The Pope Is A Communist.

[JudgeRightly]

Video: Pope Francis Takes Off The Mask, Says Christianity Never Recognized Private Property As A Right - Red State Nation

Since becoming the head of the Catholic Church in 2013, Pope Francis has not shied away from the political domain. On Sunday, the religious leader used the COVID-19 pandemic to renew his criticisms of free-market capitalism. In a video message he sent to the International Conference of judges...

redstatenation.com

When God says "Thou shall not steal," it inherently implies that a person has the right to personally own something, and that no one has the right to take it away from him.

Mr. Pope here, however, seems to have discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs.

 

[chair]

Is there a mismatch between the Old and New Testaments on this topic?

 

[Trump Gurl]

Mr. Pope here, however, seems to have discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs.

We were all getting along so well too, and then you had to attack the pope. That's too bad.

Setting aside the childish slur (Mr. Pope), the Pope has not discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs. That's a stupid lie.

The responsibility of Peter and his successors is to safeguard the Gospel and the teachings of Christ and make sure they are preserved for the next generation. He does that, and that's all there is to that.

Outside of that, a pope is still a human being like anyone else, and many human beings pop off about politics, and they often get it wrong. So Jorge Mario Bergoglio (his real name) got it wrong. Oh well. His personal opinion is what it is. He was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, so that obviously colors his political beliefs.

Jesus said many socialist things that we conservatives politely turn a blind eye too, so lets keep it real. Jesus, i.e. God, does not fit nicely into any American political construct. If the pope did fit nicely into one particular American political construct then I would be worried. But popes never do. That's why they are roundly hated by all political activists, and then they are latched onto and cheered by political activists when a pope happens to say something they like.

But your statement, that the pope "discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs" is way way way over the top and not right.

I am very disappointed in you.

I am going to wait for the correction to this which is sure to come, and here is why: According to your article the pope said thatthe right to private property is “a secondary natural right derived from that which everyone has”, which in turn arises from the “universal destiny of created goods” and affirmed that “the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and the right to private property untouchable“.

That sounds weird. The language is off. I will bet a thousand dollars that something is wrong with the translation, and that a bad translation combined with some subtleties made it sound like something it was not. So, when I see a clarification come through channels that are trustworthy I will return to this thread and post it. Popes are always mistranslated and misquoted.

Until then I am exiting.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Is there a mismatch between the Old and New Testaments on this topic?

There is no mismatch. The Old Testament is the foundation for the New Testament. They agree.

 

[JudgeRightly]

We were all getting along so well too, and then you had to attack the pope. That's too bad.

I'm an equal opportunity offender.

Setting aside the childish slur (Mr. Pope), the Pope has not discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs,

When the Pope says, quote, "a secondary natural right derived from that which everyone has" and "the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and untouchable the right to private property," that is, in fact, a discarding of what God says.

unlike your friend Mr. Enyart who swims in a pool of heresy.

Gesundheit.

The responsibility of Peter and his successors

How about we just say, "those who are responsible for guiding the flock."

is to safeguard the Gospel and the teachings of Christ and make sure they are preserved for the next generation. He does that, and that's all there is to that.

Which Francis is most certainly not doing.

Outside of that, a pope is still a human being like anyone else,

Indeed.

and many human beings pop off about politics, and they often get it wrong.

So, are you agreeing with me that what the Pope said is wrong?

So Jorge Mario Bergoglio (his real name) got it wrong. Oh well. His personal opinion is what it is. He was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, so that obviously colors his political beliefs.

Truth is not affected by national border or place of origin.

Jesus said many socialist things that we conservatives politely turn a blind eye too, so lets keep it real.

Jesus was speaking to a nation who he hoped would accept Him as Messiah, about the coming tribulation where the best way for them to survive was to live depending on each other.

He was not speaking to what you and I would call "Christians."

Jesus, i.e. God, does not fit nicely into any American political construct.

