Discussion in 'The Signs of the Times' started by BrianK, Jul 26, 2016.
You wouldn't know funny if it slapped you in the face.
you obviously have not learned that lesson.
I will leave the serves at this particular tennis match to you people. You play well below my standards. Play amongst yourselves like good children.
We don't need Aquinas to tell us this. All we need is history and common sense. BTW I am on his side but not from your angle.
All speculation and nonsense. Like the American media they take a 5 second soundbite and then state that the Pope is changing doctrine. Pure and simple rubbish. People arguing the state of a soul...who is and isnt a sinner. Maybe we should just understand we are all sinners...and your little sins could be graver then an adulterer or a homosexual. I am tired of the arrogance...and the comments of everyone else being a sinner.
Back to my cave...tired of this nonsense.
From Mark Mallett
"Pray For Your Shepherds"
"During the past five decades, which Pope Paul VI described as a period of “apostasy”, the Lord raised up many movements and souls who have stepped in the gap. I’m thinking of Focolare, Catholic Action, the Charismatic Renewal, and the powerful apostolates of Mother Angelica, Catholic Answers, Catherine Doherty, and Dr. Scott Hahn among others. Even Evangelical voices like Billy Graham have brought the Gospel into Catholic homes when the pulpits were falling silent in their parishes. And it is nearly impossible to measure the powerful impact that Our Lady has had through her locutions and apparitions during this time that have, in turn, raised up some very powerful and holy priests (and popes!) and countless lay apostolates.  No, the Lord has not abandoned us.
The Lord is my shepherd… Even though I walk in the dark valley I fear no evil; for you are at my side with your rod and your staff that give me courage. (Today’s Psalm)
Indeed, precisely because of these heavenly interventions, seminaries are beginning to produce some beautiful young men who are shepherds after God’s own heart. And there are bishops, cardinals, and priests today who are beginning to speak out boldly, at the cost of breaking collegiality with their fellow clergy and subjecting themselves to persecution. And while I am fully aware of the controversies that Pope Francis’ interviews and exhortations have caused (and some concerns are not without merit), I also see in Francis a Pope who is trying his best to reach the lost. Hear Ezekiel’s warning again:
You did not bring back the strayed nor seek the lost.
Pope Francis has gone out of his way to seek those who, for whatever reason, find themselves on the fringe of the Church, whether through their own fault or others. While some people want Pope Francis to stand on St. Peter’s balcony and simply regurgitate doctrine, this pope prefers to meet with sinners and tax collectors. He often says nothing at all. He just touches them, listens to them, hugs them, dines with them, and journey’s with them. The reason is because he wants his first message to them to be: “You are loved.” In fact, when people are so utterly broken, messed up, and entangled in sin and debauchery, that’s the only word they are capable of hearing. I think our Pope has accurately perceived our generation to be such, a generation embroiled in pornography, materialism, and self-centeredness. As someone said recently, “Love builds a bridge over which truth can pass.” Sure, I doubt Elton John has become a practicing Catholic. But somehow, Francis has his ear. Maybe that’s the whole point.
True, Pope Francis has done little to stroke the ego of the culture warriors and guardians of orthodoxy who’ve been courageously fighting the culture of death and battling heresy. And they are doing an indispensible work. Perhaps they feel a bit like the workers in the vineyard in today’s Gospel who feel a bit taken for granted when the last minute employees are paid the same:
‘These last ones worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us, who bore the day’s burden and the heat.’ He said to one of them in reply, ‘My friend, I am not cheating you. Did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage?’ (Today’s Gospel)
We have to be careful to avoid the attitude of the elder brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son who resented the father’s unconditional mercy… and with the Holy Father, seek to welcome the lost sons and daughters of our era. For how can we put a new robe on them (Baptism and Reconciliation), new sandals on their feet (the Gospel of Truth), and a new ring on their finger (the dignity of divine sonship) if they don’t know they are welcome to return home?
So let us be careful in our assault upon the shortcomings of our clergy, popes included. In that regard, you will rarely hear Our Lady condemning the clergy. But you will hear her constantly imploring us to pray for them. Do you pray for Pope Francis? Do you pray for liberal bishops? Do you pray for your own bishop and priest? If Christ can convert the likes of Saul (St. Paul), why can he not move the hearts of those shepherds who are asleep, who are timid, or who are even wolves in sheep’s clothing?
Whenever I am tempted to dwell on the faults of others, I turn my eyes back to myself, back to the moments when I have failed through timidity, cowardice, and self-preservation; when I have been uncharitable, impatient, and self-centered. And then I pray for them, and for God’s mercy on me.
Pray for your shepherds today. They need your love and support, most especially those who have been “pasturing themselves.”
