No ouches at all.
@Caroline03 I'm not cricizing you or even your position. That's the beautiful part of Canon Law 751.
You don't HAVE to submit to the Supreme Pontiff's
teachings. Only to the Supreme
Pontiff. In practical terms, so long as you recognize and acknowledge he
-is- the Supreme Pontiff (i.e
head of the Church), then you have fulfilled the requirement in that you are not contesting his lawful authority, i.e. you are submitting to it..
His
-teachings- are a different matter. The same is true for his
endorsements, his
views, his
opinions, his
preferences and so on.
So long as they are not formally delivered as the Head of The Catholic Church under the auspices of Papal Infallibility, then they are not technically binding.
NONE of these latest errors are.
Pope Franics has, simply put, just been sharing his
opinion and it's contrary to the teachings of the Church. Ignore it as you please. Benedict did the same and, in truth, worse because he was erudite and presented his views far more persuasively and to a more shchoarly audience.
Submission and pretense are two different things. Since submission is not legally defined in Canon Law, it's open to interpretation. Francis is the Supreme Pontiff, he's currently expressing his opinions, his opinions are contrary to the Church, but they aren't binding. . So were JP II's opinion on Islam.
Your writing isn't a mess and, in truth, you aren't a Catholic Archbishop known for his scholary criticisms.
Archbisho Vigano, however, is
both and he always uses these hedges to say what he wants to without actually coming out in open defiance. That's how pretense works.
"We are told that to deny ONE aspect of Church teaching is to step outside the Church."As I've said elsewhere, Benedict XVI did and so did JP II. Yet for all that, somehow JP II was still able to posthumously intercede with God for miracles. It's difficult to reconcile him being
outside the Church and
still a saint with at least two verified miracles to his credit.
What the situation teaches me is popes and even saints may err and they still remain popes and saints.
As I've told others in far less congenial circumstances than our conversation here, Pope Francis chooses "yes men" but they're
marxist yes-men. Homosexuality is one of many, many tools they use to destroy Western society. They're just as enthusiastic over illegal immigration and, in Francis' case, climate change.
It's getting kinda chilly now in Europe, where I live has already seen half a foot of snow. Climate change activists are like crickets: they're loud in the summer and die off in the fall. Next spring, we'll see more of Francis and Greta Thunberg.
"Heaven has sent a Leader to the RC Church who proclaims the complete ANTITHESIS of what the real Christ taught."Francis isn't the first. In terms of theology, we've had a long bad run of Church Leaders doing just that since Vatican Council II, in one form or another.
"The New World Order aims to dis-establish the OLD Roman Catholic Order founded by Christ ie His RC Church."Don't worry about that. Truly. I hereby formally predict as GTV's Official Self-Appointed Seer:
-That Will Never Happpen.Not only relying on the promises of Christ, but also of my own first-hand experience with Traditionalist clergy. They are masters of remaining in full communion with the Church and yet, remaining true to Christ.
.I can answer your "why" questions fairly easily, since they all stem from the same basic one. Why does God allow evil in the world? He allows it because he allows humanity free-will. The leadership of His Church is human and therefore also subject to this dictum.
There have been many, many bad popes in history. Some founded dynastic families of "popes" one after the other. We're fortunate not to be living in such times. In the meantime, this is when our Catholic Faith in TRULY accepting God's Will gets tested, even if the trial is unpleasant.