Of course not. But that's not because what He said is wrong, and not even because what He said isn't applicable today, but because what He said was directed at one specific group of people which DOES NOT include America.

If the pope did fit nicely into one particular American political construct

Are you actually attempting to equate what the Pope says to what Jesus said?

Shame on you if so.

If not, then please explain why you would draw such a parallel?

then I would be worried. But popes never do.

Are the popes ever wrong?

And if so, do you think they should repent and ask God to help them in their daily walk with Him?

That's why they are roundly hated by all political activists, and then they are latched onto and cheered by political activists when a pope happens to say something they like.

It's not a bad thing when someone promotes evil to criticize them.

It's not a bad thing when someone does something good to praise them for doing something good.

I am doing the former.

But your statement, that the pope "discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs" is way way way over the top and not right.

I'll say it again.

The pope is a communist.

Communists believe that there is no inherent God-given right to personal property.

The pope said: "a secondary natural right derived from that which everyone has" and "the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and untouchable the right to private property."

The Bible says: "Thou shall not steal," and many other things that affirm and reaffirm that people have a right to own property.

I am very disappointed in you.

That's nice.

How about being disappointed in the fact that the pope is, in fact, supporting communism when he says, "a secondary natural right derived from that which everyone has" and "the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and untouchable the right to private property,"

I am going to wait for the correction to this which is sure to come,

There won't be one.

and here is why: According to your article the pope said that the right to private property is “a secondary natural right derived from that which everyone has”, which in turn arises from the “universal destiny of created goods” and affirmed that “the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and the right to private property untouchable“.

That is, in fact what the Pope said (with minor alterations)

Here is the video, TG, of the pope, saying that the right to private property is secondary and not untouchable.

That sounds weird.

Of course it sounds weird, because it's not the truth.

The language is off.

That's because it's a poor translation of what he said.

Here is a transcript of the video using the captions that I did just now (I fully admit that I don't know enough spanish to translate directly, but I will say that I know enough spanish, and about latin-based languages in general to recognize certain words):

Righteous are those who do justice. Righteous, knowing that, when, resorting to law, we give the poor what is essential, we do not give them our belongings, nor those of third parties. But we give them back what is theirs. We have lost this idea so many times to return what belongs to them. Let's build the new social justice admitting that the Christian translation [JR: I presume the translator meant "tradition," as that's what it sounded like the pope said] has never recognized as absolute and untouchable the right to private property, and has always emphasized the social function of all its forms. The right of ownership is a secondary natural right deriving from the right that everyone has, born from the universal destination of the created goods. There is no social justice that can be based on iniquity which presupposes the concentration of wealth." - Pope Francis, as he sits in his lavish, Vatican surroundings

You're more than welcome to attempt a translation of your own, however, I doubt it will be much different than the above.

I will bet a thousand dollars that something is wrong with the translation,

If I were a betting man, you'd owe me a grand, then.

and that a bad translation combined with some subtleties made it sound like something it was not.

This is what catholics always seem to claim when the pope says something controversial. I could understand once or twice, but every time he says something controversial, people always jump to his defence and try to make it seem like he misspoke or it was a bad translation or something.

But again, the transcript shows what he said clearly.

So, when I see a clarification come through channels that are trustworthy I will return to this thread and post it.

I doubt you will.

Popes are always mistranslated and misquoted.

That's what they all say. You'd think they'd do a better job translating what he says... they apparently don't get paid enough, based on the kind of room he's in.

Until then I am exiting.

Just know that you likely will not return to this thread then.

 

[chair]

There is no mismatch. The Old Testament is the foundation for the New Testament. They agree.

Foundation- yes. Agree- no.

Aren't there verses in the NT that suggest giving away property?

 

[Trump Gurl]

Briefly scanning your reply I can see that it is a massive heap of gobbledygook so I won't engage in bickering in the weeds.

Bottom line: Saying that the pope discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs is false. And the Pope is not a Communist either. That was untrue.

