Thank you, Father. As you said, everything hinges on this question. I remember the day, after over 30 years as an atheist, when I had to reexamine my answer to who I thought Jesus was. Admitting his divinity truly was a crossroads where the path determined life or death. I am so thankful that I was shown the path toward home.
Thank you, that does clarify things a great deal. I am still realing from the Pachemas being placed in Churches for worship and the garden scene in which Francis was present during which nuns and priests prostrated themselves to the ground in front of the statue of Parchema, and the Pope allowed it and neither said nor did anything. Plus he condemned the courageous young man who threw them into the river. He reminded me of Joshua who said, "as for me and my house we shall worship the Lord only", and also of the Maccabees. That young man's love for the Lord was heartening and breath taking!!!!
Your points are excellent. We must learn to separate our man made view of Jesus, the Christ, from the Holy spirit revealed truth and accept Jesus as He truly is. I have a problem tho with one of the three sourcces. Until very recently I accepted and trusted the three sources. However of late I find I have lost trust in the Magesterium especially Pope Francis. I find myself relying on Scripture, Tradition and the Church Fathers not the Pope and Cardinals who seen to have lost the Faith and their personal faith and betrayed God and His people.Does that mean I should not receive Our Lord the Eucharist?
Thank you for your comment. I do not believe I can say you cannot receive communion. To some degree, communion with God can also be a process that takes time, and our imperfection of it, does not necessarily denote mortal sin or excommunication.
I used the term "universal magisterium" (infallible) to distinguish between what is generally considered magisterial teaching (which can be in error) and the universal magisterium which involves those truths passed on from one generation to another. These terms have specific meaning. I believe Pope Francis and Benedict wouldn't insist that everything they muse about, or teach is to be considered infallible. For instance Benedict wrote many books, but there were not meant to be read as "Definitive Magisterial teachings." Further, comments from Pope Francis don't typically take on a definitive nature, but have a very specific context by which he applies them. This of itself implies fallibility since praxis and discipline admit of complexity which the Church does not define excessively. But we do owe them some deference, insofar as we believe the Holy Spirit may be speaking through them. Thus, we have to be careful of the politically charged environment we find ourselves in which can certainly poison the well, our interpretation, etc..
Thank you, Father. As you said, everything hinges on this question. I remember the day, after over 30 years as an atheist, when I had to reexamine my answer to who I thought Jesus was. Admitting his divinity truly was a crossroads where the path determined life or death. I am so thankful that I was shown the path toward home.
Thank you, that does clarify things a great deal. I am still realing from the Pachemas being placed in Churches for worship and the garden scene in which Francis was present during which nuns and priests prostrated themselves to the ground in front of the statue of Parchema, and the Pope allowed it and neither said nor did anything. Plus he condemned the courageous young man who threw them into the river. He reminded me of Joshua who said, "as for me and my house we shall worship the Lord only", and also of the Maccabees. That young man's love for the Lord was heartening and breath taking!!!!
Your points are excellent. We must learn to separate our man made view of Jesus, the Christ, from the Holy spirit revealed truth and accept Jesus as He truly is. I have a problem tho with one of the three sourcces. Until very recently I accepted and trusted the three sources. However of late I find I have lost trust in the Magesterium especially Pope Francis. I find myself relying on Scripture, Tradition and the Church Fathers not the Pope and Cardinals who seen to have lost the Faith and their personal faith and betrayed God and His people.Does that mean I should not receive Our Lord the Eucharist?
Dear Kathleen,
Thank you for your comment. I do not believe I can say you cannot receive communion. To some degree, communion with God can also be a process that takes time, and our imperfection of it, does not necessarily denote mortal sin or excommunication.
I used the term "universal magisterium" (infallible) to distinguish between what is generally considered magisterial teaching (which can be in error) and the universal magisterium which involves those truths passed on from one generation to another. These terms have specific meaning. I believe Pope Francis and Benedict wouldn't insist that everything they muse about, or teach is to be considered infallible. For instance Benedict wrote many books, but there were not meant to be read as "Definitive Magisterial teachings." Further, comments from Pope Francis don't typically take on a definitive nature, but have a very specific context by which he applies them. This of itself implies fallibility since praxis and discipline admit of complexity which the Church does not define excessively. But we do owe them some deference, insofar as we believe the Holy Spirit may be speaking through them. Thus, we have to be careful of the politically charged environment we find ourselves in which can certainly poison the well, our interpretation, etc..