Vatican City, Oct 27, 2017 / 03:04 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Ahead of a Vatican conference exploring the future of the European Union, several ambassadors to the Holy See have said the event is a prime opportunity to share ideas with those who are beyond their usual circles.
And the Church, they said, is in a unique position to speak on major issues, offering key insights from which many global leaders could benefit.
Hungary’s Ambassador to the Holy See, Eduard Habsburg, told CNA that when exploring the current challenges that Europe is facing, it’s important to recognize that there are different visions, “but that they are reconcilable, and that if you speak to each other you can march in a good direction.”
“I think the greatest enemy of Europe is the idea that everybody agrees on everything which is just one vision. It doesn’t work like that,” he said. “We’re a big family with many different members who sort-of agree on a general direction, but who may sometimes have different opinions on things.”
Habsburg, who will be leading an Italian-language group during the conference, said he is looking forward to the discussion because “it’s not going to be the usual people together; they are really going to mix (it up) so that you sit with people you don’t usually meet.”
Because of this “there’s no danger that everybody pats each other on the back in mutual agreement on everything, but you are really going to be exposed to different ideas and different geographic regions, and that’s a very, very exciting prospect,” he said.
Added to this is the desire to more intentionally involve the voice of the Church, which is organizing the event. So another key goal, then, is “to bring Church people into contact with E.U. people to engage the Church more into E.U. business and topics.”
In comments to CNA, Irish Ambassador to the Holy See Emma Madigan said that given this year’s celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome that established the E.U., “we want as many voices as possible involved in the future of Europe.”
“Europe is only strengthened by the engagement of thoughtful people, hearing their concerns and their criticism and their hopes,” she said.
The conference is an opportunity “for a broader and a deeper exchange of views among people of great experience and insight,” Madigan said, voicing her belief that the event “will benefit both from the different perspectives the participants will bring, but also the common ground they share in terms of the global challenges they identify and the fundamental values of dialogue, cooperation and inclusion.”
Titled “(Re)Thinking Europe: A Christian Contribution to the Future of the European Project,” the conference takes place in Rome Oct. 27-29, and will gather together hundreds of high-level Church and E.U. political leaders.
It is being organized by the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community in partnership with the Holy See, and will draw hundreds of civil and ecclesial leaders from across Europe and the E.U. to offer a constructive reflection on the challenges facing Europe.
Rather than an official congress with a formal concluding declaration, the event will be more of a frank discussion between the various stakeholders, as well as an opportunity to for the different parties to exchange ideas and opinions.
Some 350 participants from 28 delegations representing all E.U. countries are slated to attend, including high-level E.U. politicians and Catholic hierarchy, academics, ambassadors, representatives of different Catholic organizations and movements, as well as from other Christian delegations.
Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin will open the conference with a keynote speech Friday, and his address will be followed by a speech from former President of the European Parliament Pat Cox on the “crossroads” at which Europe currently stands.
From there, discussion will dive into topics such as the state of democracy in Europe and how to build bridges among the various E.U. member-states, as well as what kind of economy is best for Europe amid a changing world.
On Saturday, various ambassadors to the Holy See will chair discussion groups divided by language, so the various interlocutors can meet and exchange ideas with representatives from different countries and organizations, both civil and ecclesial.
The conference will close with an audience with Pope Francis, who throughout his pontificate has been outspoken about his vision for Europe, including the need to “rediscover” the Christian roots of the continent and to find new, innovative and creative solutions to modern problems.
Habsburg said he is happy to see the bishops organizing the event, and that from the words the Pope has spoken, it’s obvious that Francis “really cares about Europe, and the E.U.”
“I was present at the E.U. 60th anniversary meeting in Rome, and you could feel that he really cares about Europe and tries to engage in a dialogue,” he said.
As far as the conference and the role of Church leaders in shaping the future of the E.U., Habsburg said he believes the event was organized in part because the Holy See wants to “sensitize the local bishops conferences to E.U. topics in order to help governments.”