Rubbish - His meaning is unequiviocal. He is saying "good on you for remaining faithful in your love for each other but there is a better way." He is also saying there is a better method of showing this way than ramming it insensitively and extemporaneously down their throats and rubbing their faces in their sin. He is saying there is a better way than clubbing them over the head with the rule book. We are fishers of men not frighteners of men. He is saying we have a duty of care in the way we try to redirect these souls to the Doors of Mercy, welcome them into the Church and lead them to the path that leads to Heaven.
All hardened gmblers on the forum will be familiar with the racing term an, 'Each Way Bet'. This is a much safer bet than putting your money on a single bet in that if any of the first three or four horses win you at least get to get your money back. It is were the safe money is, you'll never get to loose much money with a bet like this, but on the other hand you never get to get much money back.
The Prophets and Jesus when we meet them in Scripture never realy hedged their bets. When they spoke of the religious authorities in their day they placed all the money on the one horse. That horse was that to give the religious and secular authorites of the day the big thumbs down. They did not say the powers that be were wrong , but on the other hand did some nice things they just said they were worng. No bet hedging.
The difficult of speking out against the powers that be is that you are betting your life. Whether or not you are criticisng Corporation Sandhedrin/ Cheif Priest of against Corporation Vatican/ Pope. You are speaking from a position of powerlessnes to a postion of supreme power. In doing so you risk everything. Even your very life . Jesus and the Prophets can prove that, for they all paid with their lives.
If Jesus and the Prophets had on the other hand done an each way, bet, hedged their bets ,went for the smart monet they would never have ended up ebing murdered.
How wold the smart money money have went? Well if would ahve went something like this,
'Terrible things have happeneded under the Chief Priest and the Sanhedrin , I know this. But the Chief priest and the Sanhedrin themselves are wonderful guys'.
Now if I transpose this to the Church, the safe money is to say,
'Yes terrible things are happening in the Church , but this is not the Pope's fault he is a wonderful guy'.
So the safe money is played. You get to win which ever side turns up, being both a little bit of a rebel on the hand and an avid loyalist on the other. You get to ride both horses.
The safe money.
You may thing this is a little unfair but if I could take for instance what Mark said,
'....you will rarely hear Our Lady condemning the clergy.'
But I am sorry , this is simply not true. Jesus went out of his to kick the clergy of his time right in the teeth repeatedly and in public.
Perhaps you should be careful not to put words into the mouths of Jesus and Mary. What you have quoted is not only unfair but it is misguided in both content and intent.
To me your comment has neither the ring of truth not the resonance of reason.
I have never hedged my bets on Francis. My money is on his nose. A nose that will be first past the post. You know that I have backed Francis 100% all time all the way as he works his way through the dialogues of his pontificate.
I have only ever bet on one horse, Francis, whose owners are Jesus and His Mum. All winnings go to them and them alone. A Jesuit takes nothing with him. He leaves it all behind for God.
We are never speaking from a position of powerlessness: if God is with us who can be against? The Spirit has set us free and that Spirit has empowered us.
This is why I cannot understand the forum members who oppose Pope Francis. They can be neither free nor empowered. They neither see nor hear nor understand the great grace he carries from God to the Church and to the world.
They reject his mission of Mercy as mere distraction from his true strategy. But this is not his true form. They are wrong to bet on anyone (like Cardinal Burke who I greatly admire) but him no matter how promising their form and conformation. Francis is the leader of the pack and holds this position at the direct behest of his owner, Jesus.
Like me Pope Francis bets on the nose - the nose of Jesus, a fine Jewish nose that fronts a fine Jewish mind. In the end only this bet is worthwhile because it really is a dead cert. Jesus is not only the owner but also the favourite and the favourite rarely pays well unless the wager is large. As ye sow so shall ye reap. The more you put in, the greater the reward.
Jesus would never kick anyone in the teeth. He would not mame or disfigure. He was tough but not like that. He criticised some clergy. Not all of them.
There is nothing of safety in supporting Pope Francis but everything of surety: surety of salvation. Dostoyevsky says it is easy to be a martyr when you have an audience. The private martyrdom of Conchita suffered for the last 35 years especially, carries with it the blessings of popes and saints so I will repeat her words about Pope Francis once again,
"SALVATION IS IN HIS HANDS."
There you go again, Joe, with your personal attacks.
Here is your post that prompted me to respond to you:
"Pope Francis is laying the ground for the renewed Catholic Church, a church that will not tolerate elitism or deviancy, a Church that will only be possible after the Warning has corrected the conscience of the world. Pope Francis is preparing us to let go of all that blocks or causes imbalance in our approach to heaven. He is making straight and leveling the spiritual road ahead. A Church whose yes will be yes and whose no will be no. The world will not be able to accommodate or grow such a Church until after the Warning. Truth has never changed and will never change but circumstances have changed and Satan is riding these changes to his best advantage. From the start, resistance to the changes for which we are being prepared in this pontificate has been evident among clergy and laity alike. In this opposition the fact that no attempt has been made to change truth is minimised and the dangers of change maximised. Pain is not caused by change but by resistance to change. Here we are talking about the pain of schism. The schismatics are those who will abandon Francis and take others with them. You have the wrong pope in your sights Padraig but there will be another good Pope. Pope Pius XII did not speak out in the way that world understands 'speaking out' but his reserve saved many lives and he suffered for this action just as Pope Francis is suffering. Sorry - a bit rushed - at lunch."