As to the content of what the pope said we turn to this::

PART THREE​

LIFE IN CHRIST​

​

SECTION TWO​

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS​

​

CHAPTER TWO​

"YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF"​

​

ARTICLE 7​

"You Shall Not Steal"​

​

I. THE UNIVERSAL DESTINATION AND THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF GOODS​

​

2402 In the beginning God entrusted the earth and its resources to the common stewardship of mankind to take care of them, master them by labor, and enjoy their fruits (Gen 1:26-29). The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race. However, the earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge. It should allow for a natural solidarity to develop between men.​

​

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.​

​

2404 "In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself." The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.​

source: The Ten Commandments: You shall not steal


The pope is quite loose with his language so I am not too worked up. And he also gets taken out of context a lot. Unless he comes out and specifically says he is changing Church teaching, which he has not, I would not get too worked up The doctrine stated above is correct and he did not change it. If anyone thinks that the doctrine stated above is not correct then they are in error.

The importance of the word “absolute” in his statement as quoted by the OP article cannot be ignored. The Pope is speaking very precisely here, and needs to be heard precisely. Overlooking that word and its impact leads to a misinterpretation of the pope’s message. Of course property rights are important. And of course they are not absolute, as he correctly stated.

The author of the OP article states further down, "Sorry, but property rights are not secondary. As an attorney who defended property owners from government takings liked to say, “Property rights are human rights.” You can’t have one without the other."

She speaks of laws of men, not God. Maybe they are not secondary according to the laws of her land, but man's law is not God's law. Your OP article places man's law above God's law, and in your attack against the pope, you confused man's law with God's law.

In the end, despite any translation oddities, the article's quote of the pope is a reasonable summary of the Church’s teaching on private property rights, which falls under the commandments, and that teaching is infallible, ratified by God the Holy Spirit. Property rights are important, but they are secondary and limited rights, subject to the common good and the needs of others.

Thus sayeth the Lord.

Just know that you likely will not return to this thread then.

You should know me better than that by now.

 

[Trump Gurl]

Just to say it:
I love my country and I am a patriot. But in the end, the USA and its laws are inventions of men.
God is God, and His Church was established by God the Son Jesus Christ.

The former shall never supersede the latter.

The Church and the Papacy stood 2,000 years before there was a USA and they will stand long after the USA is dust. They will be here when Christ comes again and they will be drawn up into Glory.

 

[Right Divider]

Of course not. But that's not because what He said is wrong, and not even because what He said isn't applicable today, but because what He said was directed at one specific group of people which DOES NOT include America.

At a specific TIME and for a specific REASON and PURPOSE.

 

[Idolater]

Just to say it:
I love my country and I am a patriot. But in the end, the USA and its laws are inventions of men.

Human rights are "invented" by God, and the United States is the first nation to enumerate in a Constitution, the liberal ideological principles of the rule of law, the separation of powers, a constitution, and the recognition of universal human rights in law. So while history shows that the American founders were not even Catholics, let alone Catholic (or Orthodox) bishops, nonetheless, because human rights are God-given, America, particularly our liberal democracy as defined by the institutions listed above, which has since spread to the whole developed world, is of God and not of man.

God is God, and His Church was established by God the Son Jesus Christ.

Agreed, where "His Church" is especially the office of a bishop, and wherever that office is administrated. iow, where the valid bishops are, there is His Church.

(Setting aside that all the valid bishops today are not in communion with each other.)

There is another meaning of "His Church". It means as Pope St. John Paul II's catechism teaches, all those who believe in Christ. That's not the definition I'm using above, I am using the definition of His visible Church, where His sacraments are celebrated validly by valid bishops, which is the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

The former shall never supersede the latter.

But it isn't an unreasonable idea that there can exist a political theory that coexists with the Church, that is separate from the Church.

The Church and the Papacy stood 2,000 years before there was a USA and they will stand long after the USA is dust. They will be here when Christ comes again and they will be drawn up into Glory.

I believe the United States will never be dust.

