The oppressive, immoral, atheist political science whose goal includes apartheid of Christianity helps poor people he said, and so that makes it Christian.
This reminds me of grammar school at St Mark's when the class clown would hijack a lesson by yelling out something he thought was clever or funny.
There was no need for the mass tranquilization of children with Ritalin when the nuns were allowed to pull them out of class by the shirt and tell them to knock it off.
I saw the pic of Pope Frank tooling around in the cafeteria with workmen wearing blue shirts.
I could imagine myself in that predicament... thinking to myself "on no, here he comes".
How long do you think I'd last before I would say, "Begging the pardon of His Holiness, while I'd love to sit and shoot the breeze, every time I see your face I'm reminded of my children and the people I love who now think the principles of Catholic moral theology are only followed by kooks on the fringe - so I'm going to mosey on over to another table to each my tuna sandwich and chips. Pray for me and have a great day. "
Before its over,I wouldn't be surprised to see pics on instagram of him coming out for morning coffee in his robe and slippers without his dentures.
You know, the regular schmoe code of conduct for future men elected to chair of Peter.
Reports are beginning to surface on the agenda for the Synod. If they are accurate, in the chaos of Captain Quigg worrying about the strawberries, the City of Rome has been hijacked by madmen.
The tailspin from the alleged proposed theologically asinine agenda will be irreversible. We ain't seen nuttin yet.
We just ain't seen nuttin yet.
The real pity is watching the nightmare unfold and realizing there isn't a single person in Rome who has the courage to yank him out by the shirt and tell him to knock it off.
UPDATE: The consistent and disturbing theological message from Pope Francis should be recognized in this outstanding article on "the fundamental option" which (evidently) grew out of the theological turmoil following "Vatican II".
Fundamental option separates specific moral actions from a more general – fundamental – orientation of life. It holds, therefore, that specific sins do not bear on the status of one’s soul, or on the destination of one’s soul after death. All that matters for salvation, in this view, is that one “fundamentally” lives for God rather than evil.
This is precisely what our loved ones are regurgitating from Pope Francis jumbled messages.
The author does a great job quoting St. John Paul II condemnation of 'the fundamental option'.
With every freely committed mortal sin, he offends God as the giver of the law and as a result becomes guilty with regard to the entire law (cf. Jas 2:8-11); even if he perseveres in faith, he loses sanctifying grace, charity and eternal happiness.
I had never heard of 'fundamental option' before, but instinctively recognized the problems in the execution of judgment and spiritual practices each time Pope Francis invites journalists to publish his thoughts and remarks.
The author also articulates, I think succintly, the same thoughts and questions I have - we all have:
The sheer menace of fundamental option and its patent disregard of Church teaching spark some pressing questions. What would possess someone who should know better to teach this most dangerous and most destructive distortion? What benefit does the teacher gain by proffering a bogus path to salvation? Surely he knows that he himself will not be the arbiter of his students’ eternal fates. Why, then, teach his own theory of salvation when he could teach the means taught directly by the Judge Himself?