Welcome to the Weekend Roundup! – News & Views – 11/30/19

As part of his progressive agenda, Francis will soon be adding sins against the ecology to the Catholic catechism. Catholics are taught they must successfully obey the Ten Commandments and church rules in order to possibly merit Heaven. Christians are certainly commanded to be good stewards of the Lord’s gifts, which include this planet and its resources, but Catholics are not stewards/servants because they are not trusting in Jesus Christ as there Savior by faith alone. Instead, they are seeking to establish their own righteousness (Romans 10:3). How will Francis roll out his guidelines on ecological sins? Will throwing gum wrappers on the street be a “venial” sin and disposing of four old tires in the woods a “mortal” sin?

After months of pleading from outraged Buffalo parishioners, pope Francis finally relented and tapped bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn to look into allegations that bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo had repeatedly covered-up for abusive priests. But a former altar boy has recently sued DiMarzio himself for abuse. Responding to the allegations against DiMarzio, the pope stated that he wants the matter “cleared up quickly.” Throughout this double-decade of scandal, the RCC has consistently put its predatory priests and bishops first and victims last by seeking the “quick fix.”

The Catholic church teaches that at mass its priests transform bread wafers and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ and that the congregants receive special graces by consuming the Jesus wafer that help them merit their salvation. But recent research (see here) reveals that only 31% of Catholics believe priests actually change bread wafers and wine into Jesus, an amazing statistic! Whether they believe in transubstantiation or not, these lost Catholics are attempting to merit their salvation rather than trusting in Jesus Christ as their Savior by faith alone.

Pope Francis guilefully lifted the ban on communion for remarried divorcees via two footnotes in his 2016 Amoris Laetitia encyclical, leaving it up to the discretion of the administering priest. As liberal bishops and priests continue to roll out Francis’ novel teaching, conservatives and traditionalists rant and rail.

Christians should not be concerned about society’s approval. The Gospel will offend. However, much of society’s aversion is due to some evangelicals’ outspoken support of President Trump and Republican politics (see Jerry Falwell, Jr., Robert Jeffress, Franklin Graham, etc.) rather than for proclaiming the Gospel.

We are so blessed to have God’s Word, the Bible, but society is more concerned with the trendiest shows available from Netflix or HBO.

The Babylon Bee takes the culture’s irrational crusades to their illogical conclusion.

20 thoughts on “Welcome to the Weekend Roundup! – News & Views – 11/30/19

  1. Hi brother the pope is nuts adding sins of ecology to their book I mean John Paul 2 was more Catholic than Franky is and that’s saying something. Why do people say Catholics are Christians and if I had a nickel for everytime I heard that I would be a millionaire.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Francis is revealing his progressive mindset with his push to define ecological sins. I have a question for Francis: Would throwing a gum wrapper on the street be a venial sin while investing $100,000 in Exxon-Mobil be a mortal sin? Just more legalism for lost Catholics to sift through.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Thanks! Francis talks out both sides of his mouth. The Vatican has billions of dollars of investments in all types of commercial enterprises including the same ones he “preaches” against. It’s all a sham.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. The one thing Catholics can’t answer is are they the blessed man of Romans 4:8 because they can lose justification only true Christians are the blessed man of Romans 4:8

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: lots of conversations

      Bible Guy is definitely back (as ReformedBeliever) and I’m glad to have him back! I give him credit for giving me the idea on how Francis is going to roll out these ecological sins; what constitutes a venial vs. a mortal ecological sin?

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Re: transubstantiation

    Well I guess Gelasius needed a lesson on transubstantiation too.

    Pope Gelasius I, Bishop of Rome (492-496): Surely the sacrament we take of the Lord’s body and blood is a divine thing, on account of which, and by the same we are made partakers of the divine nature; and yet the substance of the bread and wine does not cease to be. And certainly the image and similitude of Christ’s body and blood are celebrated in the action of the mysteries. (Tractatus de duabus naturis 14 [PL Sup.-III. 773]) See Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3 Vols., trans. George Musgrave Giger and ed. James T. Dennison (Phillipsburg: reprinted by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1992), Vol. 3, p. 479 (XVIII.xxvi.xx).

    Edward J. Kilmartin, S.J.: According to Gelasius, the sacraments of the Eucharist communicate the grace of the principal mystery. His main concern, however, is to stress, as did Theodoret, the fact that after the consecration the elements remain what they were before the consecration. Edward J. Kilmartin, S.J., “The Eucharistic Theology of Pope Gelasius I: A Nontridentine View” in Studia Patristica, Vol. XXIX (Leuven: Peeters, 1997), p. 288.

    Edward J. Kilmartin, S.J.: The teaching of Gelasius on the subject of the sacraments of the Eucharist has often been explained as being in line with the teaching of the Council of Trent. But, as a matter of fact, Trent rejected it on two counts. In canon 1 of the thirteenth Session (1551), the council taught that the Eucharist not only signifies but contains ‘the totum Christum’. The explanation of Gelasius does not include, and indeed seems explicitly to exclude, a doctrine of the somatic real presence of the ‘whole Christ’. Secondly, Canon 2 stresses the patristic notion of ‘conversion to avoid the notion of the union of the substance of bread and wine with the substance of the humanity of Christ. This concept was already found in the list of propositions attributed to Reflormers formulated in 1547: ‘There is in the Eucharist indeed the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, but with the substance of bread and wine, so that there is no transubstantiation, but a hypostatic union of the humanity and the substance of bread and wine’. Canon 2 was formulated precisely to avoid the idea that a rigid parallel exists between the unique hypostatic union of Logos and humanity and the sacrament of the Eucharist. But precisely this viewpoint is central to the Eucharistic theology of Pope Gelasius. Edward J. Kilmartin, S.J., “The Eucharistic Theology of Pope Gelasius I: A Nontridentine View” in Studia Patristica, Vol. XXIX (Leuven: Peeters, 1997), p. 288.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I was reading the other day in the newsfeed about the Pope adding ecological sin to the list. I laughed at first but then I realised how sad it really is. Who does he think he is God?
    Thank you Tom for another informative weekend round up.
    Keep up the great work brother.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s