Has Pope Francis really said anything contrary to tradition?

[Tantum_ergo]

Obviously he doesnt have to go around answering any and all questions anyone throws at him, but he does need to “explain” in the sense of teaching the faith in a way that the faithful are able to understand. One of the “rights” of the faithful is to be instructed, correct? And we must understand in order to be instructed.

Great post.

Perception matters and has real world consequences. This is the kind of thing Im wrestling with too.

Good points.

Now, some seem to forget that Pope Benedict, especially now, is perceived as being an ‘Uber’, dictatorial, ‘by-the-book’ Catholic, and many of his statements and actions are being presented by the media as being ‘contradictory’ to that of Pope Francis, and that Pope Francis’ actions are ‘better’ or ‘right’, while Benedict’s were ‘worse’ or ‘wrong’.

Even though, as a recent blog (I think Jimmy Akin) pointed out by giving several quotes by ‘the Pope’ which seemed to support a ‘liberal’ position, those quotes were actually made by BENEDICT.

IOW, both Pope Benedict and Pope Francis are saying the same thing when it comes to the Catholic faith., . .but because of the perception by those in the media that Pope Benedict was a hardline, oldfashioned, ‘conservative’ Pope, they never ‘heard’ what he said but rather ‘interpreted it’ by their perception of him. (Same with the actions. Pope Benedict was just as kindly to children and animals, just as personally ‘humble’ and dismissive of personal ‘pomp’, as Pope Francis, but the media didn’t think of him as such, and so they not only didn’t LOOK to see those in him, they actually ignored his words or actions and ‘spun’ them into something else).

And right now, they are doing a ‘reverse’ with Pope Francis. Because they ‘perceive’ him as being a ‘maverick’ who eschews ‘tradition’ in favor of ‘liberal type values’, they will hear, and see, and look for things which support that interpretation, and they will ignore or spin anything that seems not in line, because this is Pope FRANCIS, and he’s 'one of them." LOL.

I would LOVE to be able to have Pope Francis and Pope Benedict wear ‘masks’ of the other and go about their normal actions. Because I would bet that if somebody saw and heard Pope Benedict, but thought he was Pope Francis, that his words and actions would be considered in the most ‘positive’ light, whereas if they thought Pope Francis was Pope Benedict, suddenly his words would be scrutinized and any possible NEGATIVE connotation would be placed upon what he said. . .

 

[McCall1981]

Good points.

Now, some seem to forget that Pope Benedict, especially now, is perceived as being an ‘Uber’, dictatorial, ‘by-the-book’ Catholic, and many of his statements and actions are being presented by the media as being ‘contradictory’ to that of Pope Francis, and that Pope Francis’ actions are ‘better’ or ‘right’, while Benedict’s were ‘worse’ or ‘wrong’.

Even though, as a recent blog (I think Jimmy Akin) pointed out by giving several quotes by ‘the Pope’ which seemed to support a ‘liberal’ position, those quotes were actually made by BENEDICT.

IOW, both Pope Benedict and Pope Francis are saying the same thing when it comes to the Catholic faith., . .but because of the perception by those in the media that Pope Benedict was a hardline, oldfashioned, ‘conservative’ Pope, they never ‘heard’ what he said but rather ‘interpreted it’ by their perception of him. (Same with the actions. Pope Benedict was just as kindly to children and animals, just as personally ‘humble’ and dismissive of personal ‘pomp’, as Pope Francis, but the media didn’t think of him as such, and so they not only didn’t LOOK to see those in him, they actually ignored his words or actions and ‘spun’ them into something else).

And right now, they are doing a ‘reverse’ with Pope Francis. Because they ‘perceive’ him as being a ‘maverick’ who eschews ‘tradition’ in favor of ‘liberal type values’, they will hear, and see, and look for things which support that interpretation, and they will ignore or spin anything that seems not in line, because this is Pope FRANCIS, and he’s 'one of them." LOL.