“My interpretation is that the Pope wants to expose Church members from different European states to major E.U. issues and make them a partner in the discussion,” he said. And coupled with this is also the fact that “one doesn’t want religion to be pushed out of political talk and everyday reality in the E.U.”
“I’m very happy that this comes from the bishops,” he said, adding that “perhaps sometimes, through all the hectic everyday politics, you need those moments where you can sit back and look at the greater picture.”
In comments to CNA, British Ambassador to the Holy See Sally Axworthy noted that Pope Francis continually encourages “both the Church and governments to respond to the challenges that they see around them with compassion for the vulnerable and a strong sense of our values.”
“We support him in that,” she said, adding that the British government also welcomes the fact that European bishops and Church leaders want to contribute to the discussion on the future of Europe.
“It is important that the religious perspective on Europe’s future direction is heard,” she said.
Similarly, Madigan noted that Pope Francis’ words about Europe have been strong, and that he has always sought “to challenge European leaders to create the best version of Europe they possibly can.”
Madigan, who has been Ireland’s ambassador to the Holy See since 2014, pointed to what she has perceived as a “subtle development” in the Pope’s approach to Europe the past few years, continuing to challenge, but with greater focus on “the extent to which Europe exemplifies values that should be more prevalent in the world than they are – peace, democracy, dialogue, cooperation and respect for human dignity and freedom.”
French Ambassador to the Holy See Philippe Zeller also commented on the poignancy of the Pope’s message on Europe, particularly in his recent speeches.
Also pointing to the subtle change in the tone used by Pope Francis – who during his visit to Strasbourg in 2014 told E.U. leaders that a “grandmother Europe” needed to move beyond “outdated” systems, but in March was much more keen in highlighting the potential that Europe has for the future – Zeller said the March speech especially “was very well received,” particularly the reference to Europe’s roots.
Noting how in his March speech Francis pointed out that the six “founding fathers” of the E.U. “were all engaged in, in a personal view of course, the Catholic religion, in Christianity,” Zeller said that to present this view is “very important right now,” as Europe is re-thinking its identity.
Both Zeller and Habsburg stressed the importance of remembering Europe’s Christian roots.
It’s crucial to introduce ideas based on “common heritage, on cultural roots,” Zeller said, and voiced his excitement at having the opportunity for leaders and politicians to have an open discussion about Europe, “which actually is not doing very well.”
“The E.U. faces real and difficult challenges now,” he said, so the idea of having a meeting among the episcopal conferences in Europe as well as political leaders is “very interesting and we are happy as European ambassadors to the Holy See to be associated and to share the views of these different conferences.”
Likewise, Habsburg said he believes that for Europe truly to advance, it must “go back to core values, and some of those core values, in my opinion, are the Christian roots of Europe.”
Both family and solidarity are two key values that need to be re-emphasized today, he said, adding that there has to be a careful balance “between doing things together and having a healthy respect of the differences.”
In terms of the message each country wants to bring to the discussion table, Madigan, Habsburg, and Zeller all voiced their desire to both share their own local experience on key issues, and to listen.
For France, Zeller said their new president, Emmanuel Macron, has a lot of ideas on the challenges Europe faces, including security and defense policies, economic and business policies, as well as the desire to reduce unemployment and increase trade opportunities.
“It’s interesting for us to see that those ideas presented by our new president and government could be shared or could trigger some ideas” within the E.U., he said, and pointed to what he believes is a need to “re-introduce this aspect of common values.”
As for Ireland, which in many ways is facing a heightened sense of national uncertainty following the 2016 Brexit vote, Madigan noted that almost immediately after the result of the UK referendum was known, members of the E.U.27 met in Bratislava, where they recognized that “the E.U. is not perfect but it is the best instrument we have for addressing the new challenges we are facing.”
Looking forward, Madigan said the future of the E.U. “is inseparable from the future of the world,” and that as such, members must adapt to the new challenges faced not only on the continent, but throughout the world.
Europe is and must be “much more than a debate on institutions,” she said. Rather, “it is about achieving outcomes for all our citizens and the expression of our values in the world.”