And regarding the OP: All I really see there is that taxation of some sort isn't inherently immoral, which I agree with. I just believe that income tax and property tax is inherently immoral (extortion), but that there are moral ways to generate tax revenue, like sales tax, tariffs, and other taxes on commerce.

Property rights cannot morally mean the right to violate the basic, fundamental rights of others. That idea, writ large, is what liberalism was pitted against, when monarchs basically owned all the land, and so with the wrong notion of property rights, they would have had the right to infringe anybody's rights, based on their supposed property rights. Liberalism, liberal ideology, contends against this idea, and promotes the contrary idea that no matter who owns what, that our inalienable rights are absolute, in that it is absolutely immoral to violate or disregard them, even if one man owns the whole world's property.

In this way, I agree that property rights are secondary and derivative.

 

[Trump Gurl]

In this way, I agree that property rights are secondary and derivative.

So you agree with the pope. Then what the heck was all the other crap for. I know, you just needed to argue against me because I got on you in those other threads.

And yes, the USA will be dust. No nation ever lasts forever..

 

[Right Divider]

And yes, the USA will be dust. No nation ever lasts forever..

There will be one that will last forever.

Luk 1:31-33 KJV And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: (33) And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Isa 9:6-7 KJV For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (7) Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

 

[Idolater]

So you agree with the pope. Then what the heck was all the other crap for. I know, you just needed to argue against me because I got on you in those other threads.

Or, I engaged with what you wrote there. Which is the point of an anonymous internet discussion forum.

And yes, the USA will be dust. No nation ever lasts forever..

If you mean that Christ's kingdom in all its fullness, when He comes again, will dispatch with all the nations of man at that point (the new heaven and the new earth), then sure. Otherwise and until then, I foresee nothing but the continued survival and growth of America.

 

[Right Divider]

If you mean that Christ's kingdom in all its fullness, when He comes again, will dispatch with all the nations of man at that point (the new heaven and the new earth), then sure.

In the new heaven and the new earth, there will be nations. With one nation above the rest.

Rev 21:24-27 KJV And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. (25) And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. (26) And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it. (27) And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Foundation- yes. Agree- no.

They agree in that they are all from God.

Aren't there verses in the NT that suggest giving away property?

I think you answered your own question.

In case it wasn't clear, here's how:

In order for someone to give away "their" property, it must be theirs to begin with.

Also, the OT also has verses on giving away one's property.

 

[Trump Gurl]

In the new heaven and the new earth, there will be nations. With one nation above the rest.

Pure nonsense. Par for your usual course.

Why the heck would the corrupt practice of man against man and nation against nation, which was only a result of man's fallen nature in the fist place, continue once man is glorified and perfected and beyond such things. How stupid is that.

And if you say that it is in the scriptures, then I will reply that your personal interpretation of scripture is not scripture itself. And usually your personal interpretation of scripture is totally retarded anyway.

In short, the phrase “a new heaven and a new earth” (Revelation 21:1-5) refers to what heaven will be like for us as resurrected, glorified human persons. That is, a three-dimensional reality that thus accommodates aspects of our physical earthly experience, though in a glorified manner. (See bottom of post for more.)

Now, having said all that, none of that is the topic of the thread!

The thread title, "The Pope Is A Communist", and the statement that the Pope "discarded what God says in favor of his own personal beliefs" are not true.

Post #7 is correct ::

. . . . . to the content of what the pope said we turn to this::

PART THREE​

LIFE IN CHRIST​

​

SECTION TWO​

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS​

​

CHAPTER TWO​

"YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF"​

​

ARTICLE 7​

"You Shall Not Steal"​

​

I. THE UNIVERSAL DESTINATION AND THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF GOODS​

​

2402 In the beginning God entrusted the earth and its resources to the common stewardship of mankind to take care of them, master them by labor, and enjoy their fruits (Gen 1:26-29). The goods of creation are destined for the whole human race. However, the earth is divided up among men to assure the security of their lives, endangered by poverty and threatened by violence. The appropriation of property is legitimate for guaranteeing the freedom and dignity of persons and for helping each of them to meet his basic needs and the needs of those in his charge. It should allow for a natural solidarity to develop between men.​

