De Profundis
jimcat
Francis is merely saying what St Paul said. A mere pope has no authority to unsay what an Apostle, writing inspired Scripture, says.

If the rabbi objects to what the Apostle St Paul says in an inspired letter, too bad. Sorry. Just as, if non-Jews object to Scripture, too bad.

BTW, it is scandalous that the modern papacy has by word and deed renounced the mission to the Jews, and also to the …More
Francis is merely saying what St Paul said. A mere pope has no authority to unsay what an Apostle, writing inspired Scripture, says.

If the rabbi objects to what the Apostle St Paul says in an inspired letter, too bad. Sorry. Just as, if non-Jews object to Scripture, too bad.

BTW, it is scandalous that the modern papacy has by word and deed renounced the mission to the Jews, and also to the Orthodox. Since Jesus Christ laid this universal charge upon the Church, no-one in the Church can possibly by any means renounce it. No pope or Council has that power or that competence. Christ did not confer a share in His Authority upon St Peter and the other Apostles, in order to allow them to contradict, evade or disobey His commands. He conferred it in order to equip them to obey His commands. If bishops don't intend to obey Him, they need to resign their share in the Authority Christ conferred on them. They have no business retaining it, unless they intend to do as He commands. It really is that simple.
Ultraviolet
Go tell that to Saint John Paul II, @Jeffrey Ade . He didn't say a word about converting the Jews when he visited the synagogue in Rome. Not a peep when he visited Israel , too.. :P
Jeffrey Ade
Got me there!
jimcat
The hairy tick Bergoglio is a Modernist. JP2 was a disaster: even a statue of him fell over and killed someone: irishtimes.com/…to-death-by-john-paul-ii-statue-in-italy-1.1774121

Photograph: nbcnews.com/…hn-paul-ii-crucifix-falls-crushes-man-death-n89546
Ultraviolet
...all of which proves @Steve D this is hardly unique to "Bergoglio" as you insist on incorrectly labelling The Church's current pontiff. Certain people here tend to scream in outrage at "Bergoglio" while quietly choosing to ignore that "Saint" John Paul II, as you insist on incorrectly adding "fake quotes" to a Canonized Catholic Saint, said and did far worse.

...and yet for all that The Chur…More
...all of which proves @Steve D this is hardly unique to "Bergoglio" as you insist on incorrectly labelling The Church's current pontiff. Certain people here tend to scream in outrage at "Bergoglio" while quietly choosing to ignore that "Saint" John Paul II, as you insist on incorrectly adding "fake quotes" to a Canonized Catholic Saint, said and did far worse.

...and yet for all that The Church has found through his intercession, The Almighty has worked miracles.

"It was a high level sacrilege."

The Catechism of The Catholic Church makes no such distinction between "high level" sacrilege or any other "level".. Sacrilege is sacrilege. St. Thomas Aquinas delineated three variations of it, personal, local, and real. (Summa, II-II, Q., xcix) However there are no degrees of it any more than there are in apostasy. Something either is sacrilege or it is not.

Consequently you have no business inventing theological distinctions that do not exist on The Church's behalf. That's another error on your part,

Be careful how quickly you condemn Saint John Paul II's admissions of errors within The Church, particularly its ecclesiastical use and approval of force.

In the era you're defending, your errors on the "levels" of sacrilege, along with those snarky "fake quotes" you placed before a Canonized Catholic Saint would win you the unfriendly attention of an Inquistor with a brazier of hot coals and all the other tools The Church of that time authorized for rooting out errors, false belief, heresy, and dissent.

He wouldn't stop digging at your errors on sacrilege, or your obvious doubt of the legitimacy of a valid Canonization. Calling The Pope "Bergoglio" and a "harry tick" would certainly earn you a number of particularly thorough interrogations. It wasn't just "da joos" who ran afoul of the Inquisition. Disespectful loud-mouthed Catholics were a favorite target as well which brings us to...

"the supposed harsh treatment of Galileo"

Supposed? Let's apply that metric to you, Tex. After the Inquistor is done forcing you to admit and abjure your errors regarding sacrilege, "Bergoglio" and "Saint" John Paul II, and if you grovelled enough, The Church might give you the same clemency they gave Galileo.

A lifetime of house-arrest. That's right, Steve-O. The Church would forbid you from ever leaving your home again.

