Gaudete et Exsultate

[Luke6_37]

And then, when traditional leaning bishops, cardinals, and theologians fight back, and speak out at this obvious assault on doctrine, all hell breaks loose!!! They’re labeled a Pharisee, or lacking tolerance, or the current favorite, “rigid.” I can’t speak for anyone else on here, but It’s becoming extremely tiresome!

Actually, I think Pope Francis labels them gnostics in paragraph 43 of the exhortation:

1. It is not easy to grasp the truth that we have received from the Lord. And it is even more
   difficult to express it. So we cannot claim that our way of understanding this truth authorizes us to
   exercise a strict supervision over others’ lives. Here I would note that in the Church there
   legitimately coexist different ways of interpreting many aspects of doctrine and Christian life; in
   their variety, they “help to express more clearly the immense riches of God’s word”. It is true that
   “for those who long for a monolithic body of doctrine guarded by all and leaving no room for
   nuance, this might appear as undesirable and leading to confusion”.[39] Indeed, some currents of
   gnosticism scorned the concrete simplicity of the Gospel and attempted to replace the trinitarian
   and incarnate God with a superior Unity, wherein the rich diversity of our history disappeared.

From my own personal experience having to deal with comments like this…

Souls are immortal. Luke’s views on this thread are heretical.

I must say that Pope Francis is spot on.

 

[KMG]

Don’t derail this thread by resurrecting a closed thread. Completely inappropriate, deliberately provocative.

 

[Luke6_37]

Don’t derail this thread by resurrecting a closed thread. Completely inappropriate, deliberately provocative.

Just illustrating a point.

 

[KMG]

A point that does nothing but deliberately provoke and seek to derail, and to give increased attention to your private, un-Catholic pet theories.

 

[MarisStella123]

As part of the ‘younger’ set, and leaning more on the traditional side of things, I can say that it is very discouraging to see all the arguments and bickering going on, and yes very much like having parents who are fighting all the time.
It’s like the priests see a young person and start sizing them up - which ‘side’ are they on? I feel guilty going to a liberal parish and being faithful to the Sacraments (Rosary, Adoration, Confession, forgive me if I love the Sacred Heart! and being seen as ‘rigid’). I feel guilty going to a conservative parish and being seen as ‘liberal’ for not being married and having 5 kids!!! The priest look at me weird at either place… sigh…

 

[christofirst]

There is certainly nothing wrong with preferring a traditional way of prayer and worship. We need only look to the recent reign of Pope Benedict to see that. I wish that everyone who felt so drawn could find their needs met in their parishes, but I also know that different pastors and liturgists have their own ideas of how things should be. The truth is, we really do have great latitude in our Church when it comes to choices of prayer, the liturgy, and even matters of conscience. I think it gets problematic when we start to insist that our preferred way is the only way, and must be so for everyone else. I think this applies equally for both liberals and conservatives. I also know that when we feel passionately about a particular issue, many of us naturally want convince everyone to see things our way. I think there is something for all of us to consider in line 117 from Rejoice and be Glad, even though it might threaten our need to be right:

“It is not good when we look down on others like heartless judges, lording it over them and always trying to teach them lessons. That itself is a subtle form of violence. Saint John of the Cross proposed a different path:
‘Always prefer to be taught by all, rather than to desire teaching even the least of all.’”

 

[MarisStella123]

I completely agree ^_^. But sometimes it gets to the point where if there’s even a hint of ‘traditionalism’ in someone then they are judged as ‘looking down on others’, not being merciful, being judgemental, etc… I’ve got to be one of the most laid back people there is, despite being Traditionally-oriented - and it’s not like I’m pushing it on anyone.

Who is judging who here?

 

[Mark121359]

Here is Robert Royal and Fr. Gerald Murray’s take on Cardinal Christoph Schönborn’s comments on women priests, and Gaudete et Exsultate and other recent news. Their observations are dead-on as usual.

 

[godisgood77]

Their observations are dead-on as usual.

