Blessing sin does not make sin righteous

[Michie]

As the three-week synod on synodality begins, the pope’s response to a set of dubia issued by five cardinals has caused many Catholics to raise an eyebrow. The threat that Pope Francis refuses to validate and stand firm on the Church’s official teaching regarding homosexual marriages has many wandering if this weak papacy will endorse the blessing of sin?

Five cardinals submitted questions to the pope in July seeking clarification of the pope’s stance on homosexual marriages, among four other areas of concern. The dubia received a response by Pope Francis in which the pope gave a typical Jesuit ambiguous response. The answer from Francis refused to prohibit the blessing of homosexual marriages and, in contrast, alluded to the permissive blessing of such sinful marriages.

The pope’s reply contradicted itself by initially reiterating that a marriage is between a man and a woman. In the same reply, however, he said that priests and bishops should use “pastoral charity”that consists of not being judges of those in a homosexual marriage. He stated priests were not to deny or exclude those seeking a homosexual marriage. Francis has a papacy which promulgates a Christian life of “go along to get along.” It ignores the need for repentance, refuses to call sin a sin, and pulls Christians farther away from discipleship of Jesus. Perhaps the pope should bless adultery, inappropriate contentography, and sex trafficking next. After all, priests are not to “judge or exclude”. Right?

“You are not a God who delights in evil; no wicked person finds refuge with you; the arrogant cannot stand before you. You hate all who do evil, you destroy all who speak falsely. Murderers and deceivers, the Lord abhors.” (Psalm 5:5-7)


Continued below

Blessing sin does not make sin righteous

The pope may support, allow, and encourage the blessing of homosexual marriages. The blessing of sin, however, does not make the sin righteous.

www.catholic365.com

 

[chevyontheriver]

As the three-week synod on synodality begins, the pope’s response to a set of dubia issued by five cardinals has caused many Catholics to raise an eyebrow. The threat that Pope Francis refuses to validate and stand firm on the Church’s official teaching regarding homosexual marriages has many wandering if this weak papacy will endorse the blessing of sin?

Five cardinals submitted questions to the pope in July seeking clarification of the pope’s stance on homosexual marriages, among four other areas of concern. The dubia received a response by Pope Francis in which the pope gave a typical Jesuit ambiguous response. The answer from Francis refused to prohibit the blessing of homosexual marriages and, in contrast, alluded to the permissive blessing of such sinful marriages.

The pope’s reply contradicted itself by initially reiterating that a marriage is between a man and a woman. In the same reply, however, he said that priests and bishops should use “pastoral charity”that consists of not being judges of those in a homosexual marriage. He stated priests were not to deny or exclude those seeking a homosexual marriage. Francis has a papacy which promulgates a Christian life of “go along to get along.” It ignores the need for repentance, refuses to call sin a sin, and pulls Christians farther away from discipleship of Jesus. Perhaps the pope should bless adultery, inappropriate contentography, and sex trafficking next. After all, priests are not to “judge or exclude”. Right?

“You are not a God who delights in evil; no wicked person finds refuge with you; the arrogant cannot stand before you. You hate all who do evil, you destroy all who speak falsely. Murderers and deceivers, the Lord abhors.” (Psalm 5:5-7)


Continued below

Blessing sin does not make sin righteous

The pope may support, allow, and encourage the blessing of homosexual marriages. The blessing of sin, however, does not make the sin righteous.

www.catholic365.com

Such blessings, because they bless sin, are blasphemy.

Pope Francis may not come out and teach that such things are OK but by his failing to stand for truth and his appointment of cardinals and bishops who work against truth he is allowing it. He has yet to infallibly teach heresy, but he has enabled it by things he has done and things he has failed to do.

And so we shall see blasphemous blessings in dioceses near you. No matter what the ‘Synod’ ends up saying these things are now unleashed. They are still wrong. The truth is still the truth. The pope didn’t specifically teach the error. But he allowed it and made it so it could proliferate. It is his fault. It will take years to repair the damage. Even if he falls off his horse and gets religion due to the prayers of the faithful.

 

[mourningdove~]

Such blessings, because they bless sin, are blasphemy.

Pope Francis may not come out and teach that such things are OK but by his failing to stand for truth and his appointment of cardinals and bishops who work against truth he is allowing it. He has yet to infallibly teach heresy, but he has enabled it by things he has done and things he has failed to do.

And so we shall see blasphemous blessings in dioceses near you. No matter what the ‘Synod’ ends up saying these things are now unleashed. They are still wrong. The truth is still the truth. The pope didn’t specifically teach the error. But he allowed it and made it so it could proliferate. It is his fault. It will take years to repair the damage. Even if he falls off his horse and gets religion due to the prayers of the faithful.

Wonder if you could answer a couple questions for me:

What percentage of the RCC globally would you estimate is in favor of progressive changes in the Church?

What percentage of the RCC in the U.S.?

IOW, is the Church overall fairly equally split - progressives/conservatives - or is there really alot more Catholics in support of female priests, same-sex unions, climate change as a priority, etc., than those that prefer the traditional* Church?

