Is Catholicism A Democracy?

[JReducation]

No takers I see. So who wrote these words…
Whence all who saw the Lord Jesus according to the Humanity and both did not see and believe according to the spirit and the Divinity, that He Himself is the true Son of God, have been damned; so even now all who see the Sacrament, which is sanctified by the words of the Lord upon the altar by the hand of the priest in the form of bread and wine, and do not see and believe according to the spirit and the Divinity, that this is truly the Most Holy Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, have been damned, since the Most High Himself testifies, who said: “This is My Body and” My “Blood of the New Testament [which is poured forth on behalf of the many]” (Mt 14:22,24); and “He who eats” My Flesh “and drinks” My Blood, “has life eternal” (cf. Jn 6:55). · Whence of the Spirit of the Lord, who dwells in His faithful, is he who receives the Most Holy Body and Blood of the Lord. All others, who do not share this same Spirit and presume to receive Him, eat “and” drink “judgement upon themselves” (cf. 1 Cor. 11:29).
The answer is none other than St. Francis of Assisi himself in The Words of Sacred Admonition, Chapter 1. Many links for this is available, here’s a few…

franciscan-archive.org/patriarcha/opera/admonit.html
sacred-texts.com/chr/wosf/wosf03.htm
thenazareneway.com/st_francis.htm

Lesson we should take from this quiz? You can not separate charity from the truth. That mean’s the truth about Christ, the truth about His Church. And yes, the truth about his great saint, St. Francis of Assisi.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

Thanks for the quote DD. I hope that you read the entire admonition. You will notice that this admonition is not written for non Catholics. It was written for the Brothers and any one who wanted to follow the footsteps of Christ crucifed. Observe that through the entire document he speaks about the friars.

Also observe that the introduction says:

"Of all the writings of St. Francis, the Admonitions contain the most stirring and enduring legacy of the Seraphic Patriarch. They are a monument of the Poverello’s profound and sober grasp of the spiritual reality of the religious vocation. As such they are a perennial source of inspiration for all his spiritual sons and daughters, as well as for all generations of those who seek to follow in the footsteps of Christ Crucified.

Neither the Church nor St. Bonaventure, who approved the publication of the admonitions applied the term Seraphic Patriarch to non Catholics. Francis is the Seraphic Father of Catholics. And as such he is respected by the Church and loved by his Order. That’s why he also earned the title Holy Father, even though he was never a pope. To whom is he patriarch or father? To his Franciscan Family and the Catholic Church.

I’m glad that you are reading our Holy Father’s writings. They are very inspiring when taken in context.

JR

 

[JReducation]

As to the dialogue on the EF and Of, there are many interesting points by everyone. I would just remind everyone that the Holy Father said to the bishops that the NO is the is the norm, not the exception. He probably does not see it as such a catastrophe as many may think he does.

Visit Cardinal Sean’s blog on this.

“The Holy Father was very clear that the ordinary form of celebrating the Mass will be the new rite, the Norvus Ordo.” (Cardinal Sean, OFM Cap, June 2007)

cardinalseansblog.org/?m=200706

JR

 

[JReducation]

I highly recommend this encyclical to all who are trying to understand what the Church is doing and saying in the area of Ecumenism.

Ut Unum Sint
Encyclical “That They May Be One”
His Holiness Pope John Paul II
May 25, 1995

The Church recognizes that Catholicis and others have given their lives for the Gospel. This is progress. Neither side has ever been able to acknowledge this before. It requires honesty and a sense of justice to do so.

Giving one’s life for the Gospel, even if we come from different Churches or Ecclesial Communities is one step toward unity, because there is only one Gospel. At least we are united in that respect.