Voicing his hopes for the outcome of the conference, Habsburg said his biggest desire is that “we should not talk so much about each other, but talk with each other, and most of all listen to each other.”
“I have the impression that some countries which are at times being perceived as being very critical of Europe or even rebellious, often only have wishes that could somehow also further the common European cause, but are often not listened to or are often drowned in lots of political narratives,” he said.
However, during the conference everyone will be able to speak up about their own ideas and visions of Europe, he said, explaining that discussion groups will focus largely on questions such as “what is your idea about the path of Europe in your part of the world? What are you dreams? Where could we go? What do we have in common?”
“It’s a real serious stopping, sitting down together and talking, and I think Europe really needs that now,” he said. And while heads of state meet with regularity, the conference is unique in that so many people from different levels of both Church and state will attend and share ideas.
“So it’s really going to be a very interesting experience,” he said. “I think this conference is an incredible sign of hope.”
Hannah Brockhaus contributed to this report.
[…]
Finally.
This will make plain what everyone knew but, except for a few brave souls, were afraid to say.
It has been a case of “The Emperor’s New Clothes” with Francis and his minions. Now the small voice of Truth has spoken.
Here’s how it will work out:
1) The document will initially be ignored, as were the Dubia. But because it is the Truth, it won’t go away.
2) Next meliorist scribblers of all sorts will try to stonewall and blunt the Truth. Expect all the BIG NAMES in the Catholic Center Right commentariat to start telling us that the document isn’t correct because of this jot or that tittle. They will try to discredit the Truth by a thousand small stabs at the document.
3) When ignoring and stonewalling doesn’t make the Truth disappear, it will be assailed by all the powers of the clerical caste, both in an out of the Vatican. Signers will be excommunicated, laicized, fired from employment, perhaps even physically assaulted in some parts of the world. Intimidation will be the name of the unjust game these goons will play against the Truth.
4) They will defeat the Truth in one arena, only have it arise even stronger in many others.It will come to be widely recognized as the Truth.
5) The Truth will win.
“Utinam disrumperes caelos et descenderes a facie tua montes defluerent sicut exustio ignis tabescerent aquae arderent igni ut notum fieret nomen tuum inimicis tuis a facie tua gentes turbarentur” (Isaias 64:1-2)
Thanks be to God!
The civil war waged by the Jez and their marketeers against the truth.
PDamian, if you’ve not already got your own blog, you should start one! I’d read it every day. I’d only disagree that “everyone” already knew. Everyone who knows their faith and loves Truth knew, but I’m amazed at the zombies who are still clueless.
The first shot.
It had to be said and is now on record. It will be ignored.
Sixty two cardinals could have signed this document and it would still be ignored.
Loyalty to Magisterium of two thousand years means nothing in this Vatican. Locality to Francis is everything.
“The people are with him” is the mantra of the pope’s Marxist lieutenants. Hmmmmm.
Should read “Loyalty to Francis is everything.”
It’s not just loyalty to Francis… It’s loyalty to the council, to the new religion. Francis is the natural result of Vatican II. If he’s wrong, the world of the new church comes crashing down.
I don’t think it will be ignored. I think it will be used to punish those who signed it, and perhaps to clamp down on EF etc.
It’s a bit hard to know what to think of this document. In the end, it is merely an expression of discontent that most people feel towards this papacy. “We don’t like the way you are operating” is all it seems to say. While using the word heresy a lot, it does not really accuse the Pope of heresy. If I read it correctly, it merely accuses the Pope of indirectly leaning towards heresy, or for allowing bad things to happen that they want to label heresy.
It is strongest in that they clearly state that the Popes actions are not helpful, not in accord with the magisterium, and they imply that his attempt at trickiness is beneath the office of the Papacy. Their warning is simply that he cannot get away with this Jesuitical baloney for long. In the end, he cannot fool all the people all the time.
But no cardinals, no real bishops signed it. Most of the people who did sign it are not theologians, but historians, philosophers, regular priests, and an SSPX guy. ONe guy is a Marian conspiracy theorist. So that certainly minimizes its impact and in the end it is oo real correction of the Pope at all. It is merely a protest statement. The only real correction can come from bishops and cardinals.
