time another state considers legalizing gay marriage, my Facebook gets flooded with "You can change man's laws but you can't change God's laws." I figure it's something of that sort.
:thumbsup:

Exactly.
 
Shaddim Sep 14, 2013 11:13 AM
I don't believe His Holiness is trying to game anyone, he's saying what's in his heart and not bludgeoning people with doctrine. They've heard enough of that, now he sees that humanity needs an advocate as much as we need direction. I see him as the type of person who will honestly work and pray for everyone, every minute he's awake, and to hell with politics and standard convention.
 
Chongo Sep 14, 2013 11:38 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa (Post 4247712)
That's not what you are referring to and you know it. Go ahead, you can say what you really mean. Everyone knows what you are referring to even if you are afraid to admit it.



:thumbsup:

Exactly.
Yep and Jesus also said
Luke 16:18
Quote
18 "Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.
 
Shaddim Sep 14, 2013 11:58 AM
The connotation of "putting away" is to abandon her without real justification, other than simply being bored with them. He was addressing the single parent issues of the time, where men would father kids all over the place and never help provide for them. Not much has changed in 2000 years.
 
subego Sep 14, 2013 02:54 PM
Is homo marriage a sin? I thot it was the buttsecks.
 
subego Sep 14, 2013 03:05 PM
WRT the previous Pope and atheism, he noted there are atheists who are closer to God than those who call themselves Catholic.
 
Mrjinglesusa Sep 14, 2013 06:49 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by subego (Post 4247756)
Is homo marriage a sin? I thot it was the buttsecks.
Well if homosexuality is a sin and it takes two homosexuals to marry then homosexual marriage is a sin by default. :thumbsup:

Then again, Jesus also said that you should cut off your hand if it causes you to sin (Mathew 5:30) but I don't see too many one-handed Christians running around so what do I know.
 
Laminar Sep 14, 2013 06:58 PM
Hate the sin, not the sinner!!!
 
Chongo Sep 14, 2013 08:52 PM
Sorry to burst your collective bubble on Pope Francis. Here is his statement from 2010
Quote
“In the coming weeks, the Argentine people will face a situation whose outcome can seriously harm the family…At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”
Cardinal Bergoglio continued: “Let us not be naive: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a ‘move’ of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”


Read more: Cardinal Bergoglio Hits Out at Same-Sex Marriage |Blogs | NCRegister.com
 
Chongo Sep 14, 2013 09:18 PM
 
aristotles Sep 15, 2013 01:36 AM
The non-believers often confuse the meaning of verses. For example, judge not lest ye be judged is often confusing for atheists. If you read it in context, Jesus is saying that if we are to judge, we must ensure that we are not being hypocrites by having even greater sins in our own lives than those we would seek to judge. It is also in the context of judging our "brother" who is a fellow believer. We should judge our fellow believers when we are in a position of greater moral authority and a fellow believer has strayed.

It also warns us believers from judging the world of unbelievers as they will be judged by god on judgement day. The reason for this is that appearing "judgemental" can give the wrong impression to a non-believer and the worldly also tend to not see the sin in their own lives but are constantly judging us with a harsh double standard. Because of this, we are to give the best impression possible by living holy lives that can stand up to the harsh and unfair scrutiny of the non-believers.

I am not sure what Francis is up to. I hope that he is a still a sincere follower of christ as he appeared to be from that statement in 2010. I think much of what we have seen in the media of late is an interpretation or spin put on statements he may have made coloured by a worldly view. I think some liberals see what they want to see rather that what is really there.
 
subego Sep 15, 2013 03:13 AM
Irony overload.
 
subego Sep 15, 2013 03:28 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4247778)
Sorry to burst your collective bubble on Pope Francis. Here is his statement from 2010
I'll actually enjoy bursting your bubble, and am not the least bit sorry:

Quote
On March 19, The New York Times reported that when Argentina was gearing up for a bitter national debate on gay marriage in 2009 and 2010, Bergoglio quietly favored a compromise solution that would have included civil unions for same-sex couples.

