Catholicism can and must change, Francis forcefully tells Italian church gathering

[Darryl1958]

I wonder what type of change it is that Francis advocates?

Born again evangelicals have shown themselves to be street worthy, in North America at least.
Is that the kind of church that Francis envisions?

 

[Brendan_64]

From a secular author:

Why conservative Christians would have hated Jesus
Even as they profess to spread his word, fundamentalists are forgetting Jesus’ most important message

Jesus never could have been the pastor of a contemporary evangelical church nor a conservative Roman Catholic bishop. Evangelicals and conservative Roman Catholics thrive on drawing distinctions between their “truth” and other people’s failings. Jesus by contrast, set off an empathy time bomb that obliterates difference.
…

Read the rest: salon.com/2014/11/03/why_conservative_christians_would_have_hated_jesus_partner/

A lot of this is exactly what Pope Francis was referring to.

This article was written by someone who now describes himself as an atheist. Although he says he is an atheist who believes in God. I wonder how that works?

 

[sarah_j]

With all the confusion that clearly exists in our Church right now, Cardinal Muller makes a very interesting point.

“Today, a painful purification is in course, but it is the same as when Jesus overturned the tables… Purification is painful and disquieting. May it do its work. Let us remain faithful and not become discouraged.”

churchmilitant.com/news/article/vaticans-head-of-doctrine-a-painful-purification-is-in-course

That is certainly an interesting article.
God bless Cardinal Muller.

"And the Church’s mission, perhaps contrary to the insistence of some of its more modernist members, is to conform to the mind of Christ, not the thought of all those who profess to be His followers.

“The work of the Church is not to reflect the opinions of Her members,” said Müller. “The Church’s job is to reflect the point of view of Her Head and Founder: Jesus Christ.”

 

[outremer]

With all due respect to His Holiness, the speech was forcefully ambiguous to me. I wish he would have offered a clear and concise vision of the “change” he exhorted the Italian Church to seek. What does he intimate by “change”?

“Dream of this church, believe in it, innovate it with freedom,” exhorted the pope.

A lot of negative characters will latch onto that verb “innovate”.

Same for this passage:

Christian doctrine is not a closed system incapable of generating questions, doubts, interrogatives – but is alive, knows being unsettled, enlivened," said the pope. “It has a face that is not rigid, it has a body that moves and grows, it has a soft flesh: it is called Jesus Christ.”

He’s a wonderful man, but he certainly leaves a lot of head scratching.

 

[Brendan_64]

The trouble with ambiguity is that it leads to a position where opposing positions see what they want to see in the statements. You end up with no clear direction.

 

[Darryl1958]

Maybe his ideal is for people to pick up on the ambuiguity and run off in a million different directions with it.
Is the Church entering its 'let a thousand flowers bloom stage"?

Then recall that ‘Stomp, stomp through the tulips’ is what typically follows.

 

[Smfm]

So can anyone on here point me the post where Pope Francis said the words of the title above ?

 

[Robert_Bay]

So can anyone on here point me the post where Pope Francis said the words of the title above ?

Full text of what he said in English is here
zenit.org/en/articles/text-of-pope-s-address-in-florence-on-humanism

 

[Smfm]

The Catholic Church can change like a bed with linen, but it can never change it’s fundamental point of being the rock, otherwise it’s a pebble, a grain of sand. Vultures need to post up what Pope Francis actually said. You can rub your hands with glee, but the Pope is a Catholic, based in Rome, & if your break away group (denomination) has to keep attacking the Rock, then that says it all, because your demo: is mostly ********e. If your Church was the Church Jesus started, then your church could say it is the Church Jesus started. But the Church your in can’t say that, only The Catholic Church proclaims this. All the churches you people proclaim to be a part of can’t say your the church Jesus started.

 

[Brendan]

Huh? :ehh:

 

[guanophore]

Maybe this is the problem? The misundersatandings of what the Pope means. People on the grace side (me) think there are too many man-made (yes, please see my post to Thomas White) rules and regulations that have nothing to do with dogma or doctrine.

