A memorable letter from the Pope to the Bishops of Chile, worthwhile for it to be called "the great Francesco", how great was Peter on the Via del 'Quo vadis, Dominated?»
Latest posts by father ariel (see all)
- The fans of Mary co-redemptrix, a gross contradiction in theological terms - 6 February 2024
- A good priest is such if he waits for the end of his mandate to praise his Bishop: Andrea Turazzi, from today Bishop emeritus of the Diocese of San Marino-Montefeltro - 3 February 2024
- Charity washes and makes even dirty money clean, The great Saints of Charity teach us this in the history of the Church - 23 January 2024
It is certainly more virtuous to think well, even if you can't guess. I only asked one question, E’ really an exemption ? I add another: it makes a difference if the source of bad information is just a rag, or on the contrary a supreme authority ? In Inf. XXVII , Guido da Montefeltro is misinformed by Boniface VIII: what can you do, if not to trust the Pope ? but yet, mean, how he awoke ! Are (purely for school hypothesis) I, who am no one, were informed today by the Pope that there’ hell does not exist, what could I say when I was in it instead ? In short, if we talk about saving each one's soul, it is good for each of us to verify his sources. If we talk about general politics, both ecclesiastical and worldly (for instance, if we talk about gas and bombs) then let's say that a very very high percentage of information is Fake.
The fact that Pope Francis has officially apologized in his capacity as “Supreme Pontiff” after he had vigorously defended his choices in front of journalists on the plane returning from his pastoral trip, expressing himself on that occasion, if not mistaken, like a private doctor, arouses many perplexities in me.
In fact, he writes, in “Rejoice and rejoice” to n. 170: “It is true that spiritual discernment does not exclude the contributions of human wisdom, existentials, psychological care, sociological or moral. But it transcends them. AND EVEN THE WISE RULES OF THE CHURCH ARE NOT ENOUGH. We always remember that discernment is a grace. Even if it includes reason and prudence, exceeds them, because it is a question of glimpsing the mystery of the unique and unrepeatable project that God has for each one and which is carried out in the midst of the most varied contexts and limits.”.
This leads me to creep into my mind the suspicion that the current Pope considers himself infallible by grace regardless of “wise church standards”.
I will be happy if this worm of mine will be eliminated…
I was misinformed, it is really an exemption ? The first who was misinformed, he heard himself say You will not die, but you will be like Gods. And he passed on the bad information.
The Pope chooses with authority the people he wants to be informed of, to blame them is again to blame them, albeit smelly.
Given that he has been misled, or even admitting it was him, doing everything by himself, to fall into error, what else should he have done?
If he hadn't said anything, he would surely have been accused of pride and arrogance; saying something, instead it risks making the figure of Eve who was misinformed by the Great Tempter.
then tell us concretely: what he should have done?
Then keep in mind that the history of the Church does not begin with the pontificate of Francis I. Or do you think John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, they were surrounded by saint's shins?
But let's also go to the popes of the pre-council, to avoid suspicion on the part of some: Pio XII, in the second phase of his pontificate, he was surrounded by such reliable people, who did not even appoint a Secretary of State. And Pius XI, who in an explosion of anger screamed to be “surrounded by snakes”? And some bishops from the French and German areas, that during the Vatican Council I, rumored that Pius IX was a dangerous mentally ill, to the point that some of them later gave birth to the Old Catholic schism?
I guess she too, like all of us, he will have heard the Gospel of the Passion during this Passover, in which resounds a sentence that speaks for itself: "Then, all the disciples abandoned him fled " [Mt 26, 56]. Add to this the betrayal of Judas, to understand that even the Word of God, he had put smelly rags around.
Hello Father.
I like to think that his vision is the right one, out of love for the Church and out of devotion to the Roman Pontiff. She says that, precisely because he is a Jesuit and because he is Argentine, Francis was spontaneous in making that public admission of error, with their apologies. Undoubtedly the fact is commendable in itself, as well as being meritorious for the whole Church. I too am absolutely convinced of spontaneity, But – and I hope the good Lord can forgive me for this thought – I cannot exclude that the Pope may not have said those words in a disinterested way, but by calculation… maybe, perhaps aspiring to an image recovery (!?). After all, he gave reason to think that this way of acting is not completely alien to him, also taking into account that he is an Argentine Jesuit!
I hope I'm wrong, what does she think?