On this score, I was told by three sources in Argentina that the Times basically got it right: Bergoglio did, in fact, favor civil unions.

That was confirmed on background by two senior officials of the bishops' conference in Argentina, both of whom worked with Bergoglio and took part in the behind-the-scenes discussions as the conference tried to shape its position.

"Bergoglio supported civil unions," one of those officials told me.

Mariano de Vedia, a veteran journalist for La Nación, has covered church/state issues in Argentina for years and said he could confirm Bergoglio's position had been correctly described in the Times account.

Guillermo Villarreal, a Catholic journalist in Argentina, said it was well known at the time that Bergoglio's moderate position was opposed by Archbishop Héctor Rubén Aguer of La Plata, the leader of the hawks. The difference was not over whether to oppose gay marriage, but how ferociously to do so and whether there was room for a compromise on civil unions.

Villareal described the standoff over gay marriage as the only vote Bergoglio ever lost during his six years as president of the conference.

Behind the scenes, sources say Bergoglio tried to avoid fireworks on the gay marriage issue. One young Catholic told me, for instance, he had wanted to organize a public recitation of the rosary on the eve of the vote outside the legislature, knowing that supporters of gay marriage would also be there and the prayer would be a provocation. He wrote to Bergoglio seeking advice, he said, and Bergoglio called him directly, suggesting they pray at home instead.

Oesterheld suggested Bergoglio went along with the harder line espoused by the majority of the bishops' conference even if it wasn't his own instinct.

"At that time, there were different views within the bishops' conference on how open the church should be [to compromise solutions]," Oesterheld said. "The cardinal went along with what the majority wanted. He didn't impose his own views. He never publicly expressed his own feelings on the matter, because he didn't want to seem to be undercutting the common position of the bishops."
Hard questions about Francis in Argentina and a lesson from Chile | National Catholic Reporter
 
Chongo Sep 15, 2013 10:12 AM
I heard that on the day he was elected. That "support" is like B16's "support" of the use of condoms brouhaha. The Reporter is heterodox paper. The National Catholic Register on the other hand run by the same people who operate EWTN.
 
Chongo Sep 15, 2013 10:17 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by aristotles (Post 4247795)
The non-believers often confuse the meaning of verses. For example, judge not lest ye be judged is often confusing for atheists. If you read it in context, Jesus is saying that if we are to judge, we must ensure that we are not being hypocrites by having even greater sins in our own lives than those we would seek to judge. It is also in the context of judging our "brother" who is a fellow believer. We should judge our fellow believers when we are in a position of greater moral authority and a fellow believer has strayed.

It also warns us believers from judging the world of unbelievers as they will be judged by god on judgement day. The reason for this is that appearing "judgemental" can give the wrong impression to a non-believer and the worldly also tend to not see the sin in their own lives but are constantly judging us with a harsh double standard. Because of this, we are to give the best impression possible by living holy lives that can stand up to the harsh and unfair scrutiny of the non-believers.

I am not sure what Francis is up to. I hope that he is a still a sincere follower of christ as he appeared to be from that statement in 2010. I think much of what we have seen in the media of late is an interpretation or spin put on statements he may have made coloured by a worldly view. I think some liberals see what they want to see rather that what is really there.
:thumbsup:

Invincible ignorance also plays a part. Most people cannot claim invincible ignorance.
 
subego Sep 15, 2013 11:25 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4247833)
I heard that on the day he was elected. That "support" is like B16's "support" of the use of condoms brouhaha. The Reporter is heterodox paper. The National Catholic Register on the other hand run by the same people who operate EWTN.
Would it bother you if Bergoglio acted as claimed in the Reporter?
 