*Not referring to 'Trads' here, but 'traditional', like how the Church has been for many many years.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Wonder if you could answer a couple questions for me:

What percentage of the RCC globally would you estimate is in favor of progressive changes in the Church?

I don't know. Worldwide very few people participated in the early phase of the synod. About one percent. Of those one percent maybe half wanted 'progressive change'. Way less than 10%.

What percentage of the RCC in the U.S.?

I'd guess about the same in the USA. Only one percent participation. And lots of that by those who want to upend things. I participated in that early stage but even then it seemed futile and few normal Catholics wanted to bother with it. This is a highly engineered synod to get to a highly engineered result. I hope someone upends the thing. We shall see. For now they are in closed door sessions with no news.

OW, is the Church overall fairly equally split - progressives/conservatives - or is there really alot more Catholics in support of female priests, same-sex unions, climate change as a priority, etc., than those that prefer the traditional* Church?

I think the radicals are still the minority although they are being made to look like the overwhelming majority. I think most folks are uncritically going to accept what they are told the majority think. And then there are the intentional disciples of Jesus Christ, who have put effort into understanding what the Church teaches. My guess, and it is just a guess, is the ratio is about 5: 65: 30 of progressives: swayable: traditional. Did I say that was just a guess? Sometimes it feels like 90:10 of wreckers vs faithful.

*Not referring to 'Trads' here, but 'traditional', like how the Church has been for many many years.

Understood. Referring to people who could have been understood to be Catholics 1000 or 100 years ago or even those current with the documents of Vatican II and the previous two popes, with Scripture and the Magisterium as it has been up to now understood.

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

Such blessings, because they bless sin, are blasphemy.

Pope Francis may not come out and teach that such things are OK but by his failing to stand for truth and his appointment of cardinals and bishops who work against truth he is allowing it. He has yet to infallibly teach heresy, but he has enabled it by things he has done and things he has failed to do.

And so we shall see blasphemous blessings in dioceses near you. No matter what the ‘Synod’ ends up saying these things are now unleashed. They are still wrong. The truth is still the truth. The pope didn’t specifically teach the error. But he allowed it and made it so it could proliferate. It is his fault. It will take years to repair the damage. Even if he falls off his horse and gets religion due to the prayers of the faithful.

Don't be so compassionate that you compromise on the Truth because Jesus never did that.

 

[mourningdove~]

I don't know. Worldwide very few people participated in the early phase of the synod. About one percent. Of those one percent maybe half wanted 'progressive change'. Way less than 10%.

I'd guess about the same in the USA. Only one percent participation. And lots of that by those who want to upend things. I participated in that early stage but even then it seemed futile and few normal Catholics wanted to bother with it. This is a highly engineered synod to get to a highly engineered result. I hope someone upends the thing. We shall see. For now they are in closed door sessions with no news.

I think the radicals are still the minority although they are being made to look like the overwhelming majority. I think most folks are uncritically going to accept what they are told the majority think. And then there are the intentional disciples of Jesus Christ, who have put effort into understanding what the Church teaches. My guess, and it is just a guess, is the ratio is about 5: 65: 30 of progressives: swayable: traditional. Did I say that was just a guess? Sometimes it feels like 90:10 of wreckers vs faithful.

Understood. Referring to people who could have been understood to be Catholics 1000 or 100 years ago or even those current with the documents of Vatican II and the previous two popes, with Scripture and the Magisterium as it has been up to now understood.

Thanks, Chevy.

What made me think was that I put on EWTN for a time this morn, and saw the excited crowds around the Vatican.
Just for a moment, it occurred to me that there may actually be many persons who like the policies of Pope Francis.
Needing abit of a reality check, thought I'd come online and ask ...

I don't doubt there are persons very happy with the direction the pope is taking the Church.
But in my heart, I do believe there are others that are not, also.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Thanks, Chevy.

What made me think was that I put on EWTN for a time this morn, and saw the excited crowds around the Vatican.
Just for a moment, it occurred to me that there may actually be many persons who like the policies of Pope Francis.
Needing a bit of a reality check, thought I'd come online and ask ...

When looking at 'excited' crowds at St. Peter's square always look to see if the square is full to the brim or not. Depending on camera angles you can make it look full though when it is far from it. The recent appointing of cardinals brought a slim crowd. But one camera shot made it look full. When it wasn't.

The other thing about excited crowds is they might be folks who went to considerable lengths to influence us all into thinking it's majority opinion when it's minority opinion with lots of eager beavers. The true thing is they have lots of eager beavers who do want to change the Church and this is their revolution.

I don't doubt there are persons very happy with the direction the pope is taking the Church.
But in my heart, I do believe there are others that are not, also.

Lots of us are not happy about it at all. I will be watching 'World Over' tomorrow night on EWTN and I'm sure they will have a recap. Then again, I have not heard of a press release yet. Maybe.

Xavier Rynne was a name famous from the reportage of Vatican II. Sort of 'all the news that's fit to print' when V2 press conferences were a bit lacking. We finally found out who Xavier Rynne was in real life. This time around George Weigel is publishing under Xavier Rynne II. That can be found at First Things.