https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/pope-francis-texas-bishop-strickland-b2445810.html
Bishop Joseph Strickland was ‘relieved’ of his duties as head of the Diocese of Tyler after challenging the pope’s leadership
These people keep talking about Jesus, but if the Jesus they talk about and describe in their holy book ever actually had to come back, he wouldn't last ten minutes until they'd call him radical leftie, an SJW and a 'danger to the world' and crucify him again.
Wall Street maybe not. Flipping out in Joel Osteen's megachurch would be biblically accurate however.
Papal infallibility is also traditional doctrine. Sounds like some people really want to be excommunicated.
It's only infallible when it's the message you want to hear. If the message isn't to your liking then it must be the work of the devil. Very similar to "he's not hurting the right people".
Indeed. I was trying to (probably too obliquely) highlight how futile it is to inject any logic or reasoning into the situation, given the subject matter.
...We teach and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, irreformable.
Sounds pretty cut and dried to me. It applies whenever the Pope speaks ex cathedra, and the bishop was directly contravening such doctrine regarding faith or morals.
The literature about this subject is all over the place. I definitely see no consensus that there have only been two. Maybe two that are very good examples, but the general theme is that whenever he speaks of faith or morals he is infallible. Oh well, you could spend a lifetime trying to logic the illogical.
With that, the Roman Catholic Church is now about one century more progressive than the Mormons. Still a brainwashing and abusive cult...but they all are.
I mean, I'll take the Catholic church any day over American christo-fascists. At least the church is willing to (very slowly) evolve with the times, meanwhile the christo-fascists are busy creating their own al qaeda clones.
The Church is only doing this because it's slowly losing its grip on power. American protestants are rewarded for their extremism with more power.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Pope Francis forcibly removed a conservative Texas bishop who had been a staunch critic of his progressive reforms of the Catholic Church.
The Vatican announced on Saturday 11 November that Bishop Joseph Strickland had been “relieved” of his position as the head of the Diocese of Tyler after the pope ordered an “apostolic visitation” in June.
Bishop Strickland emerged as a leading critic of the pontiff, claiming his leadership was “undermining the Deposit of Faith” and amplifying videos on social media that described Francis as a “diabolically disordered clown.”
Cardinal Daniel Nicholas DiNardo, of the Metropolitan Archbishop of Galveston-Houston, said in a statement that his removal came after the Vatican ordered an investigation into “all aspects of the governance and leadership”.
This week, the Pope said that the church would allow transgender Catholics to be baptised and serve as godparents as long as it did not create scandal or “confusion”.
He has previously stated that gay marriages could be blessed and the church was “open to all” as part of growing outreach to the LGBTQ community.
The original article contains 356 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 51%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
