Gaudete et Exsultate

[Luke6_37]

Are you suggesting that whether Jesus dying on the cross can also be nuanced and interpreted differently?
I don’t think Pope Francis had this in mind when he wrote this.

Jesus truly died on the cross to redeem our sins, reconcile us to God, and grant us salvation.

That’s what we KNOW.

Can it be nuanced - certainly. There are at least several major theories that consider exactly how Christ’s redeeming sacrifice on the cross worked. The Church does not require us to believe any of them. The most popular are: 1) Satisfaction Theory (Anselm); 2) Ransom Theory (e.g., Aslan in the Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe); 3) Christus Victor (My favorite); and 4) Penal Substitution (Reformed Protestant & hopefully wrong). Bishop Barron makes a good case for a hybrid Satisfaction/Christus Victor theory that sounds good to me.

I think this sort of theological diversity is what Pope Francis has in mind. What we know for certain is generally broadly stated. The details and doctrinal implications is what theologians argue over the centuries.

I think there are certain doctrines which everybody do agree on. Especially those which had been infallibly defined.

Usually when a dogma is defined it comes with an anathema attached to make it clear that this is an essential truth of the faith. However, even aspects of the Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception & Assumption were argued about for years, because of their implications for the traditional doctrines of salvation and eschatology. Basically, they both mess-up the space-time continuum (to use a Star Trek phrase) in the way the early church fathers could never have begun to imagine. That is why it took so long for them to be declared.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

So one theologian - who is very much known to be on the fringes of Catholic orthodoxy (if he’s orthodox at all) - whom Pope Francis appointed as a consultant to the Secretariat for Communications, makes a comment on Twitter about one passage in lengthy document, and we are to regard this as Pope Francis taking aim? Hardly. Sounds more to me like Fr. Martin has latched on to a passage in the document and is himself using that passage to “take aim” at his own detractors.

I must ask, as I’ve asked many folks regarding Amoris Laetitia, have you actually read Gaudete et Exsultate? I’m personally more interested in hearing your understanding and opinions of the document itself and discussing that with you, than I am interested in discussing news articles and secondary sources.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

As the article itself admits, the supposed “curious absence” is not absent at all. The issue that the author of the article takes with GE is that it doesn’t discuss the role of the Eucharist early enough for their liking. Perhaps this is because the previous two popes have discussed the role of the Eucharist in the spiritual life at great length and Pope Francis felt continuing down that path would simply be too redundant.

I would suggest that GE be read in light of Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical Deus Charitas Est since Pope Francis loves to quote from that document in particular.

 

[ratio1]

Yes but you are talking about the nuance of how and why Jesus died on the cross.
But surely there is no nuance about the what. Ie the fact that Jesus died on the cross. I mean can we question maybe he died but not quite or maybe it isn’t the same dying as we experience it etc and so on.
So there are something we do KNOW. Pope Francis is not asking us to question the facts of resurrection.

 

[Luke6_37]

The Church doesn’t know it all…yet. But it has the ability to know it all because it will be guided by the Holy Spirit infallibly.

Hence the Church has this great mechanism of councils and also Pope ex cathedra where if there is a dispute about what to believe then we can have a mechanism to define for us.

So unless one has strong theological grounds to challenge current mainstream belief then I think it’s reasonable to believe in the mainstream until the “new” theory gains momentum and gets defined in a council.

Absolutely, that’s the genius of the Church that allows it to move ever closer to the Truth. I also think its reasonable to believe in the mainstream theory unless it is an impediment to faith. At which point, it is better to push against the flow and question the assumptions upon which a doctrine is based, than to abandon the faith or go seeking a “better” alternative faith.

So souls are indeed immortal and this is the way we should believe this NOW. I agree perhaps there is a nuance but no major group of Catholics is saying this.

I’m not sure you even know what I’m saying. To simplify matters, lets just say that I perfectly agree with everything Pope Benedict (Joseph Ratzinger) writes about in his book on Eschatology. The thing is, that folks on this forum are doing is making claims about stuff he is silent about. You cannot make dogmatic claims regarding issues about which the Church is silent or has not addressed.

 

[Luke6_37]

So Indeed if Just in case you do have the Truth then I’m sure the Holy Spirit will guide you and others to consider your opinion seriously and then momentum will build in the church so much that the Pope calls for a council to infallibly define your new nuanced view. Which is perfectly fine and it has happened before. But my educated guess is that it won’t happen and I think it Is indeed correct for Catholics to point out until we know more we should stick to believing in what we know rather than what we don’t know. What Pope Francis is against is the arrogance of knowing. Surely he is not asking us to believe in the myriad of pseudo heterodox theories.