I would LOVE to be able to have Pope Francis and Pope Benedict wear ‘masks’ of the other and go about their normal actions. Because I would bet that if somebody saw and heard Pope Benedict, but thought he was Pope Francis, that his words and actions would be considered in the most ‘positive’ light, whereas if they thought Pope Francis was Pope Benedict, suddenly his words would be scrutinized and any possible NEGATIVE connotation would be placed upon what he said. . .

This would be great!

 

[vatcatholic]

The reason is that Francis is an antipope and it is the end of the world like st malachy says. Francis is a non catholic heretic and therefore not the pope learn more here www.vaticancatholic.com

 

[Debora123]

The reason is that Francis is an antipope and it is the end of the world like st malachy says. Francis is a non catholic heretic and therefore not the pope learn more here www.vaticancatholic.com

Why would you say such a thing??

 

[Thomas_Casey]

Please observe the change that I have made in the title of the thread. It is more appropriate to ask a question than to state categorically that the pope has made controversial statements. Controversy, like beauty, is often in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[livingwordunity]

So far Pope Francis has made several off-the-cuff commments that the media has spun to suit their own agenda and cause some controversy (atheists go to Heaven, who am I to judge gay people, etc).

The media typically misrepresents what Pope Francis says. For example, Pope Francis never actually said that atheists go to Heaven, and if one reads the actual transcript where Pope Francis talks about atheists, Heaven was not even mentioned.

 

[McCall1981]

Please observe the change that I have made in the title of the thread. It is more appropriate to ask a question than to state categorically that the pope has made controversial statements. Controversy, like beauty, is often in the eyes of the beholder.

Ok, thanks.

The media typically misrepresents what Pope Francis says. For example, Pope Francis never actually said that atheists go to Heaven, and if one reads the actual transcript where Pope Francis talks about atheists, Heaven was not even mentioned.

Oh I know. Please dont misunderstand, I certainly do not think he has said anything against Tradition, I know he has not. Im more getting at comments the media has chosen to portray as “controversial”.

Like with the “who am I to judge” comments, I know what he actually said was perfectly true. It was just phrased in such a way that it was easy for the media to exploit, and Im wondering if he intended that or not. Like after that interview was he thinking “oh no, I wish I had phrased that differently”, or was he happy with it because he thinks it will benefit the Church in some way.

Its interesting because on this site and others Ive seen that people seem to have drastically different takes on this. Personally, I really dont know what to make of it, so thats why I made the thread.

 

[JReducation]

Ok, thanks.

Oh I know. Please dont misunderstand, I certainly do not think he has said anything against Tradition, I know he has not. Im more getting at comments the media has chosen to portray as “controversial”.

Like with the “who am I to judge” comments, I know what he actually said was perfectly true. It was just phrased in such a way that it was easy for the media to exploit, and Im wondering if he intended that or not. Like after that interview was he thinking “oh no, I wish I had phrased that differently”, or was he happy with it because he thinks it will benefit the Church in some way.

Its interesting because on this site and others Ive seen that people seem to have drastically different takes on this. Personally, I really dont know what to make of it, so thats why I made the thread.

From what I know about Jesuits and about Hispanics, having worked with both for many years, I can tell you that they are much more plain spoken than the average American is. We tend to be much more formal in our speech, meaning that we try to think how something will sound. We tend to speak for the benefit of another or for our own benefit. That’s not the case with Hispanics or Jesuits.

I think that Hispanic and Jesuit belong in the same sentence. Let’s remember where the Jesuits get there spirituality. It’s a Spanish order. Even though it’s international, it’s tradition and formation is still very Spanish. Ignatius was Hispanic. People like Ignatius or Teresa of Avila never spoke for the benefit of another person or for their own benefit either. They simply spoke what was on their mind and heart. They were very transparent people. This is still very much part of the Hispanic and Jesuit mindset.

When a Hispanic Jesuit (pope or not) tells you that grass is greener on that side during the month of Mary, that’s exactly what he means. He doesn’t have any other intent in speaking. The problem is not Pope Francis. The problem is the English speaking world.

