Conservative Catholics question Pope Francis’s approach

[Emerald_Isle]

No Pope has moved me like Pope Francis. He has said that he is a son of the Church i.e. no change in the teaching. What he seems to me to be saying is that , yes, we have made our teaching on abortion etc. clear many times and we need now to focus on some of the ‘dos’ rather than ‘do nots’. Be merciful, have compassion, help the poor, travel with suffering humanity. Perhaps he is seeking a way to bring reconciliation with people who have fallen away or are out of communion with the Church. I think he is exactly what the Church needs at this time.

Please pray for me.
MD

 

[Tantum_ergo]

No Pope has moved me like Pope Francis. He has said that he is a son of the Church i.e. no change in the teaching. What he seems to me to be saying is that , yes, we have made our teaching on abortion etc. clear many times and we need now to focus on some of the ‘dos’ rather than ‘do nots’. Be merciful, have compassion, help the poor, travel with suffering humanity. Perhaps he is seeking a way to bring reconciliation with people who have fallen away or are out of communion with the Church. I think he is exactly what the Church needs at this time.

Please pray for me.
MD

He is saying exactly what Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul 2 and Pope Paul VI etc. etc. have said in the same venues (homilies, etc.)

the only difference is the way the media perceives it.

When Pope Benedict spoke of love and mercy, the media called it a ‘sop’, claimed that he was paying ‘lip service’, and kept making comparisons to the Inquisition, the Nazis, etc. Instead of reporting what Pope Benedict actually said, they reported on what they PERCEIVED him to THINK. . .and pretty much without fail, got it wrong.

When Pope Francis speaks of love and mercy, the media calls it a breath of fresh air (as if the words never came out of the Vatican before AD 2013, claim that this is the start of ‘real reform’, imply that the protestants were right all along and FINALLY the Catholic Church ‘gets it’. . .IOW, instead of reporting what Pope Francis actually said, they take words out of context and conflate to what they think he MEANS and things. . .and once again, they’re pretty much, without fail, getting it wrong.

 

[Lormar]

He is saying exactly what Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul 2 and Pope Paul VI etc. etc. have said in the same venues (homilies, etc.)

the only difference is the way the media perceives it.

When Pope Benedict spoke of love and mercy, the media called it a ‘sop’, claimed that he was paying ‘lip service’, and kept making comparisons to the Inquisition, the Nazis, etc. Instead of reporting what Pope Benedict actually said, they reported on what they PERCEIVED him to THINK. . .and pretty much without fail, got it wrong.

When Pope Francis speaks of love and mercy, the media calls it a breath of fresh air (as if the words never came out of the Vatican before AD 2013, claim that this is the start of ‘real reform’, imply that the protestants were right all along and FINALLY the Catholic Church ‘gets it’. . .IOW, instead of reporting what Pope Francis actually said, they take words out of context and conflate to what they think he MEANS and things. . .and once again, they’re pretty much, without fail, getting it wrong.

 

[seekerz]

No Pope has moved me like Pope Francis. He has said that he is a son of the Church i.e. no change in the teaching. What he seems to me to be saying is that , yes, we have made our teaching on abortion etc. clear many times and we need now to focus on some of the ‘dos’ rather than ‘do nots’. Be merciful, have compassion, help the poor, travel with suffering humanity. Perhaps he is seeking a way to bring reconciliation with people who have fallen away or are out of communion with the Church. I think he is exactly what the Church needs at this time.

Please pray for me.
MD

I agree with you. He is exactly what the Church needs right now - someone who can speak to those outside the fold in ways that will get their attention. But he is simultaneously speaking to us within the Church too.

I think there is this sense that when he speaks to the ‘sinner’, he is speaking to the ‘other’ . Not so. Several of his remarks have been corrections to us about how we model the Christian lifestyle. We need to humble ourselves and LISTEN.

 

[sisblessed]

Whether or not the Church claims the authority to judge is one thing. But Jesus is the judge, as The Creed states, and His Gospel states the following:

So, salvation is only in Christ Jesus.

But, about the Church’s authority, I submit the following:

And

So the Gospel and the Apostles clearly state that the Church has the authority to judge, as long as it is in accordance with the Gospels and the Apostles.

For, on the other hand, I submit that if someone stands for the Gospel in some matter and is condemned by someone in the Church, then we have the following promise of Jesus:

So, the Church is supreme in her judgement, so long as she doesn’t oppose the Gospel or the Apostles, as I understand it.