**The courageous witness of so many martyrs of our century, including members of Churches and Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church, gives new vigor to the Council’s call and reminds us of our duty to listen to and put into practice its exhortation. These brothers and sisters of ours, united in the selfless offering of their lives for the Kingdom of God, are the most powerful proof that every factor of division can be transcended and overcome in the total gift of self for the sake of the Gospel. **

The Church recognizes the Ecumenism is not an easy task. But it also says that WE CANNOT FAIL TO MEET THE CHALLENGE. Ecumenism is not just converting others to the Catholic faith. That’s the final goal. But it begins with smaller steps, breaking down wall of division and prejudices.

**No one is unaware of the challenge which all this poses to believers. They cannot fail to meet this challenge. Indeed, how could they refuse to do everything possible, with God’s help, to break down the walls of division and distrust, to overcome obstacles and prejudices which thwart the proclamation of the Gospel of salvation in the Cross of Jesus, the one Redeemer of man, of every individual? **

The Church encourages us not to despair or panic. Theological dialogues between Christians and others has produced tangible and positive results. One of them is the lifting of the excommuniction and anathemas between Orthodox and Catholics. Another was the Lutheran and Catholic accord.

Since someone brought up St. Francis, another step forward is that for the first time since the Protestant Reformation, the Franciscans have had general chapters as one community. Granted, these were extraordinary chapters, not to make laws for the community, but to share their Franciscan heritage. The same has happened among the Benedictines.

The Monks of Taize were recognized as a religous institute by the Catholic Church, Anglicans and Lutherans. They are the only interdenominational religioius institute, to the best of my knowledge, that the Catholics, Lutherans and Anglicans approve.

The monks of Taize come from all three churches. They live, work and minister to youth as one community. They bear witness to the fact that all of us belong to the one Mystical Body.

They respect each other when it comes time for liturgy by celebrating separate liturgies. They give great witness to the fact that we are united in many ways and that we have some miles to walk.

Rather than be prejudiced or negative about each other, they share what is common truth and admit what is still lacking toward perfect unity. They are years ahead of the average lay person in all three churches.

**I thank the Lord that he has led us to make progress along the path of unity and communion between Christians, a path difficult but so full of joy. Interconfessional dialogues at the theological level have produced positive and tangible results: this encourages us to move forward. **

Et Unum Sint should be mandatory reading for all people of faith.

JR

 

[JReducation]

Hi Catharina,

I can imagine someone who has never been to a TLM having a negative reaction to it because they don’t really understand it. And I would definitely want to take a potential convert to a TLM with Gregorian chant with the people singing the parts of the Mass appropriate to them (However, I would be willing to take them to a low Mass TLM if they had at least a small red missal that they could read). And certainly a NO done properly with Gregorian chant would be a better choice than the way it is typically celebrated today.

The subscript is mine.

This is not a critique, just a reminder. If you’re going to look for liturgy celebrated using the NO with Gregorian Chant for a non Catholic, you must always keep two things in mind and make sure that your friend knows this.

Many of our parishes are administered by religious. You may not always get Gregorian chant; but you can still get a very solemn liturgy.

If asked why you may not get Gregorian chant, it is important that we be fair and remember that there are religious communities where Gregorian Chant has never been used and where it may not be allowed to be used for reasons that are appropriate to the religious community, just like there are religious communities that have a long and beautiful tradition of chant.

JR

 

[DustinsDad]

Thanks for the quote DD. I hope that you read the entire admonition. You will notice that this admonition is not written for non Catholics. It was written for the Brothers and any one who wanted to follow the footsteps of Christ crucifed…

Either it’s true or it’s false JR. Here is a letter not just to friars, but to all the faithful…A Letter to the faithful (EpFid II)
(It’s the second one down on the page)