At the time Humanae Vitae was released 87 theologians released a letter stating that the Pope was wrong. Of course, their outburst was just the pampered outrage of academics. The Pope was right.
It is helpful in that it does express disagreement with the Pope and in the end will add to the weight of evidence against him
Samton:
Don’t hold your breath for any more Cardinals and Bishops. 4 of the Cardinals already took a stands.
Hundreds of priests from England and the US took a stand in the Synod crisis.
Only 1 bishop in England answered the call 500 years ago.
Other people in the Church – including these theologians and professors – count a lot.
Step 2: meliorism
“it merely accuses the Pope of indirectly leaning towards heresy, or for allowing bad things to happen that they want to label heresy.”
You don’t have to be a heretic—formally promulgating false beliefs—to be a heresy-spreader. I think that that is what the “correction” is attempting to address. The muddlement of “Amoris Laetitia” aside, the incessant off-the-cuff observations—on everything that pops into his head—of this world-class Commenter are causing widespread confusion and dismay.
We may have our private suspicions as to whether he says what he says with calculation or inadvertently; but, yes, only the bishops can decide, formally.
Yet, to the average Catholic sitting in the pew—too preoccupied with making a living and/or raising a family to follow the niceties of theological debate—it won’t matter to him if he finds out that he’s been misled through the promulgation of a false Church document, or through the careless false ideas quoted to him, scattershot, through the media.
While the authors don’t directly accuse Francis of heresy but rather with fostering conditions where heresy thrives, I believe this is the first time a major document prints the pope’s name and the word “heresy” together. Of course, it has been the stuff of many private conversations for months or years now.
There is only one correction that will make a difference. It must come from Pope Emeritus Benedict. He must make it clear that he writes not as Peter but as a humble bishop, imploring Francis. He must state unequivocally that what Pope Francis is trying to do is impossible, and that both St. John Paul II and he intended their prohibition on reception of communion by “remarried” Catholics who refuse to live as “brother and sister” (see, Familiaris Consortio 84, Sacramentum Caritatis 29) to be definitive and irreversible.
Is there a contradiction in the article that appears to state that Bshp. Fellay wasn’t aware of the letter until it was delivered, yet, simultaneously claims that he was a signatory to that letter (cant be both)?
There should have been far more signatories to this letter, that thee were so few is troubling.
It is far more important now to act rather than protest. The letter is fine though very likely to be ignored. Sunday I implored Laity be aware of the current dangerous dilemma within the Catholic Church stemming from take away of Amoris Laetitia by many including National Bishops Conferences that lead to distancing practice from doctrine. Everything in the Pontiff’s exhortation Amoris Laetitia is splendid. Except for Ch 8 which contains hypothetical premises, biased suppositions, suggestions that are not official magisterial pronouncements, binding propositions and nevertheless invite change in practice. Permitting those living in adultery, cohabitation, practicing homosexuality to receive communion without the sacrament of reconciliation and requirement to relinquish those practices. I urged all remain steadfast in following Apostolic Tradition and the authentic Magisterium of Benedict XVI, Pope John Paul II, Paul VI on now widely questioned, oft repudiated traditional moral doctrines affirmed and reaffirmed by these Pontiffs. The good beleaguered Cardinal Burke is impugned and increasingly isolated. We priests, diocesan ordinaries must for sake of our own salvation and that of those we care for, Christ’s sheep speak out convincingly. We ask how can this be? That a Roman Pontiff is permitting error to spread by suggestion, maneuvering, silence. What I will say that whatever the Pontiff’s motives may be, God is his and our judge that on the grand scale of things we know God is permitting this. Rationale seems retribution for widespread disobedience and laxity in practice by Catholics. That we are all being offered a Choice. A fateful one. Either to follow non binding suggestion and premises of what Pope Francis offers Church and world, or remain faithful adhering to practice of the Apostolic Tradition and the Gospel of Christ.