Our culture is very guarded, while theirs is not. They could care less what other people think. If you ask a question, you’re going to get whatever is in their heart and mind. They’re going to tell you whatever it is that’s on their mind. They mean it just the way that it comes out.

Jesuits are formed in a very Hispanic way of doing things. They are direct, honest, informal and they don’t wait for your to ask questions or ask for clarifications. They’re not interested in what you think they said. Actually, they don’t really care. That’s not part of their culture. They’re interested in making sure that you hear what they have to say, because you asked them a question. If you want more information, you have to ask right then and there or you will not get an answer later down the line. Going back and revisiting something because someone is upset is something that they do not do.

This does not make them callous or careless. Its’ who they are as a people. They do not like drawing out a point. That’s a very American thing and we have to learn to live with it, because this is the card that God has dealt the Church.

 

[Brendan_64]

The media typically misrepresents what Pope Francis says. For example, Pope Francis never actually said that atheists go to Heaven, and if one reads the actual transcript where Pope Francis talks about atheists, Heaven was not even mentioned.

Is the media claiming that Pope Francis has actually said that atheists go to Heaven? I haven’t read that anyone has claimed that.

Are atheists redeemed by Christ? Yes they are, as are all men.

CCC 2125 - Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion. The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances.

All good comes from God, atheists can (and do) do good. To claim that atheists cannot get to Heaven would speaking against the teachings of the Church.

 

[Melchior_1]

Wait, someone from South America doesn’t fit the mold of euro-Catholicism? Whodathunkit.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Ok, thanks.

Oh I know. Please dont misunderstand, I certainly do not think he has said anything against Tradition, I know he has not. Im more getting at comments the media has chosen to portray as “controversial”.

Like with the “who am I to judge” comments, I know what he actually said was perfectly true. It was just phrased in such a way that it was easy for the media to exploit, and Im wondering if he intended that or not. Like after that interview was he thinking “oh no, I wish I had phrased that differently”, or was he happy with it because he thinks it will benefit the Church in some way.

Its interesting because on this site and others Ive seen that people seem to have drastically different takes on this. Personally, I really dont know what to make of it, so thats why I made the thread.

The Pope is well used to the media and the press and to making public statements, and appears to be a confident individual. My guess is that it would be extremely rare for him to second guess himself. The media, however, loves to second guess the Pope. He is not playing games, they are.

 

[robwar]

The Pope is well used to the media and the press and to making public statements, and appears to be a confident individual. My guess is that it would be extremely rare for him to second guess himself. The media, however, loves to second guess the Pope. He is not playing games, they are.

yes! exactly! you hit the nail on the head.

 

[3DOCTORS]

From what I know about Jesuits and about Hispanics, having worked with both for many years, I can tell you that they are much more plain spoken than the average American is. We tend to be much more formal in our speech, meaning that we try to think how something will sound. We tend to speak for the benefit of another or for our own benefit. That’s not the case with Hispanics or Jesuits.

I think that Hispanic and Jesuit belong in the same sentence. Let’s remember where the Jesuits get there spirituality. It’s a Spanish order. Even though it’s international, it’s tradition and formation is still very Spanish. Ignatius was Hispanic. People like Ignatius or Teresa of Avila never spoke for the benefit of another person or for their own benefit either. They simply spoke what was on their mind and heart. They were very transparent people. This is still very much part of the Hispanic and Jesuit mindset.

When a Hispanic Jesuit (pope or not) tells you that grass is greener on that side during the month of Mary, that’s exactly what he means. He doesn’t have any other intent in speaking. The problem is not Pope Francis. The problem is the English speaking world.

Our culture is very guarded, while theirs is not. They could care less what other people think. If you ask a question, you’re going to get whatever is in their heart and mind. They’re going to tell you whatever it is that’s on their mind. They mean it just the way that it comes out.

