re: Pope Francis Clarifies, Again, Why Some Don’t Like His Blessing Of Homosexual Couples

quote:

---

Pope Francis Clarifies, Again, Why Some Don’t Like His Blessing Of Homosexual Couples

---

...because we don't like homosexual couples, the end.

I am a Catholic and active member in the KofC and I loathe this pope. I do not agree with his spin.

quote:

---

It must be tough to be a Roman Catholic these days.

---

For me, it seems to be about the same as it ever was.

quote:

---

On the one hand, they argue that one of the selling points of Catholicism is the unity that is supposed to exist.

---

Unless you're talking about the normal "unity" that any group advances, I'm not sure what you're meaning here.

quote:

---

they are saying things like “not my Pope” because they disagree with the teaching of the supposed head of the church.

---

The Catechism remains unchanged. Homosexual sexual activity is deadly Sin. A homosexual can receive a Blessing on his Soul, but, this Blessing does not fall on the Sin that is on that Soul.

Catholics can disagree on whether this is a good move by the Pope, but, if they disagree with the Catechism on the issue of homosexual sexual activity, then they are outside of the RCC on this issue. They should go be a Methodist, or Presbyterian or Anglican.

LINK

quote:

---

Because some people see homosexuality as a bad thing.

---

NO, because irrespective of one’s own sin they struggle with, or sin they enjoy, a believer is NOT okay with tampering with, ignoring, or re-writing scripture (God’s Word) to validate their sin. Only someone who doesn’t look to scripture or doesn’t actually believe in God in the first place is down with that. That’s the absence of the fear of God, or recognition of His sovereignty in determining what is right and what is wrong, regardless if they or anyone else falls in line with it in every facet of their life or not.

It’s okay to be imperfect and struggle with sin here and there. We are all works in progress that need to submit and look to Him every day in order to overcome if we are believers. It’s NOT okay to call yourself a believer and pervert, discount, or create doctrine that is in opposition to scripture. That’s pretty much the definition of anti-Christian.

quote:

---

"Petros" and "petra" which have different meanings.

---

Petra and petros had the same meaning in Greek at the time this particular passage was written. Second, petros is the masculine form. Jesus (or the person writing Jesus's words in Greek) would not have named or designated Simon in the female form of petra.

Further, this would have most likely been spoken in Aramaic, which didn't make such distinctions as earlier Greek had between petra and petros. The only word was cephas, which is also used to refer to Peter.

The passage in Matthew 16:18 is not the first time or only time that Jesus had referred to Simon Peter as "Rock." According to John (1:42), Jesus called Simon "Peter" when he first met him. In Acts, Simon Peter is referred to throughout as Petros. Paul never referred to Simon Peter as "Simon," only Kephas or Petros. To interpret Matthew 16:18 as you do means that all of the early members of the Church, including the ones present when Jesus spoke it, were wrong.

As much as protestants want to shake it, disclaim it, or run from it, all Christians came from the one Holy catholic (look that up, too) Church. That same Church birthed the Bible that all Christians use as the source material for their catechisms.

Has the Church had its problems? Sure. Did those problems cause protestants to split from the Church? On some occasions.

But trying to pick apart a fairly clear passage in the Bible to say that Jesus never intended that Peter be the first bishop of the Church does nothing but cause harm to all of Christianity because you are attacking Jesus's own words. When you do that, you enable persons with nefarious intent to do the same: isolate and/or pick apart simple and correct Bible passages to twist them to what they want to say. And there you will find "Liberation Ideology" and the like.

Of course, this doesn't even address the tripartite blessing that Jesus gave Peter at that time which, again, clearly shows that Jesus was directing his communication as to Peter being the "Rock" upon which He would build his Church.

Homosexuality is a profoundly disordered condition. More than that it's a mortal sin to practice homosexuality. By his decision Bergoglio is blessing sin, which is impossible, and in itself a grave sin.

The Bishops of the Catholic Church of Africa, have refused to follow his directive. I wish I could see the same concern for the souls of her children by the Bishops of the American Catholic Church that I see in these brave African Bishops.

Satan has labored long and hard to sit in the Chair of Peter. He has realized his goal.

It pains me to no end to say this - Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a heretic.

Pater caelestis, defende nos ab his qui ad nos veniunt sicut oves in specie lupi, Amen

quote:

---

By his decision Bergoglio is blessing sin,

---

No.

Pope is being nuanced in that he's giving permission to Bless the Soul of the homosexual without Blessing the Sins on that Soul.

IMHO, this move is too nuanced and will cause confusion, and, I don't agree with this move on that basis.

quote:

---

It must be tough to be a Roman Catholic these days.

---

Not really. Being a Catholic these days sure as hell beats being a Catholic back during the early-4th century when Diocletian was persecuting us. We also had some very bad popes prior to the Papal Reform Movement of the 11th century.