The Final Dakar Sep 16, 2013 01:35 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4247650)
JP II's encyclical Veritatis Splendor was released in 1993. The Catechism,(under the direction of then Cardinal Ratzinger) in 1992
You think a lot of atheists are reading that? Also, that was 20 years ago. This is is exactly what I mean by saying not doing a good job of communicating.


Quote, Originally Posted by subego (Post 4247675)
Re: Jesuit

...

The Jesuits were founded by a soldier, which gives the order a distinct character. Jesuits have the nickname "God's Marines".

...

Another key tenet of the order is its members should do something secularly useful, therefore they approve of the idea seminary is a "graduate level" or later educational experience. They actively fill their ranks with people who have had an extensive secular life, and one way they want their members to tend to their flock is by continuing those secular activities.

This stress on secularism, not just in terms of the people the order recruits, but in terms of how secular activities are considered an important part of missionary evangelicalism, makes the order less hidebound than others.
Interesting stuff. This means the cardinals that voted him in had to have a decent idea of what they were getting.


Quote, Originally Posted by Laminar (Post 4247703)
Every time another state considers legalizing gay marriage, my Facebook gets flooded with "You can change man's laws but you can't change God's laws." I figure it's something of that sort.
Quote, Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa (Post 4247712)
That's not what you are referring to and you know it. Go ahead, you can say what you really mean. Everyone knows what you are referring to even if you are afraid to admit it.
That's what I was wondering. It's amazingly passive aggressive. And gutless if you won't say so when asked.
 
subego Sep 16, 2013 03:04 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by The Final Dakar (Post 4248004)
Interesting stuff. This means the cardinals that voted him in had to have a decent idea of what they were getting.
One would imagine.

I assume it's considered the lesser of two evils. The alternative would have been a schism comprised of those Catholics who want the church to have relevance.
 
Chongo Sep 16, 2013 04:56 PM
Give him time. He will eventually say something the press doesn't like and will say he's no better than B16 or JPII or, etc.
 
Chongo Sep 16, 2013 05:01 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by The Final Dakar (Post 4248004)
That's what I was wondering. It's amazingly passive aggressive. And gutless if you won't say so when asked.
It can apply to a lot of things, not just so called "gay marriage" Abortion is legal and it's still a mortal sin.
 
subego Sep 16, 2013 05:15 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4248039)
Give him time. He will eventually say something the press doesn't like and will say he's no better than B16 or JPII or, etc.
JPII wasn't too bad. B16, which sounds like a vitamin, was pretty bad IMO.

Would it bother you if the Pope approved of civil unions?
 
Shaddim Sep 16, 2013 05:35 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4248039)
Give him time. He will eventually say something the press doesn't like and will say he's no better than B16 or JPII or, etc.
I don't get why you're trying to make the people on the forum hate him. :confused:
 
subego Sep 16, 2013 05:39 PM
I assumed he was lamenting (what he sees as) the capricious nature of the press.
 
The Final Dakar Sep 17, 2013 11:52 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4248039)
Give him time. He will eventually say something the press doesn't like and will say he's no better than B16 or JPII or, etc.
By default he's no better than them. In practice he's been quite refreshing. It's not the predictable instances where that are noteworthy.

Quote, Originally Posted by Shaddim (Post 4248049)
I don't get why you're trying to make the people on the forum hate him. :confused:
Doesn't matter, dudes, I'm not going to hell! : p
 
Chongo Sep 17, 2013 01:31 PM
Jimmy Aiken has written about this:

Quote
4) What did Pope Francis actually say about atheists and salvation?

Here is the passage:

First of all, you ask if the God of the Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith.

Given that—and this is fundamental—God's mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience.

In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil.

The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.

In this passage, you’ll note that after introducing the topic of salvation, Pope Francis begins by saying God’s mercy has no limits “if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart.”

This statement appears to apply to believers—the ones you would expect to ask God for mercy with contrition, etc.

Pope Francis then pivots to discuss “the issue for those who do not believe in God.”

He says that for them “the issue” is following their conscience, which will result in good behavior.