Jesuits are formed in a very Hispanic way of doing things. They are direct, honest, informal and they don’t wait for your to ask questions or ask for clarifications. They’re not interested in what you think they said. Actually, they don’t really care. That’s not part of their culture. They’re interested in making sure that you hear what they have to say, because you asked them a question. If you want more information, you have to ask right then and there or you will not get an answer later down the line. Going back and revisiting something because someone is upset is something that they do not do.

This does not make them callous or careless. Its’ who they are as a people. They do not like drawing out a point. That’s a very American thing and we have to learn to live with it, because this is the card that God has dealt the Church.

This is kind of what I was trying to get at in an earlier post, but even more in depth. Well said. And I’m from a German Catholic on father’s side and various European Protestant background on mother’s side - plus I was an English major in college and learned a lot about rhetoric and argument. Interestingly one of my profs trained at a Jesuit college so I had only the super-scholarly, intellectual model of Jesuit as my mental image of “what a Jesuit is.” Again, thanks for an enlightening expansion of my knowledge.

 

[AndyP2010]

Why are Catholics worried about the Pope and what he says

Why do they attribute some sort of strategy behind the Holy Father’s response to journalist’s questions? His answers are matter of fact - simple, clear, understandable. He knows exactly what he is doing and saying - but I seriously doubt he’s playing war games with journalists. I also do not think the Holy Father needs handlers to censor him.

Yet EWTN spokesman Raymond Arroyo seems to think the Holy Father needs handlers, that he needs distancing from speaking directly to people - lest he be misinterpreted.

The entire episode reminds us that papal handlers do have their place. As cumbersome as they are, and as much as they distance the pontiff from his people, handlers can protect the Pope from this sort of misinterpretation. Off the cuff, vigorous expressions have their place, but so do unambiguous, vetted statements—especially when dealing with a media unversed in Church teaching.

Likewise, others express worry - ‘concern’ over how the MSM and dissidents will misinterpret what the Pope said, and most especially, what he meant. Just about everyone from self-appointed apologist-theologians with their own brand of online tenure and EWTN sponsorship, to Cardinals and bishops bend over backwards to clarify that the Pope’s words were somehow impossible for ordinary people to understand without a clear understanding of what the catechism teaches. They claim the Pope speaking in ordinary language is a “problem” - because his words may be hi-jacked by the enemy.

You are worried that the faith and Catholic teaching will be misunderstood? That the Pope should only speak with prepared theological texts? This is exactly what the Pope has spoken against - distancing the faithful through over dependence on academic, theological, dogmatic dissertation and cold, official statements in ecclesial language.

Kind of how I feel try reading the whole thing.

 

[McCall1981]

Why are Catholics worried about the Pope and what he says

Kind of how I feel try reading the whole thing.

I think I feel pretty much the exact opposite of what this article says

 

[AndyP2010]

I think I feel pretty much the exact opposite of what this article says

But why?

Why if as I think we all agree he hasn’t spoke against Tradition and has taught solid Catholic doctrine. Is is because some seem determined misrepresent what he has said? Is it because that liberal and dissenters are happy with him ? and they set up false comparisons with Pope emeritus Benedict XVI? Why?

I think of it this way, JPII and BXVI have done so much to give us the true teaching of the 2nd Vatican counsel. Now Francis is showing us how to live it out. Learn what you can from what he has to teach and let the Holy Spirit handle the rest, or as we say in ACTS “Let Go and Let God”

 

[Tigg]

But why?

Why if as I think we all agree he hasn’t spoke against Tradition and has taught solid Catholic doctrine. Is is because some seem determined misrepresent what he has said? Is it because that liberal and dissenters are happy with him ? and they set up false comparisons with Pope emeritus Benedict XVI? Why?

I think of it this way, JPII and BXVI have done so much to give us the true teaching of the 2nd Vatican counsel. Now Francis is showing us how to live it out. Learn what you can from what he has to teach and let the Holy Spirit handle the rest, or as we say in ACTS “Let Go and Let God”

Your comments remind me of something I heard recently on faith. “It is caught, not taught!” Now I can speculate that the originator of this catchy little phrase was saying that children learn by the faith example of their caretakers and by our good example, others will be drawn to the Church. This may be true on a certain level, but ultimately faith is a pure gift from God and I would argue how can you love and believe in that which you do not know? Modern catechists seem to buy into the fun and games of faith formation. “Make it fun, so they will come,” to the detriment of a third grader not even knowing the Hail Mary. (True story - I’m a catechist.)