Other than supporting the German push to change Church teaching on adultery, homosexual practices and fornication, what has Pope Francis done to lay the groundwork for a Church whose yes will be yes and no will be no? Other than a movement within the Church that wants to follow the Pharisees' example of permitting divorce in response to the hardness of people's hearts, what are the changed circumstances that make the indissolubility of marriage vows too heavy a burden for the faithful?
Who am I? A simple Catholic who sees the smoke of Satan being fanned by Bishops who have embraced the secularist agenda and are adopting secularist methods to erode Church teaching on marriage and sexual morality with the apparent support of the Pope. The same methods that destroyed the very definition of family in secular cultures are being employed at the heart of Christ's Church. That should be warning enough for anyone to sit up and take notice. Compassion and tolerance were the secular terms to usher in the destruction, mercy is the term being used in the Church.
I should have known better than to respond to your posts because when you can't defend the indefensible you resort to personal attacks questioning the faith of anyone who disagrees with you. What a sad day for the Church when Catholics who defend 2000 years of Church teaching are attacked as heretics while Martin Luther is being lauded by Bishops and the Pope is preparing to attend the celebration of the Protestant schism.
You are the one making personal attacks. No personal attacks from me but this is you attacking me. You asked the question and I answered it. Stop trying to cause trouble for me by trying to turn the tables. You are not the prey. You are part of the pack.
You accuse our pope of promoting sin and sacrilege and you expect me to sit silently by. You claim to be a simple Catholic but in your false accusations of the Vicar of Christ you are a dissembling Catholic...just like Luther was.
These accusations are in your comment. Your own words have said it. I do not attack you. You attack the pope. And you attack him without provocation. Why should I expect better treatment.
It is a sad day for the Church when people who call themselves Catholics betray their leader as you do. Do you really think you are qualified never mind justified in correcting the pope as you do. I ask again: who do you think you are?
I have not resorted to personal attacks. You have. It seems it is ok for you to use personal attack in your disagreements with me. You and your like have never been censured here on MOG for your personal attacks on me or the way you pervert my words. Grow up and walk away.
I lay the blame fairly and squarely on Padraig for the bad impression he has given of me to the forum. You have simply gone along with it. This is what I mean when I say you are part of the pack. This is not a personal attack, just a statement of fact.
I will not jump on board with bashing our Holy Father. I know he has done well for many and he has appealed to even the media (which might not be an endorsement). However, one has to consider some of his more flippant statements, which can seem to be appeasement towards those in sodomy or fornication, and ask with a sincere heart the one most important question. Has his words moved anyone who practices these grave sins to repent of them? With all the media and instant social media in the world, I have not read one article where a man or a woman has declared that the Popes words have brought them to repentance and conversion from these deadly sins. This is very telling to me. The stories in the gospels have plenty of examples where people whom Jesus addressed their sins to, repented and followed him to the cross. Mary Magdalene is but one example. I would welcome anyones stories who has read of such examples of those repenting from the sins of sodomy or fornication after hearing what Pope Francis has said on these issues.
Did you just bash the Pope? Sorry Fatima,..I know you were not! Bashing and making observations are two different things right?
I'm not sure where to post this. http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351357?eng=y&refresh_ce
Your pride, unfortunately, prevents you from having proper reading comprehension and discernment. This comment was not directed at you, as I regard you as simply a lovable orthodox poster with a quixotic quest to try to defend the indefensible. (It was precipitated by a PM about liberal posters here and elsewhere.)
But your baseless insults are very telling in the light of your lack of comprehension. It will be informative whether you retract and apologize, or if you just dig your heels in further.
No one has ever stated the pope is changing doctrine, but changing discipline so that, eventually the doctrine will remain, but be ignored.
Not a small distinction.
But go ahead and keep setting up straw men, and valiantly knocking them down for all to see, if it makes you feel better.
And how, exactly, is this post ANY different from those posted by us "bashers" you constantly bemoan?
Uh...really now, Joe? Surely though dost protesteth too much. (I just illustrated that your pride and persecution complex lead directly to baseless attacks. I'll let the readers and lurkers be the judge. Hopefully that's the only judgement you suffer...)
Don't worry, those whose eyes are open see what is obvious before them; Joe gets angry and lashes out when he loses in his quixotic quest, then denies the obvious.
But don't be angry with him, he at least means well.
If he keeps this up, though, he should be placed in the lovable but cranky three year old category...
Separate names with a comma.