This is what the press, etc., have been interpreting as him saying that they can be saved.

But he doesn’t actually say that.

Believers also need to follow their conscience, and doing so will result in them having right behavior. But if they don’t follow their consciences then they sin and need to ask for mercy with contrition and a sincere heart.

What are atheists supposed to do if they don’t follow their consciences?

Pope Francis does not address this question.

Read more: Did Pope Francis say atheists don’t need to believe in God to be saved? (9 things to know) |Blogs | NCRegister.com
 
subego Sep 17, 2013 01:48 PM
What a load of horseshit.

Unbelievers can't ask for mercy?
 
subego Sep 17, 2013 01:51 PM
It pisses me off when people think God is such a petty little mother****er.

It should piss you off too.
 
subego Sep 17, 2013 01:52 PM
Oh, yeah. Third time's a charm.

Chongo, would it bother you if the Pope supported civil unions?
 
andi*pandi Sep 17, 2013 01:53 PM
Well, why would they ask for mercy from a god they don't believe in?

Quote
What are atheists supposed to do if they don’t follow their consciences?
They can however feel contrition and sincere regret for their actions, and act to improve themselves and do reparation.

Who programs a person's conscience? You can learn morality without a belief in god (or damnation, or salvation, either way).
 
Chongo Sep 17, 2013 02:10 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by subego (Post 4248164)
Oh, yeah. Third time's a charm.

Chongo, would it bother you if the Pope supported civil unions?
Would you support legislation than banned abortion after 20 weeks?

Moot point anyway, Argentina already permitted "civil unions"

Quote
Getting the Facts
A starting point is trying to get the facts on the matter, as best they can be known.

According to press accounts, back in 2010 when the Argentine government was in the process of approving homosexual "marriage," then-Cardinal Bergoglio suggested the possibility of civil unions for homosexuals as a way of keeping homosexual marriage from being made legal.

Read more: Pope Francis on Homosexual Unions |Blogs | NCRegister.com
 
Chongo Sep 17, 2013 02:11 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by subego (Post 4248162)
What a load of horseshit.

Unbelievers can't ask for mercy?
From God, who they don't believe in?
 
subego Sep 17, 2013 02:14 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by andi*pandi (Post 4248165)
Well, why would they ask for mercy from a god they don't believe in?
Even Dawkins doesn't claim his atheism is absolute, just very close. For someone who is assured, I think we get into the question of whether they're barred from heaven for rejecting God's mercy or unfathomable hubris.
 
Chongo Sep 17, 2013 02:27 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by subego (Post 4248171)
Even Dawkins doesn't claim his atheism is absolute, just very close. For someone who is assured, I think we get into the question of whether they're barred from heaven for rejecting God's mercy or unfathomable hubris.
Rejecting God's mercy is not a good thing to do.
 
subego Sep 17, 2013 02:27 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4248169)
Would you support legislation than banned abortion after 20 weeks?
Elective abortions? In principle? Sure. Five months is plenty.

Practically it becomes an issue because you need health risk exceptions. Legislating when a doctor can and cannot perform a procedure is difficult when the issue isn't contentious. It's virtually impossible when it is.

A doctor shouldn't be forced to weigh the health of the patient vs. prison.
 
subego Sep 17, 2013 02:31 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Chongo (Post 4248173)
Rejecting God's mercy is not a good thing to do.
Hence my claim that someone who does so suffers from hubris, a.k.a. pride, which is not only not good, it's a sin, and a deadly one at that.

Neither the hubristic Catholic or the hubristic atheist get into heaven.
 
subego Sep 17, 2013 02:36 PM
@Chongo

You know how people have ****ed-up views about what it means to be Catholic? You have the same kind of ****ed-up views about atheists.

Are there ass-monkey atheists who fit your view? Sure, just like there are ass-monkey Catholics out there giving you a bad name.
 
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:36 PM.

Copyright © 2005-2007 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2