Archbshp Chaput wrote an article a while back about how the Church (over three generations) has abrogated its responsibility in teaching the faith. I can agree that His Holiness is trying to give us a concrete example as to how to live out this faith, but as beautiful as it is to me, without an understanding and knowledge of Truth, how does the average non-catechized Catholic understand church doctrine without going into the rabbit hole of moral relativism, or by innocently misunderstanding what the Holy Father is saying? The fact is, we can see with our own eyes the apostasy and the great loss of faith happening in these current times.

 

[PJM]

=McCall1981;11063168]So far Pope Francis has made several off-the-cuff commments that the media has spun to suit their own agenda and cause some controversy (atheists go to Heaven, who am I to judge gay people, etc). Im trying to better undersrand the reasons for these comments, and I’d be very interested to hear other peoples opinions.

My question is this. In your opinion, do you think that Pope Francis did not intend for these comments to be controversial (ie. maybe he made a slip of the tongue, or maybe he misjudged the media)?

Or, do think that he made these comments intentionally, knowing that they would be controversial (ie. maybe he intended to be controversial because he believes it is beneficial to the Church in some way)? If you think that the comments were intentionally controversial, please also explain what you think his motivation for doing this might be.

I realize, of course, that none of us can know for sure, but Im interested to see what people think. Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut

DUH!

The Pope DID NOT SAY “atheist go to heaven!”

The “quotes” Were Not and ARE NOT at all contraverseral;; it is the secular press and their anti-catholism that misquoted and made them so!

Check the FACTS they are available!

God bless you,
PJM

 

[AndyP2010]

Your comments remind me of something I heard recently on faith. “It is caught, not taught!” Now I can speculate that the originator of this catchy little phrase was saying that children learn by the faith example of their caretakers and by our good example, others will be drawn to the Church. This may be true on a certain level, but ultimately faith is a pure gift from God and I would argue how can you love and believe in that which you do not know? Modern catechists seem to buy into the fun and games of faith formation. “Make it fun, so they will come,” to the detriment of a third grader not even knowing the Hail Mary. (True story - I’m a catechist.)

Archbshp Chaput wrote an article a while back about how the Church (over three generations) has abrogated its responsibility in teaching the faith. I can agree that His Holiness is trying to give us a concrete example as to how to live out this faith, but as beautiful as it is to me, without an understanding and knowledge of Truth, **how does the average non-catechized Catholic understand church doctrine without going into the rabbit hole of moral relativism, or by innocently misunderstanding what the Holy Father is saying? **The fact is, we can see with our own eyes the apostasy and the great loss of faith happening in these current times.

Before I answer your question, let me state that I love both Blessed JP2 and B16 but it needs to be noted that much of what Chaput is talking about involve 35 years of careful statements of theology by both Popes. They are not to blame by any means and things would likely be much worse without them but careful statements hasn’t saved everyone.

My answer:
The same way you and I have found the truth through conversion. For that to happen their have to be others willing to give witness to the truth. After that the Holy Spirit takes over and it is up to them to accept or reject. The keys to the kingdom are now in Francis’s hand and he is baring witness as JP2 and B16 and for that matter the other 264 predecessors to his office. He is doing it his way base on the type of man that he is and his training as a Jesuit. He can’t be JP2 or B16 he has to be Francis. Everything else is the Holy Spirit’s job. Francis is calling on us to go out and give our witness and that means that sometimes we are going to have to follow poor souls down some rabbit holes.
Trust the Holy Spirit.

 

[janeway529]

Pretty much this.

http://rayontremblant.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/1012253_221081361374947_1833095642_n.jpg