Yes,
Soon we learn which Bishops will gather with St. John Fisher and which will gather with the nameless of history!
Yup. The list will be a short one.
And where are all the great lights of the American hierarchy? Too busy trying railing against borders to care about the Faith I suppose.
Methinks the ranks of those who those who find that one can be excommunicated for defending the faith is about to grow…
Despite fifty-five years of no catechesis, inadequate catechesis, inaccurate catechesis and an evisceration of the theological academy, there are survivors who know Roman Catholicism from faux Catholicism. They have raised their voice, accompanied by 8,265 petition signers [after 72 hours] at “Support by the Catholic Laity for the Filial Correction of Pope Francis.”
There is no need to beat a dead horse by rehashing the list of grievances against the current state of affairs. “Correctio Filialis” and the “Dubia” presented by four conscientious and brave Cardinals have telescoped the major issues flawlessly, despite the usual six gun response of deceive, distract, dismiss, disparage, discourage and disarm in order to defeat the orthodox faithful.
Unimportant!
Insufficient numbers!
Schismatic! [Sufficiently so as to merit a dialogue going on for some years – but now? – not so much.]
One sole miserable soul alone would have been sufficient to see the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, adopt our humanity and endure a sadistic death at the hands of the self-important who knew best.
How exactly is a member of the Mystical Body of Christ determined to be worthy of notice in the Bergoglian epoch?
Does your sin, your moral crisis have to rank high on the zeitgeist list of heroics – adulterer, LGBTQ, S&M, or just for fun a simple SJ?
The ever so fraudulent “egalitarian” posers inhabiting the ecclesiastical class have inadvertently dropped their masque and revealed themselves for who they are.
Those who believe, those who care, those who can stomach it, have noticed.
Those devoted to infantilism substituting for devotion remain blindfolded. As long as they don’t see the cattle cars going off to the East they are not responsible.
“Leave it to the priests. They know better.”
God reward Cardinal Muller for a simple and brilliant solution to a host of problems that have been festering since before “the” Council.
Let the disputation begin.
Let it begin in public.
But it is highly doubtful to merit a “thumbs up.”
To do so would rob the St. Gallen entourage of its last refuge – papal authority. That can only be tanked when they are done with it.
I’m afraid this Pope is leading many to hell fire. May God help us to glue our faith to Christ teaching.I miss Pope John Paul II.(sob)
The “mob” mentality is alive and well, even among Catholics. Jesus was crucified for being a criminal and a heretic, but the resurrection and history has proven him innocent and justified. He was considered a heretic by the keepers of the law because he did not follow the “letter of the law,” and instead followed the Spirit of the Law. He broke the law because he refused to stone adulterers, and instead forgave them; as well as tax collectors, thieves, lepers, and murderers. He broke the Sabbath Law by healing on the Sabbath. He infuriated the leaders of the law by pointing out that King David broke into the Holy of Holies and took the holy bread to feed his soldiers, because it was necessary. He pointed out that Moses did not change the law regarding divorce, but only made a concession because it was necessary; because of the hard-heartedness of the people.
St. Paul endured the same kind of treatment as Jesus, from the “super apostles” (who were not apostles at all), who accused him of heresy in every letter he wrote, because he did not follow the “letter of the law,” and instead followed the Spirit of the Law. He accepted Gentiles and did not force them to become Jews before becoming Christians.
Pope Francis has stated the Marriage and Family Life is the heart and soul of civilization. If it dies, civilization will die. He pointed out the present broken state of Marriage and Family Life, and that “mortal sin” is not the only reason for the breakdown. There are many reasons – physical, emotional, mental, spiritual, cultural, etc. But another reason is because the Church leaders have abandoned their role as shepherd and pastor of the people. They stopped feeding and tending the sheep, leaving them vulnerable to wolves, and stopped searching for the lost sheep. Basically, Francis suggested that the Bishops and Pastors use the “internal forum” (pastoral guidance) in some cases, to discern whether a marriage is valid or not. He suggested the Sacrament of Confession for everyone.