I think what Pope Francis is asking is that we ground our doctrines and behavior in God’s love and mercy and allow that to lead us to the Truth. Unfortunately, that is not how some in the Church operate. They ground their doctrines and behaviors in a new scholasticism that ignores all the advances in theology that have taken place post Vatican II.

These folks label every idea that does not conform to their strict interpretation of orthodoxy a heresy. It’s all black or white to them, with no room for nuance at all. They think the know it all, yet when pressed, all they can do is appeal to medieval authorities or cite evidence that just shows their ignorance of the real issues involved and ignore evidence that contradicts their views.

I think this is what Pope Francis is talking about when he describes an attitude that gives rise to “a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyses and classifies others”.

Seriously, what else could it be?

 

[ratio1]

I also think its reasonable to believe in the mainstream theory unless it is an impediment to faith.

So what is the impediment to not believing in annihilation and where is the mainstream thought of annihilation?

 

[Luke6_37]

Yes but you are talking about the nuance of how and why Jesus died on the cross.
But surely there is no nuance about the what. Ie the fact that Jesus died on the cross. I mean can we question maybe he died but not quite or maybe it isn’t the same dying as we experience it etc and so on.
So there are something we do KNOW. Pope Francis is not asking us to question the facts of resurrection.

Unfortunately, while you and I can make that sort of distinction, there are folks on this forum who cannot. They fail to distinguish between dogma and doctrine, between hope and belief, and generalize arguments made to address a specific scenario to a completely different scenario. All while claiming they have the authority to decide what is heresy and what is orthodox. The notion of heterodox simply does not exist for them.

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

I also think its reasonable to believe in the mainstream theory unless it is an impediment to faith.

So what is the impediment to not believing in annihilation and where is the mainstream thought of annihilation?

To get into that WOULD be derailing the discussion! However, you are welcome to read through all the comments under this topic:

Does Hell Exist? Pope Francis Says No (Warning: This title is misleading) Catholic News

https://www.yahoo.com/news/does-hell-exist-pope-francis-155354139.html I wanted to post this as an example of how rumors start. This is supposedly a journalist. Yet with the title, shocking as it is, what surprised me was the gall with which the Pope was misrepresented. When one gets into the article, it reads: Shortly after the article was published, the Vatican issued a statement that claimed the article was “not a faithful transcript” and that the meeting between Pope Francis and Scalfa…

 

[ratio1]

We probably agree deep down but I just think we are not theologians and real theologians shouldn’t waste time on this forum anyway. So I have to assume everyone here is just ordinary average Catholics. And hence I see nothing wrong with promoting the mainstream orthodox belief. We can leave the nuances to the theologians. Of course I agree with you that it is wrong for some to say nuance is impossible. But I think on this forum we should focus on what the ordinary is rather than the extraordinary.

The errors of some “traditionalists” is to think nothing can develop/change. The errors of some “liberalists” is to think everything can be questioned or changed.

We must be on guard against both errors.

 

[KMG]

For those reading this thread who are seeking Catholic answers/Catholic teaching: souls are immortal, and hell is eternal.

 

[Luke6_37]

We probably agree deep down but I just think we are not theologians and real theologians shouldn’t waste time on this forum anyway. So I have to assume everyone here is just ordinary average Catholics. And hence I see nothing wrong with promoting the mainstream orthodox belief. We can leave the nuances to the theologians. Of course I agree with you that it is wrong for some to say nuance is impossible. But I think on this forum we should focus on what the ordinary is rather than the extraordinary.

I respect your response and your warning to be cautious. I agree that we should not set ourselves up as experts on doctrine. That is why nobody on this forum should say, “You are wrong.”, but rather, “I think you are wrong, and here is why.” If your argument is convincing, then you have done us all a service. If it is not, the same is true, because it should inspire others to do a little homework and find a better answer. We may not be professional theologians, but we do have access to their work and can discuss their ideas. We just don’t have the authority to rule on a verdict. That is for the Bishops & Pope to decide.

In addition, the need to be cautious applies even when citing ecclesiastical authority. It is simply not valid to quote an 11th century text and claim that this is the final word on an issue, because that is not the method the Magisterium uses to evaluate doctrine. If you are going to cite the Magisterium, you need to understand and follow their rules of interpretation. That includes understanding the context, scope and intention of what was previously taught. If you assume you know what a 1200 year old ruling means on face value and think you can apply it today to an entirely different scenario on which the Church has been silent, you should at least acknowledge that you may be wrong.