​

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.​

​

2404 "In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself." The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.​

source: The Ten Commandments: You shall not steal


The pope is quite loose with his language so I am not too worked up. And he also gets taken out of context a lot. Unless he comes out and specifically says he is changing Church teaching, which he has not, I would not get too worked up The doctrine stated above is correct and he did not change it. If anyone thinks that the doctrine stated above is not correct then they are in error.

The importance of the word “absolute” in his statement as quoted by the OP article cannot be ignored. The Pope is speaking very precisely here, and needs to be heard precisely. Overlooking that word and its impact leads to a misinterpretation of the pope’s message. Of course property rights are important. And of course they are not absolute, as he correctly stated.

The author of the OP article states further down, "Sorry, but property rights are not secondary. As an attorney who defended property owners from government takings liked to say, “Property rights are human rights.” You can’t have one without the other."

She speaks of laws of men, not God. Maybe they are not secondary according to the laws of her land, but man's law is not God's law. Your OP article places man's law above God's law, and in your attack against the pope, you confused man's law with God's law.

In the end, despite any translation oddities, the article's quote of the pope is a reasonable summary of the Church’s teaching on private property rights, which falls under the commandments, and that teaching is infallible, ratified by God the Holy Spirit. Property rights are important, but they are secondary and limited rights, subject to the common good and the needs of others.

Thus sayeth the Lord

Appendix:


VI. THE HOPE OF THE NEW HEAVEN AND THE NEW EARTH

1042 At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal judgment, the righteous will reign for ever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. The universe itself will be renewed:

The Church . . . will receive her perfection only in the glory of heaven, when will come the time of the renewal of all things. At that time, together with the human race, the universe itself, which is so closely related to man and which attains its destiny through him, will be perfectly re-established in Christ.631​

1043 Sacred Scripture calls this mysterious renewal, which will transform humanity and the world, "new heavens and a new earth."632 It will be the definitive realization of God's plan to bring under a single head "all things in [Christ], things in heaven and things on earth."633

1044 In this new universe, the heavenly Jerusalem, God will have his dwelling among men.634 "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away."635

1045 For man, this consummation will be the final realization of the unity of the human race, which God willed from creation and of which the pilgrim Church has been "in the nature of sacrament."636 Those who are united with Christ will form the community of the redeemed, "the holy city" of God, "the Bride, the wife of the Lamb."637 She will not be wounded any longer by sin, stains, self-love, that destroy or wound the earthly community.638 The beatific vision, in which God opens himself in an inexhaustible way to the elect, will be the ever-flowing well-spring of happiness, peace, and mutual communion.

1046 For the cosmos, Revelation affirms the profound common destiny of the material world and man:

For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God . . . in hope because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay. . . . We know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.639​

1047 The visible universe, then, is itself destined to be transformed, "so that the world itself, restored to its original state, facing no further obstacles, should be at the service of the just," sharing their glorification in the risen Jesus Christ.640

1048 "We know neither the moment of the consummation of the earth and of man, nor the way in which the universe will be transformed. The form of this world, distorted by sin, is passing away, and we are taught that God is preparing a new dwelling and a new earth in which righteousness dwells, in which happiness will fill and surpass all the desires of peace arising in the hearts of men."641

1049 "Far from diminishing our concern to develop this earth, the expectancy of a new earth should spur us on, for it is here that the body of a new human family grows, foreshadowing in some way the age which is to come. That is why, although we must be careful to distinguish earthly progress clearly from the increase of the kingdom of Christ, such progress is of vital concern to the kingdom of God, insofar as it can contribute to the better ordering of human society."642