If our present Annulment Process, using a Tribunal to judge whether marriages are Sacramental or null, is justified and acceptable, then, why would the judgment of holy pastors, filled with the Holy Spirit, not be acceptable? If it comes to light that Pope Francis has been living a secret life of corruption, debauchery, and immorality, then we are justified in accusing him. If not, we are merely instruments of Satan, crucifying Jesus all over again. “You can’t pick good fruit from a bad tree.”
I suggest that you read Corinthians 6:9-10 and Romans 1:26-32. If those who actively live the lifestyle of fornicators, adulterers, same sex partners are not able to enter into heaven and condemned to death. What then is the alternative? Certainly, not Heaven and the only other place for eternity is hell. Giving Communion therefore to someone who refuses to repent with a contrite heart and change their ways and who are then destined for hell is compounding the judgement by receiving Communion in an improper, unworthy disposition…Mortal Sin and Jesus do not mix.
How does priestly pastoring the lost sheep, who refuse to repent change the Word of God enabling them to receive Communion? Now, if Jesus were to come a second time and change His Word, that would be different. But, a Pope or a clergyman to change the Word of God? Oh no! Those who believe this heresy are not Catholic. This point makes me wonder about Francis. (I find it difficult to call him pope.)
Jacqueleen, you need to read the whole of Amoris Laetitia. You do not seem to know what pastoral counseling is. Francis was very strong in saying that we cannot change the teaching of Jesus or doctrines of the Church. He condemned divorce, homosexual behavior, and same sex marriage as illicit and evil. But, he does not condemn those who do such things. Jesus said: I have come for the sick, not the healthy; those who need saving and healing (paraphrased). The Church teaches that “mortal sin” includes more than just commiting a grave sin; it includes free will, intention, knowledge and a formed conscience, and forethought. Divorce does not happen in the courtroom with a piece of paper. It happens long before. A marriage that is not healthy and strong; having integrity, faith, hope, love, joy, peace, and unity is either broken or never was whole – one flesh. You are taking scriptures out of context. Pastoral counseling is intended to bring people to conversion; to recognize their sin and repent, as well as to determine if their former marriage was truly a Sacramental marriage. The Church is universal, not just in America. The laws in some countries are actually obstacles to Sacramental Marriages.
Obviously, the moderator did not like my reply….so keep your site….I’ll unsubscribe.
‘Therefore, when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed; when we love the Pope, we do not say that he has not spoken clearly enough, almost as if he were forced to repeat to the ear of each one the will clearly expressed so many times not only in person, but with letters and other public documents; we do not place his orders in doubt, adding the facile pretext of those unwilling to obey – that it is not the Pope who commands, but those who surround him; we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority; one does not oppose to the Pope’s authority that of others, however learned they may be, who differ from him. For however great their learning, they must be lacking in holiness, for there can be no holiness in dissension from the Pope.’ (Pope St. Pius X, allocution of 18 November 1912, AAS vol. 4 (1912), 695).
I have to imagine that if Pope Pius x ever imagined that there would be a pope as bad as this, he would have tempered his words somewhat.
Do you speak about the Popes? Or do you speak of a Pope who contradicts all of them? The truth is one, the Popes are many in union with the one truth—except for one.
How many times have we heard that people felt excluded from the Church because they are divorced and remarried or because they are practising homosexuals.?Wasn’t Amoris Laetitia supposed to reach out to those who felt excluded and bring back those people even without a change to their lifestyles.?If so,where are all these people.?I have certainly not seen an avalanche of people returning to the Church in their droves.
The only thing Amoris Laetitia has succeeded in doing is to let us see with our
own eyes how deep the rot in the Church is and how weak and cowardly the clergy has become when it comes to preaching the Gospels to the faithful and the not so faithful.
This letter is welcome and hopefully the beginning of something more substantial.
Confusion is evil. To ignore confusion about what is of ultimate importance is evil. Who will take responsibility for causing this confusion about what is true? Who is the one who is responsible to proclaim the truth with authority of office?
Who speaks for Jesus Christ? Who does not speak for Jesus Christ?
