The Catholic Message Board

Jack3 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2026 6:34 am I wasn't prepared for this much disagreement with the Pope when he quoted the Bible.

Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition go hand-in-hand.

Context, or perceived context, matters.

Student wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2026 7:27 pm God listening to prayers is not conditional.

Scripture disagrees with you.

Proverbs 28 9 When one will not listen to the law, even one’s prayers are an abomination.

James 4 2 You want something and do not have it, so you commit murder. And you covet something and cannot obtain it, so you engage in disputes and conflicts. You do not have because you do not ask. 3 You ask and do not receive because you ask wrongly, in order to spend what you get on your pleasures.

Isa 59 Surely the arm of the Lord is not too short to save,
nor his ear too dull to hear.
2 But your iniquities have separated
you from your God;
your sins have hidden his face from you,
so that he will not hear.

In each of those cases, Stella, God listened. His answers might not have been what the prayer requested - perhaps. You want to discuss the value (or righteousness?) or the prayers?

Islam is clearly an abomination. Authoritarian control over an entire people, also an abomination.

My problem here is that it seems like recent Popes, and by "modern" I mean "since Paul VI", are trying to add three new dogmas to the deposit of faith:

1. The dogma of climate change
2. The dogma of open borders
3. The dogma of absolute pacifism

I am serious about the following question: What does Pope Leo mean when he says that war is "Never justified"?

Does he mean that in response to Pearl Harbor, FDR should have responded by asking the Japanese for terms of our surrender?
Does he mean that Churchill should have just let Hitler take over Europe without offering any resistance?
Does he mean that Charles Martel should have just let the Muslims conquer Europe?

Is he really trying to say that Catholicism is a pacifist religion like the Quakers or the Mennonites? Because a lot of what he is saying sounds like he is trying to teach exactly that.

What exactly does he mean?

And the problem is not unique to Leo, it has been an issue with every Pope of my lifetime (excepting, of course, John Paul I, who didn't actually do anything).

And when I say "It seems like they are trying to proclaim a new dogma," this is because it is a serious question just why, with all the issues in the world, those three issues are the ones that have consumed more of the Pope's time,in the last 60 years, than any other issues. Why those issues? Issues about which there is a wide range of acceptable positions within Catholicism?

Let's not forget that Pope Urban II called for Western Christianity to take up arms to help the Byzantine Empire and recapture Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule, popularizing the phrase "Deus vult" ("God wills it").

So if Pope Leo is to be taken at face value, he's saying that God didn't listen to one of his predecessors.

Doom wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2026 7:50 amMy problem here is that it seems like recent Popes, and by "modern" I mean "since Paul VI", are trying to add three new dogmas to the deposit of faith:

1. The dogma of climate change
2. The dogma of open borders
3. The dogma of absolute pacifism
...
... why, with all the issues in the world, those three issues are the ones that have consumed more of the Pope's time,in the last 60 years, than any other issues. Why those issues?
...

That is interesting. In this case I don't know if I agree with Doom, but I am listening.

One area, not rising to dogma, that I find troublesome is the defense of Christendom. Or the lack of defense. The current, multi-generational Islamic jihad, aimed at eradicating all other religions (and all of Western civilization) and the similar atheistic Communist/Progressive/Liberal effort seem to be an issue that should move to the fore.

Another is the collapse of Catholicism in Europe. With the background of the morphing of the Protestant "churches" into empty shells. The withering of the Catholic buttress against a godless continent should be a major issue.

Doom's post bears pondering.

Doom wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2026 7:50 am My problem here is that it seems like recent Popes, and by "modern" I mean "since Paul VI", are trying to add three new dogmas to the deposit of faith:

1. The dogma of climate change
2. The dogma of open borders
3. The dogma of absolute pacifism

I am serious about the following question: What does Pope Leo mean when he says that war is "Never justified"?

Does he mean that in response to Pearl Harbor, FDR should have responded by asking the Japanese for terms of our surrender?
Does he mean that Churchill should have just let Hitler take over Europe without offering any resistance?
Does he mean that Charles Martel should have just let the Muslims conquer Europe?

Is he really trying to say that Catholicism is a pacifist religion like the Quakers or the Mennonites? Because a lot of what he is saying sounds like he is trying to teach exactly that.

What exactly does he mean?

And the problem is not unique to Leo, it has been an issue with every Pope of my lifetime (excepting, of course, John Paul I, who didn't actually do anything).

And when I say "It seems like they are trying to proclaim a new dogma," this is because it is a serious question just why, with all the issues in the world, those three issues are the ones that have consumed more of the Pope's time,in the last 60 years, than any other issues. Why those issues? Issues about which there is a wide range of acceptable positions within Catholicism?

In a 2003 interview with 30 Days, the then Cdl Ratzinger states “We must begin asking ourselves whether as things stand, with new weapons that cause destruction well beyond the groups involved in the fight, it is still licit to allow that a just war might exist.”

Being careful not to make any comment that would be deemed controversial, I'll just link to Pope Paul VI's 1974 message regarding what peace is and isn't.

https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/ ... peace.html