I just watched this… I find the commentary to exceeding negative and void of the Christian virtue of assuming positive intent.

The Pope’s teachings in this document are beautiful and spot on… the words are plainly written and easy to understand…not confusing at all. The word ‘confusion’ is nowadays substituted for ‘disagreement’. What we have is a group of Catholics that disagree with the Pope and are dissenting from his teachings and leadership… how unfortunate that otherwise good Catholics are being subjected to mass media like this that continues to sow division.

 

[Mark121359]

Their observations are dead-on as usual.

godisgood77:

I just watched this… I find the commentary to exceeding negative and void of the Christian virtue of assuming positive intent.

The Pope’s teachings in this document are beautiful and spot on… the words are plainly written and easy to understand…not confusing at all. The word ‘confusion’ is nowadays substituted for ‘disagreement’. What we have is a group of Catholics that disagree with the Pope and are dissenting from his teachings and leadership… how unfortunate that otherwise good Catholics are being subjected to mass media like this that continues to sow division.

Why am I not surprised by your reaction? …I stand by my words.

 

[Luke6_37]

A point that does nothing but deliberately provoke and seek to derail, and to give increased attention to your private, un-Catholic pet theories.

Gnosticism is not something anyone should take lightly. It is a dangerous heresy. When Pope Francis describes as gnostics those who refuse to acknowledge that there legitimately exists different ways of interpreting doctrine, he is making a serious charge. To think that even after 2,000 years of consideration, the Church knows it all - or that based on your limited human capacity to study that limited body of knowledge, YOU know it all - is beyond arrogant. It is idolotry. The fact is that when it comes to ultimate reality, our human intellect simply cannot grasp it, let alone explain it with certainty.

Our little dispute over eschatology is relevant to this point. You insist that you KNOW exactly what will happen at the end times. I hope you are wrong, because I find the eternal conscious torment of a soul to be incompatible with a loving, just, and merciful God. This is not just some “pet theory” of mine, but is widely held by many Christians, because it is the most compatible with scripture and has been part of tradition from the beginning. The Church does not teach that it is false, because there is no way to KNOW that it is false. Only a gnostic would insist that they KNOW for certain what has only ever been described by symbolic imagry.

I have been reading Joseph Ratzinger’s excellent book “Eschatology: Death & Eternal Life”. Turns out that Catholic doctrine regarding the immortality of the soul and the nature of Hell and the ultimate fate of those who reject Eternal Life has developed quite a bit over the course of Church history. He even cites the views of several several prominent un-Catholic (Protestant) theologians as authorities on the topic.

Bottom line is that the longing for a monolithic body of doctrine guarded by all and leaving no room for nuance is to replace the search for Truth with a false man-made security. That is not the Way of Christ. If certainty in all things was possible, there would be no need for faith or for God. The Gospel is simple and sufficient for our salvation. That is all we really need to KNOW for certain.

 

[KMG]

You are derailing this thread with your obsessiveness over your pet issue from the other thread, and you are arrogantly calling those who defend basic Catholic doctrine (i.e., souls are immortal) Gnostics. Enough already. Start another thread if you want to play this tired game again.

 

[christofirst]

I have been reading Karl Ratzinger’s excellent book “Eschatology: Death & Eternal Life”.

You mean, I think, Joseph Ratzinger, aka Pope Benedict.
Another good book on that topic is “Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved,” by Hans Urs von Balthasar.
(sorry to those who don’t want the thread to go in this direction)

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

I have been reading Karl Ratzinger’s excellent book “Eschatology: Death & Eternal Life”.

You mean, I think, Joseph Ratzinger, aka Pope Benedict.
Another good book on that topic is “Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved,” by Hans Urs von Balthasar.
(sorry to those who don’t want the thread to go in this direction)

Thank you for the correction! That’s what I meant. I must have had the un-Catholic Karl Barth’s name in my head when I wrote that!

I love von Balthasar’s book! It is what started me thinking on this topic. He makes it clear why we cannot speak of knowing, but only of hope.