It seems that you are experiencing a great disconnect between church disciplines/canons and doctrine/dogma. The rules come out of the doctrines,and are inseparably connnected to them. To say they have “nothing to do” with each other demonstrates a lack of understanding about them.

 Too many external acts, I like to refer to them as this, Jesus did say to pray in our prayer closets.

Jesus founded a community, not a collection of individuals in their prayer closets. Communities need guidance and direction.

  The church teaching authority comes from Jesus.  Right.  Did Jesus say to abstain from eating one hour before receiving the bread?  I don't remember that.  In fact, in Emmaus He ate the bread with the two disciples and celebrated the first communion at the same time!

Fran, I am disappointed that you are sounding like a fundamentalist here. You are right, the church teaching authority came from Jesus, to the Apostles, to the Bishops. They speak with His authority. They have the authority to bind rules on the flock just as they did in the first council of jerusalem in Acts. Do you honestly think that those disciplines/canon laws were not related to doctrine?

 

[Thomas_White]

"…the church teaching authority came from Jesus, to the Apostles, to the Bishops. They speak with His authority. They have the authority to bind rules on the flock just as they did in the first council of jerusalem in Acts. Do you honestly think that those disciplines/canon laws were not related to doctrine?

There are those of us who experienced throughout the years of our youth the rule that neither food nor water could be taken after midnight if communion were to be received the following morning. The current rule is that a person of 60 years of age or older is not required to fast at all prior to receiving communion. I would suggest that looking back on that direct experience, perhaps after being an altar server at the 11:30 a.m. Sunday High Mass for several years, provides a certain perspective (as did the modification of this and other rules). What this change might have to do with doctrine remains a mystery, but a change it was.

 

[guanophore]

I've been unable to make myself be understood.  There are only so many words one can use and then you have to hope the other will understand.

Well, lets keep trying!

But they won’t because they have preconceived notions of what you’re trying to say!

Or bad reactions to what you have said.

 What is meant by 'structures' and 'organisations'?

. The catholic church is a structure. Please answer your own question. BUT, are we to have faith in the structure? Yes. But we’re to have more faith in our faith, in the man Jesus. Ecce Homo, is exactly what the pope said.

Why is this so intimidating to some?

Fran

It is only alarming when you separate Christ from His One Body, the Church. It is not a headless body, and he did not leave us orphaned.

 

[guanophore]

I explained why I think some rules are silly. I didn’t say doctrine or dogma is silly.

The “rules” (church disciplines and canon law) are based in doctrine/dogma and are designed to lead the flock into the fulness of faith. Calling them “silly” or “crazy” just leads the reader to think you do not understand the nature and purpose of them, or you are taking a very shallow attitude toward your faith.

Have you ever considered how your words might affect Catholics and non-Catholics who are struggling to understand the direction the bishops have given to the Church? It seems like a very disdainful attitude toward the shepherds that God has appointed to be the guardians of our souls.

  You have to understand the JIST of what I'm saying and not hang onto every word.

I am working on it. Some of your “words” throw me so far, it is possible that I am missing the gist.

I DO believe that some rules are SILLY.  We're mature christians Guanophore - at least some of us here.  And we'd like to start being treated as such - by the church.

This seems to be a rather adolescent attitude toward authority.

Please don’t start an argument based on what I just said.

You can’t honestly expect to come to a Catholic forum, claim to be a catechist, create posts that indicate a disdain for our shepherds, and not expect to be confronted about it?!

Also, I’ve said before that when having a conversation, it’s not possible to support by source everything one says. The sources are in my brain - you can accept what I say or leave it. If it sounds wrong to you you could look it up online. I’m not here to debate or prove everything I say - it shouldn’t have to be necessary since people on these threads are intelligent enough to know if what I’m saying is wrong.

There are plenty of people here on the threads that do not know their faith well. That is one reason people come here, to learn more. There are also non-Catholics that need accurate information about the church. Misrepresenting the teachings of the Church is a very serious problem here.