Well said. I am also Catholic by birth, left and then returned. As a practicing Catholic rooted in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition I pray the Church will always be consistent with the Scriptures.

Right now I struggle with still wanting to read the KJV. I love quoting and reciting verses from the KJV. What version of the Bible do you read? Do you think or know if it is a sin for a Catholic to read and recite the KJV?

 

[sisblessed]

As a “conservative” Catholic I went to confession after I realized I posted comments related to questioning our Holy Father’s authority on matters of Faith and Morals.

 

[Charles12]

Let us not be fools here, the popes can fall into heresy and teach error. It is not un-Catholic to consider the statements of a pontiff to see if they are in conformity to the Faith which has an objective content. It is not up to the pope of the day to determine what orthodoxy is for us. I certainly have problems with Pope Francis’ approach and that is entirely my prerogative as a Catholic, as I am sure many of you have issues with pre-Vatican II popes for being “too harsh”. Francis has no right to condemn the institution of the Church in order to make us look good to non-believers. Do not consider yourselves to be disobedient to question his approach or statements, even if you do recognise media spin. Francis should be aware of how his endless interviews will be handled.

“The pope should not flatter himself about his power, nor should he rashly glory in his honour and high estate, because the less he is judged by man, the more he is judged by God. Still the less can the Roman Pontiff glory, because he can be judged by men, or rather, can be shown to be already judged, if for example he should wither away into heresy, because “he who does not believe is already judged.” (St. John 3:18) In such a case it should be said of him: 'If salt should lose its savour, it is good for nothing but to be cast out and trampled under foot by men. '” - Pope Innocent III, the greatest and most powerful, temporally, pope in the Middle Ages.

 

[BigBlueCane]

No Pope has moved me like Pope Francis. He has said that he is a son of the Church i.e. no change in the teaching. What he seems to me to be saying is that , yes, we have made our teaching on abortion etc. clear many times and we need now to focus on some of the ‘dos’ rather than ‘do nots’. Be merciful, have compassion, help the poor, travel with suffering humanity. Perhaps he is seeking a way to bring reconciliation with people who have fallen away or are out of communion with the Church. I think he is exactly what the Church needs at this time.

Please pray for me.
MD

 

[Emerald_Isle]

Let us not be fools here, the popes can fall into heresy and teach error. It is not un-Catholic to consider the statements of a pontiff to see if they are in conformity to the Faith which has an objective content. It is not up to the pope of the day to determine what orthodoxy is for us. I certainly have problems with Pope Francis’ approach and that is entirely my prerogative as a Catholic, as I am sure many of you have issues with pre-Vatican II popes for being “too harsh”. Francis has no right to condemn the institution of the Church in order to make us look good to non-believers. Do not consider yourselves to be disobedient to question his approach or statements, even if you do recognise media spin. Francis should be aware of how his endless interviews will be handled.

“The pope should not flatter himself about his power, nor should he rashly glory in his honour and high estate, because the less he is judged by man, the more he is judged by God. Still the less can the Roman Pontiff glory, because he can be judged by men, or rather, can be shown to be already judged, if for example he should wither away into heresy, because “he who does not believe is already judged.” (St. John 3:18) In such a case it should be said of him: 'If salt should lose its savour, it is good for nothing but to be cast out and trampled under foot by men. '” - Pope Innocent III, the greatest and most powerful, temporally, pope in the Middle Ages.

 

[TheresaLS]

My favorite saying is “what does not grow dies”…I will keep on believing in my Faith and questioning what I hear.

 

[Emerald_Isle]

I really cannot understand where this antagonism is coming from. I am not a scholar, biblical or otherwise, and I probably couldn’t turn up quotes etc. like so many of you can. My faith is not based on that. The God I believe in will not judge me on how well I observed this or that dogma. Our Lord Jesus Christ spoke more of love than of anything else. Didn’t He somewhere condemn lawyers for burdening people with rules and such. I have often wondered why the simple message of the Gospel has been buried under a mass of theology, rules etc. etc.
I think some of the comments on this thread smack of being too Catholic and too little Christian. I thought that Vatican 11 had cast off the exclusiveness of Catholicism and acknowledged the legitimacy of other denominations and faiths. Why would any Christian insist that certain people should be barred from Heaven. Do we really want to condemn others to eternal damnation because they don’t observe our rules?
As for the institutional Church I think the case for radical reform is unanswerable and I pray that God will allow Pope Francis to succeed.
God Bless. MD

 

[m134e5]

I really cannot understand where this antagonism is coming from. I am not a scholar, biblical or otherwise, and I probably couldn’t turn up quotes etc. like so many of you can.