The Holy Father invites people of goodwill to follow the meek and humble Jesus of Nazareth.
I am thankful for these brave men who are requesting clarification about one chapter and two footnotes in a papal exhortation that has created confusion for the body of Christ. Sins can be committed by omission as well as commission, and it would be completely un-Christian to let people know about how the love of God through Christ and change in behavior leads to eternal beatitude. If Christianity is just one religion among many or just another philosophy then it is just an empty symbol. It has lost its saltiness and is only good to be stepped on. Christ is the truth and the way and the light. It is true that we must not cause scandal by destroying someone in public to make a point about sin. These “irregular” situations can be handled by a priest or deacon privately to assist to directing them to Christ. Where AL loses its way is the idea that sanctifying grace works in these irregular relationships when they refuse to correct the behavior. This contradicts Christ. One may argue that God is calling someone out of this relationship which is initial grace, but God does not will people to sin (that is to be at enmity in relationship to Him). That is completely terrible to be expressed in any document in this faith. The Church also has many other Encyclicals (which bear more weight than an exhortation) that deny consequentalism with the idea that all that matters is if an action leads to a good or bad ending. The Church teaches and will continue to teach after Francis that doing an evil that good may occur is not correct morally.
Sorry, a bit of a rambling but my heart breaks for many that could be lead astray by confusion. It is not the call of Christ to hope people are ignorant so that their actions, just might, be mortal sins. The vocation of us all is to love people to a greater calling of holiness. One cannot live in that sanctifying grace (assuming they have been baptized) until they have perfectly or imperfectly confessed their sin and repented (reconciled) back to the Lord. You cannot live in sin and be sanctifying grace. That literally is impossible as sin by its nature is to be not in relationship with God. To lack His likeness. To lack His divine nature perfecting your nature. *sigh* I guess this is just the theology of this pope and his sycophants. 2+2=5 in their world.
It saddens me, greatly, that the “Curial Establishment” has such a hold over so many who believe that the Church has been the genuine Church of Christ since it was usurped by Constantine.
The Canon of Scripture is nothing other than a Roman postulation of eastern religions, as written by Saul of Tarsus and his fellow Romans and followers. Almost nothing, in the writings of Saul, conforms with the teachings of Christ as can be read in the Gospels. Indeed, Saul was the first heretic and secessionist in the Church.
Saul’s “theology” is a mixture of, mainly, Mithraism and Pharaohism, and others. His social “philosophy/theology” was that of submission, not to God, but to Man (in the gender sense).
All of Saul’s “teachings” were in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ, as we know them. Women were not subservient. The faithful were equal participants in the “Church”, not subservient to the priests – The only authority given by Christ was to Peter, and that was to “forgive sin”. No other authority, period!
Christ commanded us to: “Love God and love your neighbour”, “Love your neighbour as yourself”, “Love one and other as I have loved you”, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, “Turn the other cheek”, “Those without sin, cast the first stone”. He, also, taught us to care for the poor, the sick, the outcast. He further appealed to us to “turn our swords into ploughshares”, “to forgive as your heavenly Father forgives”, to pay workers a fair wage, not to make the House of God, a House of Mammon and many other things which are, quite clearly, the Word that our Holy Father proclaims.
The Holy Father, however, has, in my honest opinion, failed in proclaiming Pauline “Christianity” as heretical. Saul of Tarsus was not an Apostle – he was a “self-proclaimed “Apostle”. His theology is that of eastern mysticism, not of the teaching of Jesus Christ. His philosophy is that of subjugation and deference, rather than freedom and empowerment.
Those who would see Pope Francis as a heretic are, not only, ignorant of the teachings of Christ, but blind to its faithful teacher, Papa Francisco.
Finally, those who live by the principles of Saul of Tarsus, rather than those of Jesus Christ, are those in most need of the grace of salvation.
CORRECTION:
Para 5, line 1, “not” should be inserted between “in” and “Pauline”.
Should read – The Holy Father, however, has, in my honest opinion, failed in NOT proclaiming Pauline “Christianity” as heretical.