Is that only a "supposed harsh treatment" or do you feel that's a fair punishment for the same kind of name-calling Galileo did? He called a pope "Simplicio" (simple minded) and you're calling a pope a "harry tick".

The Inquisition found Galileo "vehemently suspect of heresy" (only suspect, mind you) and sentenced him to indefinite imprisonment which was commuted to house-arrest until his death.

Apply The Church's notions of justice to yourself and your own remarks before excusing what it did to Galileo. Let's us both remember somethin' here, pardnah...

House-arrest in that era made NO exceptions for medical emergencies.

You get sick and need to go to the doctor? Too bad, you ain't goin' nowhere, hoss.

...Cuz that's what you git fer runnin' yer dang-fool mouth when The Church is the sherrif in town.
Ultraviolet
Leave it to an anti-Semite to take exceptional "outrage" at a comment like that. :P Of course, if we were all living back in the romantic times when The Church had control over secular law, you criticizing the comments of a recently canonized saint in such bold terms would, again, win you another visit from the Inquisition.

This one wouldn't be nearly as pleasant as the last one.The Church …More
Leave it to an anti-Semite to take exceptional "outrage" at a comment like that. :P Of course, if we were all living back in the romantic times when The Church had control over secular law, you criticizing the comments of a recently canonized saint in such bold terms would, again, win you another visit from the Inquisition.

This one wouldn't be nearly as pleasant as the last one.The Church in that era had no patience for repeat-offenders who didn't learn from the mercy given them the first time.
Jeffrey Ade
Couldn't be Catholic if not preaching conversion of the Jews!
jimcat
One can be a Catholic, and fail miserably in all sorts of ways, even in very important ones. But one will be an unhealthy Catholic, not a healthy one. Every Catholic on Earth is an unhealthy Catholic, to some degree or in some way. The sooner the (divisive and untruthful) label "True Catholic" is forgotten, the better. The only "TC", in any worthwhile sense, is Christ Himself, since He alone is …More
One can be a Catholic, and fail miserably in all sorts of ways, even in very important ones. But one will be an unhealthy Catholic, not a healthy one. Every Catholic on Earth is an unhealthy Catholic, to some degree or in some way. The sooner the (divisive and untruthful) label "True Catholic" is forgotten, the better. The only "TC", in any worthwhile sense, is Christ Himself, since He alone is the Pattern and Exemplar of every Christian. Every one else falls short.
Malki Tzedek
"I certainly wasn’t preaching conversion to Jews, Protestants, Muslims, or anyone else!" Darned if I don't recall about something often termed the "Great Commission" in Matthew 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even …More
"I certainly wasn’t preaching conversion to Jews, Protestants, Muslims, or anyone else!" Darned if I don't recall about something often termed the "Great Commission" in Matthew 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age”. This Pope fellow needs a 'system update' of orthodox Catholic theology (barring any of his own revisions, that is).
John A Cassani
Bergoglio says in response, “I was only trying to say that you don’t need to follow the Commandments! I certainly wasn’t preaching conversion to Jews, Protestants, Muslims, or anyone else!”
Orthocat
Anyone reading the epistles of St. Paul seriously knows that he wasn't criticizing the keeping of the Natural Law as enshrined in the Decalogue (that's binding on ALL men, not just Christians & Jews BTW) but the Jewish ceremonial laws, such as circumcision and keeping kosher. These are the practices that don't make one righteous, only the grace of Christ. It boggles the mind that a pope doesn't …More
Anyone reading the epistles of St. Paul seriously knows that he wasn't criticizing the keeping of the Natural Law as enshrined in the Decalogue (that's binding on ALL men, not just Christians & Jews BTW) but the Jewish ceremonial laws, such as circumcision and keeping kosher. These are the practices that don't make one righteous, only the grace of Christ. It boggles the mind that a pope doesn't seems to get this.
Live Mike
Oy vey!
atreverse pensar
Bergoglio wanted to condemn "rigidity", and it backfired.
Today's Jews do not follow the Torah either.
De Profundis
Francis accidentally preaches Christ over Judaism and Jewish Authorities call this "not kosher
Sp . .
Bergoglio is still trying to say that Pachamama is worth worshiping.
V.R.S.
That's the tragifarce of the (B)DSM grotesque.