Jesus commands us to seek the Truth. That means we should not sit passively waiting for it to come to us. However, I do not expect every Christian to follow the intellectual path to holiness. It has always been a part of the Tradition, but there also have always been other equally valid roads that are spiritual or active in other ways. I think all of these approaches is what Pope Francis is celebrating and reminding us of in Gaudete et Exsultate.

 

[Luke6_37]

For those reading this thread who are seeking Catholic answers/Catholic teaching: souls are immortal, and hell is eternal.

Still off on a tangent I see. If this topic is so important to you, why don’t you start a new thread in the Apologetics forum?

 

[KMG]

No tangent here as long as you continue to peddle your unCatholic views on the immortality of the soul and invoke the pope’s comments on gnosticism to support said views.

Souls are immortal, and hell is real. All Catholics must believe that.

 

[Luke6_37]

Glad to see this topic is alive once more. Let’s try to keep it that way!

I like to hear which parts of the document struck people as most significant. For those, like me, who struggle to find time to read the entire document, the comments posting on Twitter with the hastag #GaudeteEtExsultate are very useful.

I thought this one is worth pointing out…

https://twitter.com/x/status/988228339130355712

Francis insists: the battle is against the devil as well, a being actively working against us.

 

[Annie]

One of the things I really like about Pope Francis is that he talks about the devil, and talks about him as if he really existed. It seems like way too many deny his existence or simply never mention him. Pope Francis has brought the devil up several, if not many, times.

 

[Michaeljc4]

Pope Francis uses a phrase in this writing that has really helped me: he writes about ‘the middle class of holiness.’ By that, I think he means just regular people like me. When you read about the saints, or the great heroes of the faith, it’s hard not to feel a bit…inadequate. But reading the Pope’s words on how I can become more holy, and just live my life as best I can in the circumstances where I find myself…that’s gold.

I realize this is not a novel observation on the part of Pope Francis, but seeing his thoughts on spiritual development–looking to the Beatitudes, for example, and applying them daily in our lives–that’s a wonderful insight for me.

I have struggled with my Catholic faith and identity since I was 13 (I’m 49 now!) I really feel like I have made some spiritual progress after reading Gaudete et Exsultate. God bless you, Papa Francis.

 

[Joe_5859]

I’ve been reading it through slowly. I’m about half way through now. Good stuff! It keeps hitting me where I’m at. Last week, I was preparing to talk at RCIA about evangelization and I come across paragraphs 23–24.
GE 23–24

1. This is a powerful summons to all of us. You too need to see the entirety of your life as a mission. Try to do so by listening to God in prayer and recognizing the signs that he gives you. Always ask the Spirit what Jesus expects from you at every moment of your life and in every decision you must make, so as to discern its place in the mission you have received. Allow the Spirit to forge in you the personal mystery that can reflect Jesus Christ in today’s world.
2. May you come to realize what that word is, the message of Jesus that God wants to speak to the world by your life. Let yourself be transformed. Let yourself be renewed by the Spirit, so that this can happen, lest you fail in your precious mission. The Lord will bring it to fulfilment despite your mistakes and missteps, provided that you do not abandon the path of love but remain ever open to his supernatural grace, which purifies and enlightens.

Tonight I have a Bible study on the Beatitudes and I just got to Chapter 3 on the Beatitudes. Gotta love God’s timing.

 

[MikeInVA]

Pope Francis uses a phrase in this writing that has really helped me: he writes about ‘the middle class of holiness.’ By that, I think he means just regular people like me.

I hope he isn’t talking about us; we’re called to greatness, not mediocrity. The saints are there to challenge us, to help us to grow. It is a mistake to say that you can’t be a saint, so being good enough is good enough.

 

[Pug]

the middle class of holiness

I think the members of the middle class are often obscure, not mediocre. By obscure I mean that they are not famous or popular or they don’t stick out a lot. People don’t often notice them. But I think an extremely holy person may well blend in. Say a sick person in a nursing home is very holy, prays for others, etc. But who knows them? Maybe even no one visits them. They are obscure and humble. But holy nonetheless. Or what about a father who works very hard for his family and is devoted to them, sacrificing without complaint for them with great love. His wife knows what he does, but who else does besides God?