Pope Francis Tells It Like It IS

[Tallguy88]

Ah... the usual ad nauseam of the "Vatican has walls..." argument, by non-Catholic guests, no less.

No, Internet, the Vatican is not a walled city

In Defense of Trump, Some Point (Wrongly) to Vatican Walls

Sorry Donald Trump, the Vatican is not actually a walled-off city

I guess the non-Catholic guests who want to argue and debate in this particular Catholic sub-forum must not be familiar with this forums' Statement of Purpose, which includes the House Rules.

This isn't a political forum, so politics aren't protected from debate by visitors as long as they stay respectful of liberal catholic theology.

 

[Tallguy88]

So have we. Millions. We feed and protect half the world.
We have a secular government. What matters most is the betterment of American citizens.

What does this have to do with DACA? Sounds more like an argument about immigration policy in general.

 

[Michie]

Foolish and ignorant debates.

Stupid used in certain translations does not make it ok to brand others stupid.

Shows a lack of humility an issues of pride. Off the top of my head, ESV uses ignorance. There are more...

 

[Michie]

lol!

 

[Tallguy88]

Stupid used in certain translations does not make it ok to brand others stupid.

Right, the Bible says that those who call others foolish are in danger of hellfire. I imagine calling someone stupid is similarly bad.

 

[Fantine]

But tallguy, if someone's foolish disregard of a serious, catastrophic warning was duly noted, would that not be considered admonishing the sinner?

 

[KWCrazy]

Book, chapter, verse, please.

US Constitution.

 

[Paidiske]

I'm not overly fond of that translation. I like ESV, RSV, and of course, KJV.

It's not the best for everything, but it is easily searchable on Oremus, which makes it my go-to for questions like "Is the word 'stupid' in the Bible?"

 

[tadoflamb]

US Constitution.

Interesting. Just curious, do you belief that the US Constitution is God breathed?

I would submit that your reading of the Constitution is leading you into some abiblical beliefs and practices.

 

[tadoflamb]

It's not the best for everything, but it is easily searchable on Oremus, which makes it my go-to for questions like "Is the word 'stupid' in the Bible?"

What I find curious is that the word 'stupid' appears in the translation we hear at mass 19 times.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

You know I've been wondering about this for some time now. American Nationalism and Christianity seems to be morphing into a new religion with it's own temples, holy days, Saints, rituals, creeds and yes, even a holy book, the US Constitution.

It certainly seems that way.

(emphasis mine)

It was late last night when I added that last part about the new revision to the flaming rule to my previous post. So, I decided to look at the other thread again this morning. I noticed something else in the OP that I inadvertently missed last night due to being very tired. The usual site wide Flaming and Goading rules are posted in this thread, but there is one revision. And it is this: "NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, smileys or post ratings which are clearly meant to goad." In the closing of the OP, there is this final statement: "Please do not use the rating system to mock or goad another member." So evidently, the new revision to the flaming rule regarding using the rating system to goad another member is a sitewide rule, therefore, it applies to all of the forums, including this one.

 

[KWCrazy]

Interesting. Just curious, do you belief that the US Constitution is God breathed?

The Constitution is not a Bible.
We are not a theocracy.
Until Christ returns, we live under the laws of men.

 

[tadoflamb]

The Constitution is not a Bible.
We are not a theocracy.
Until Christ returns, we live under the laws of men.

The law was made for man, not man for the law.

As a Catholic, a Christian and as an American I'm compelled to speak and act out against laws which perpetuate injustice.

 

[tadoflamb]

It was late last night when I added that last part about the new revision to the flaming rule to my previous post. So, I decided to look at the other thread again this morning. I noticed something else in the OP that I inadvertently missed last night due to being very tired. The usual site wide Flaming and Goading rules are posted in this thread, but there is one revision. And it is this: "NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, smileys or post ratings which are clearly meant to goad." In the closing of the OP, there is this final statement: "Please do not use the rating system to mock or goad another member." So evidently, the new revision to the flaming rule regarding using the rating system to goad another member is a sitewide rule, therefore, it applies to all of the forums, including this one.

Strange. In spite of our guests professed love of the law, at least one of them is having a problem following a simple rule.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

The law was made for man, not man for the law.

As a Catholic, a Christian and as an American I'm compelled to speak and act out against laws which perpetuate injustice.

Amen.

 

[KWCrazy]

As a Catholic, a Christian and as an American I'm compelled to speak and act out against laws which perpetuate injustice.

So you are pro-choice. Good.
If you don't like our immigration policy, petition your legislators to change it.
Ultimately, government serves the voters; though it might take a few good electoral thumpings to get them to realize that.

 

[Tallguy88]

But tallguy, if someone's foolish disregard of a serious, catastrophic warning was duly noted, would that not be considered admonishing the sinner?

It's not a sin to not believe in global-warming. So calling them stupid would not be admonishing the sinner. Either way, it was Jesus who said not to call other people fools.

 

[Tallguy88]

US Constitution.

Relevant to the legal discussion, but not so much to the moral discussion. The Pope is speaking to the overarching morality of the situation. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops will give more precise guidance when it comes to specific legislation.

 

[Tallguy88]

The law was made for man, not man for the law.

That is about the Law that God gave Moses on Mt. Sinai, not about man-made laws. St. Peter tells us clearly that we are to obey the laws of the land.

As a Catholic, a Christian and as an American I'm compelled to speak and act out against laws which perpetuate injustice.

What laws would that be? The OP is about an executive order (not a law) being rescinded. I'm not aware of any proposed new legislation that would result in increased deportations. If you want existing immigration laws laxed, then you need to take it up with your congressman or senator, not the President.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I was just quoting a political conservative. If you like we can amend that to 'man-made climate deniers' or better yet, we could use the same biblical language Pope Francis used and instead call 'climate deniers' 'stupid and hard-heading beings who don't see'.

*edited. Many thanks to the dictionary police

First of all, Pope Francis isn't an authority on climate change, unlike Bill Nye the science guy who isn't a science guy. Secondly, if you could prove that climate change is man-made, we'd have a different story. Just because you say '97% of scientists agree' doesn't mean a thing, mostly because 97% of scientists don't agree. Third of all, it appears that every time Pope Francis ends an apostolic visit somewhere, he gets hounded during downtime by the press. This last trip, he was asked for a comment on DACA and he didn't want to respond, asked again, and again, and again. Finally, tired of the question, he gave a neutral answer which the press went on to misinterpret what he stated. So what the press reports that Pope Francis says isn't necessarily what he actually said. Better to read the documents he wrote, none of which says that mankind causes climate change (and which he would have no authority to definitively state). It does say we should conserve the resources of the planet, something he does have authority to definitively state.
By the way, the Catechism (2241) says that immigration policy belongs with ‘political authorities’, not bishops. So it's ok to disagree with the pope or the no-backbone USCCB