So noles is correct that the Pope’s practical proposals on things like climate change are not a part of church teaching, though they should be given due consideration in virtue of the Pope’s office and the Pope and the church’s ordinary teachings that require the religious submission of mind and will are not necessarily gravely sinful to fail to ascent to the teachings that have been in foully defined to be a part of dogma. Kirk’s other objection though seems to be that the Pope has shortcomings like the Pope allegedly being ambiguous on the teaching related to homosexuality or him being a Marxist apparently.
But let’s Grant Kirk’s point the Pope is not perfect and he says and does things that might make him not look like in a desirable light. Well, no successor of St. Peter is perfect, and some of them are downright scandalous, including St. Peter himself. Imagine an early Christian saying Your leader St. Peter sucks because he denied Jesus three times and Peter was afraid to dine with the Gentile Christians and St. Paul had to rebuke him. That guy is a coward. He denies the truth of who Jesus is. So I’m going to follow a new leader instead, or imagine an ancient Israelite saying, look at the sins of Moses or Gideon or David.
https://www.catholic.com/audio/cot/what-charlie-kirk-gets-wrong-about-catholicism
Jesus Fucking Christ
No comments:
Post a Comment