1050 "When we have spread on earth the fruits of our nature and our enterprise . . . according to the command of the Lord and in his Spirit, we will find them once again, cleansed this time from the stain of sin, illuminated and transfigured, when Christ presents to his Father an eternal and universal kingdom."643 God will then be "all in all" in eternal life:644

True and subsistent life consists in this: the Father, through the Son and in the Holy Spirit, pouring out his heavenly gifts on all things without exception. Thanks to his mercy, we too, men that we are, have received the inalienable promise of eternal life.645​

631 LG 48; Cf. Acts 3:21; Eph 1:10; Col 1:20; 2 Pet 3:10-13.
632 2 Pet 3:13; Cf. Rev 21:1.
633 Eph 1:10.
634 Cf. Rev 21:5.
635 Rev 21:4.
636 Cf. LG 1.
637 Rev 21:2,9.
638 Cf. Rev 21:27.
639 Rom 8:19-23.
640 St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 5,32,1G 7/2,210.
641 GS 39 § 1.
642 GS 39 § 2.
643 GS 39 § 3.
644 1 Cor 5:28.
645 St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. illum. 18,29G 33,1049.

 

[Right Divider]

Pure nonsense. Par for your usual course.

I showed you the SCRIPTURE.

You must really hate the BIBLE.

Here it is AGAIN:

Rev 21:22-27 KJV And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. (23) And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. (24) And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. (25) And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. (26) And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it. (27) And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Turns out that it is YOUR interpretation that is wrong. The Bible ITSELF is crystal clear.

 

[Trump Gurl]

I showed you the SCRIPTURE.

You posted a scripture but you showed us your personal interpretation of scripture which is not scripture itself. And as usual your personal interpretation of scripture is totally retarded and wrong. You are a Biblical imbecile. Only complete idiots read Revelation literally. Next you will tell us that four horses and a dragon with seven heads, ten horns, and seven crowns on his heads will actually be flying through the air. LOL. What a maroon.

YOUR interpretation that is wrong

I don't interpret the Bible you tool. I posted infallible teachings of God's true Church. So again you make a false statement, the only kind you know how to make. Every single post you post is wrong. I have never seen anyone as consistently wrong as you.

Not to mention the fact that you are a BULLY. You have bullied me like a pig in every religious thread I have created. You're just a lowlife thug who could not interpret one scripture if his sorry life depended on it.

And all of this is off topic anyway!

You are going on Ignore
and I request the mods tell this guy that he has to put me on ignore too

 

[Right Divider]

You posted a scripture but you showed us your personal interpretation of scripture which is not scripture itself. And as usual your personal interpretation of scripture is totally retarded and wrong. You are a Biblical imbecile. Only complete idiots read Revelation literally. Next you will tell us that four horses and a dragon with seven heads, ten horns, and seven crowns on his heads will actually be flying through the air. LOL. What a maroon.

The only maroon here is you.

That scripture is crystal clear and requires no "infallible interpretation" from your bogus "authority".

One of the THE PRIMARY reasons that God gave US ALL His Word is so that there is no need for an "authority" to interpret it for us. The Holy Spirit leads everyone who believes and trusts God to understand it. Apparently, that leaves you OUT!

I don't interpret the Bible you tool. I posted infallible teachings of God's true Church.

 

[Trump Gurl]

When the Pope says, quote, "a secondary natural right derived from that which everyone has" and "the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and untouchable the right to private property," that is, in fact, a discarding of what God says.

No its not. Like Right Divider you are wrong about that the Bible says.

Have you ever read the Bible? You are so busy blabbing about creation science in other threads that you missed what is right in your face:
God created man, placed him in paradise, and gave him dominion over everything. That came first! That is the primordial original intent. Only later, after sin and the fall, after murder and casting out of Cain and all that did man invent nations and property rights.

So the Catechism quote is exactly in line with Genesis:

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise.

Case closed. Your entire thread debunked.

By the way, don't think that I missed how you, a moderator, encouraged insults and joined in them in my creation thread. Next time you ban someone maybe you should be the next in line.