 

[Luke6_37]

You are derailing this thread with your obsessiveness over your pet issue from the other thread, and you are arrogantly calling those who defend basic Catholic doctrine (i.e., souls are immortal) Gnostics. Enough already. Start another thread if you want to play this tired game again.

You are derailing the thread by making personal attacks against me. If you don’t care to discuss the section on Gnosticism in the exhortation then move on to another part. It’s a long document.

 

[Luke6_37]

I completely agree ^_^. But sometimes it gets to the point where if there’s even a hint of ‘traditionalism’ in someone then they are judged as ‘looking down on others’, not being merciful, being judgemental, etc… I’ve got to be one of the most laid back people there is, despite being Traditionally-oriented - and it’s not like I’m pushing it on anyone.

Who is judging who here?

There is tremendous beauty in many of the traditional aspects of the faith, and it would be a sad day if they should ever be relegated to the status of history or reenactments. I am very glad to see them being lived out by the traditionally-oriented.

However, you cannot deny that most of the current trouble in the Church is coming from the traditionalists who are not as liberal minded as you.

 

[Mark121359]

Gnosticism is not something anyone should take lightly. It is a dangerous heresy. When Pope Francis describes as gnostics those who refuse to acknowledge that there legitimately exists different ways of interpreting doctrine, he is making a serious charge.

Read this article (At the bottom of this post) that I linked earlier in this thread about Gaudete et Exsultate. In it, it is explained how Francis’ view of Gnosticism is flawed. From the article;

If anything, Gnosticism can far better be aligned today with movements that emphasize radical individualism, freedom from physical and material limits, ability to construct one’s belief system around one’s circumstances and desires, and places final authority in the hand of the self-created and enlightened creature rather than in the doctrine and person of the One Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

IOW, it’s far more in line with leftward leaning thinking.

Pope Francis “takes aim” in “Gaudete et Exsultate”—and misses?

 

[christofirst]

The more I study this document, the more I am intrigued by Pope Francis’ use of the term gnostic or contemporary gnosticism, as he calls it. I always understood the Gnostics as those who emphasized teachings outside the scope of orthodoxy, like secret knowledge and such. In modern times, someone like Elaine Pagels comes to mind, with her predilection for the Gospel of St. Thomas.

Now Pope Francis has seemingly reappropriated the term and even turned it on its head to include those who insist on accepted matters of doctrine to the exclusion of any other possibilities. At least this is how I’m reading it. I can see why some people are upset and threatened by this, and are trying to talk it back.

Personally, I am watching Pope Francis’ unfolding teaching with much more hope than with dread, but I think we will have to wait and see where the Spirit is ultimately leading with all of this.

 

[Luke6_37]

Read this article (At the bottom of this post) that I linked earlier in this thread about Gaudete et Exsultate. In it, it is explained how Francis’ view of Gnosticism is flawed.

Of course the folks he is chastising will say it is flawed!

I think Pope Francis offers brilliant insight into the heresy that is at the heart of how his detractors fail to understand the faith. The problem is that narrow minded people have a hard time with diversity. They want to reduce a Truth that is beyond our comprehension to a rigid set of formulas, rather than embracing it as a delightful multifaceted jewel to comtemplate.

God knew we could never KNOW him as he exists in all his glory, so he condescended to engage us as a lowly carpenter from Nazareth who was brutally executed by the greatest temporal power of the age. Everything about Jesus reveals something to us about God. Every doctrine we hold must conform to the reality that is our Lord, Jesus Christ, and especially to the image of his beaten and pierced body hanging dead on the cross. This is the perfect image of God’s love and mercy towards us.

 

[christofirst]

I’m not ashamed to admit that I am very much drawn to the idea of some form of Universalism or Apokatastasis, however that might be reconciled with Church teaching. If the lesson from Pope Francis on Contemporary Gnosticism leaves the door even slightly more open to some possibility of this, some hope that I can cling to while others tell me how many people must be in hell, then I, for one, am greatly heartened.