 

[Darryl1958]

So can anyone on here point me the post where Pope Francis said the words of the title above ?

He seems to bring up those words in the context of Pelagianism. The Pelagianism that he talks about seems to imply perfect, ideal, beyond reproach, but only perfect and ideal, because it is lived out in the fleshless, bloodless, realm of the abstract, in the world without dirt, and filth, and bruises, and doubt, and equivocation.
That attitude of certainty that the pope is speaking against involves using dogma not as an armour against sin, but an armor against authentic dialogue with people who have very different ideas and attitudes and lifestyles.

The attitude that the pope is talking about, I think, goes something like 'Church teaching is perfect and beyond reproach, beyond change, so therefore I am perfect and beyond reproach, inasmuch as I ape Church teaching".

The pope prefers doubt, and therefore openness,over a certainty that walls us in, cocoons us even. A church of flesh is subject to bruising, and growth, and transformation. Flesh lives, with all the pain and pleasure and vulnerability and thrill that is implied by a life in the flesh.

A church beyond change is a church that is calcified, hardened, as beautiful and cold and flawlessly smooth and lifeless as marble.

It reminds me of the song ‘life is change, how it differs from the rocks’.

‘The RCC is the truth, end of argument’ leaves the Church invulnerable, but untouchable. It sounds like the pope wants Italians to open up to the truths of those who are outside of the cold stone impermeable walls of the fortress church.

 

[LoveMercyGrace]

Bravo, Papa Francisco!

We shall see if it falls on deaf ears, however. Even here, among ourselves, the CAF regulars, there is an aversion to “go forth to the streets”. We all to often sit comfortably within the walls of our parish chapel, more concerned with who we think is worthy of sitting in the pews than opening the doors for "the abandoned, the forgotten, [and even more so], the imperfect.

Amen.

 

[Darryl1958]

I doubt that everyone is called, or even fit for a street ministry.
On the other hand, this homily of the pope’s, as I understand it, is readily adaptable to a different way of conversing with people on the internet, right where we all are.

 

[Brendan_64]

You can rub your hands with glee, but the Pope is a Catholic, based in Rome, & if your break away group (denomination) has to keep attacking the Rock, then that says it all

Who has said that they are breaking away from the Church?

 

[Brendan_64]

We shall see if it falls on deaf ears, however. Even here, among ourselves, the CAF regulars, there is an aversion to “go forth to the streets”. We all to often sit comfortably within the walls of our parish chapel, more concerned with who we think is worthy of sitting in the pews than opening the doors for "the abandoned, the forgotten, [and even more so], the imperfect.

And how in Earth can you possibly know that? On what do you base your opinion that CAF regulars have “an aversion to go forth to the streets”? You cannot possibly know that at all.

You seem to be assuming that those who care about the Liturgy and about maintaining Church Teaching do not “go forth to the streets”. There is in fact no conflict between both of those, no conflict at all.

Your assumption has no valid basis.

 

[frangiuliano115]

The “rules” (church disciplines and canon law) are based in doctrine/dogma and are designed to lead the flock into the fulness of faith. Calling them “silly” or “crazy” just leads the reader to think you do not understand the nature and purpose of them, or you are taking a very shallow attitude toward your faith.

Have you ever considered how your words might affect Catholics and non-Catholics who are struggling to understand the direction the bishops have given to the Church? It seems like a very disdainful attitude toward the shepherds that God has appointed to be the guardians of our souls.

I am working on it. Some of your “words” throw me so far, it is possible that I am missing the gist.

This seems to be a rather adolescent attitude toward authority.

You can’t honestly expect to come to a Catholic forum, claim to be a catechist, create posts that indicate a disdain for our shepherds, and not expect to be confronted about it?!

There are plenty of people here on the threads that do not know their faith well. That is one reason people come here, to learn more. There are also non-Catholics that need accurate information about the church. Misrepresenting the teachings of the Church is a very serious problem here.

This is what I have to say to you Guanohore:

UFFA!

See if you can get the translation for THAT! (it could mean different things).

Fran