I suspect many of the people who come up with all these quotes aren’t biblical scholars- they’ve just become very good at doing online research.

My faith is not based on that. The God I believe in will not judge me on how well I observed this or that dogma. Our Lord Jesus Christ spoke more of love than of anything else. Didn’t He somewhere condemn lawyers for burdening people with rules and such. I have often wondered why the simple message of the Gospel has been buried under a mass of theology, rules etc. etc.

God is a person we don’t physically perceive most of the time- a relationship with Him takes a lot of work. It means learning the truths He has revealed through His Church and following them to the best of our ability. To truly love someone, you must know them. How else can one know Jesus other than through the Church He founded (which gave us the Scriptures).

I think some of the comments on this thread smack of being too Catholic and too little Christian. I thought that Vatican 11 had cast off the exclusiveness of Catholicism and acknowledged the legitimacy of other denominations and faiths. Why would any Christian insist that certain people should be barred from Heaven. Do we really want to condemn others to eternal damnation because they don’t observe our rules?

Catholicism is Christianity, so I wouldn’t say comments are “too Catholic and too little Christian,” although I understand your point. Sometimes people are very rude on the internet. It’s easy to bash someone when you don’t see them, don’t hear them, and never will see or hear them.

Vatican II did not “cast off the exclusiveness of Catholicism.” This is a misconception that unfortunately is all too common these days and is at least partly to blame for the loss of missionary zeal with which the Church once changed the world. The Catholic Church alone possesses the fullness of truth- this still is the teachings of the Church.

Your post poses questions that will take much more than an online forum to answer. I suggest you read books by Catholic theologians on the authority of the Church.

 

[pnewton]

Let us not be fools here, the popes can fall into heresy and teach error.

Can he really now? You do not have much faith in the Holy Spirit, at least for a Catholic. Pardon me if I will have to reject your condemnation of my position as a fool and return that to you.

 

[Emerald_Isle]

I suspect many of the people who come up with all these quotes aren’t biblical scholars- they’ve just become very good at doing online research.

God is a person we don’t physically perceive most of the time- a relationship with Him takes a lot of work. It means learning the truths He has revealed through His Church and following them to the best of our ability. To truly love someone, you must know them. How else can one know Jesus other than through the Church He founded (which gave us the Scriptures).

Thank you for your helpful comments. I acknowledge that I have more reading to do. My reference to Vatican 11 comes from my understanding of paragraphs 811 to 848 of the Catechism.
With regard to further reading could you suggest some books on the authority of the Church.
Many thanks. it is good to have this forum to learn more about the faith. My previous posts might have been a bit simplistic and misinformed.

Catholicism is Christianity, so I wouldn’t say comments are “too Catholic and too little Christian,” although I understand your point. Sometimes people are very rude on the internet. It’s easy to bash someone when you don’t see them, don’t hear them, and never will see or hear them.

Vatican II did not “cast off the exclusiveness of Catholicism.” This is a misconception that unfortunately is all too common these days and is at least partly to blame for the loss of missionary zeal with which the Church once changed the world. The Catholic Church alone possesses the fullness of truth- this still is the teachings of the Church.

Your post poses questions that will take much more than an online forum to answer. I suggest you read books by Catholic theologians on the authority of the Church.

 

[Emerald_Isle]

Emerald_Isle:
I think my last posting got mixed up with the previous post.

 

[Corki]

No Pope has moved me like Pope Benedict. He has said that he is a son of the Church i.e. no change in the teaching. What he seems to me to be saying is that , yes, we have made our teaching on abortion etc. clear many times and we need now to focus on some of the ‘dos’ rather than ‘do nots’. Be merciful, have compassion, help the poor, travel with suffering humanity. Perhaps he is seeking a way to bring reconciliation with people who have fallen away or are out of communion with the Church. I think he is exactly what the Church needs at this time.

 

[Tsuwano]

I’m not quite sure it is correct to say that conservative Catholics question the Pope. I suppose some Catholics who call themselves conservative have questions about the Pope, but then so do some Catholics who call themselves liberal. Again, I’m not sure these labels have much meaning anymore. Anyway, it doesn’t much matter to me. I believe the Pope was chosen by the Holy Spirit to guide the Church and I will remain faithful to that belief and to the one chosen.