*Although very similar to the previous version, the incipits of the medieval manuscripts, as well as the text itself, identify this recension as an exhortation sent by St. Francis to all the Christian faithful. This Letter was written sometime between 1216 and 1226 A.D.To all Christians, religious, clerics and laymen, men and women, to all who dwell in the entire world, Friar Francis, their servant and subject, (offers) submission with reverence, true peace from Heaven and sincere charity in the Lord…Of whose Father such was the Will, that His Son, blest and glorious, whom He gave to us and who had been born on our behalf, offer His very self through His very own Blood as a Sacrifice and Victim upon the altar of the Cross…leaving us an example, so that we may follow His footsteps (cf. 1 Pet 2:21). And He wants all to be saved through Him and that we receive Him with a pure heart and our own chaste body. But there are few, who want to receive Him and be saved through Him, though His “yoke is sweet” and His “burden light” (cf. Mt 11:30).…Those who do not want to taste how “sweet the Lord” is (cf. Ps 33:9) and who love “shadows more than the Light” (Jn 3:19) not wanting to fulfill the mandates of God, have been cursed;* of whom it is said through the prophet: “Cursed are they who turn away from Thy mandates.” (Ps 118:21)…Since we ought to confess all our sins to a priest; let us also receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ from him. He who does not eat His Flesh and does not drink His Blood (cf. Jn 6:55.57), "cannot enter into the **Kingdom of God" (Jn 3:5). Nevertheless let him eat and drink worthily, because he who receives “unworthily eats and drinks judgement for himself, not dejudicating the Body of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:29), that is, he does not discern it…**You see, truth is truth. This is why St. Francis risked death to bring the Gospel message to the Sultan - to bring then something they did not have - Salvation…Eternal Life. When the Sultan balked, St. Francis was ready to walk through fire to prove the Truth of the Catholic faith, and the falseity of Islam. Francis was doing this not only in all charity - but because of all charity. You say the charity won the Sultan’s respect. I say yep - along with the zeal and unwavering and outspoken stand for Truth and it’s necessary unwavering and outspoken call to conversion to the One True Church.

And do you really - in all honesty - think St. Francis softened any of this for the Sultan’s ears? And, if so, was that before or after he taunted them with a walk through a blazing fire?

wga.hu/detail/g/giotto/assisi/upper/legend/scenes_2/franc11.jpg

If St. Francis were to bow his head down before a hereitic, an apostate, or an infidel, I say it would be in the manner of his fellow Brothers Berardo, Ortho, Pietro, Accurso and Adutoto - that is to offer the Lord his head in martyrdom - not to offer it to be “blessed.”

There seems to be a popular “revisionist” view of St. Francis - and I don’t think it’s something that just popped up in our own day either. According to Pope Pius XI where I quoted earlier, such a hijacking of St. Francis’ name for novelty was already creaping up back then - what, five popes ago?:…What evil they do and how far from a true appreciation of the Man of Assisi are they who, in order to bolster up their fantastic and erroneous ideas about him, imagine such an incredible thing as that Francis was … the precursor and prophet of that false liberty which began to manifest itself at the beginning of modern times and which has caused so many disturbances both in the Church and in civil society!
Rite Expiatis

And yes, this is the same pope who wrote Mortalium Animos - it is not surprising.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[JReducation]

Either it’s true or it’s false JR. Here is a letter not just to friars, but to all the faithful…A Letter to the faithful (EpFid II)
(It’s the second one down on the page)

*Although very similar to the previous version, the incipits of the medieval manuscripts, as well as the text itself, identify this recension as an exhortation sent by St. Francis to all the Christian faithful. This Letter was written sometime between 1216 and 1226 A.D.To all Christians, religious, clerics and laymen, men and women, to all who dwell in the entire world, Friar Francis, their servant and subject, (offers) submission with reverence, true peace from Heaven and sincere charity in the Lord…Of whose Father such was the Will, that His Son, blest and glorious, whom He gave to us and who had been born on our behalf, offer His very self through His very own Blood as a Sacrifice and Victim upon the altar of the Cross…leaving us an example, so that we may follow His footsteps (cf. 1 Pet 2:21). And He wants all to be saved through Him and that we receive Him with a pure heart and our own chaste body. But there are few, who want to receive Him and be saved through Him, though His “yoke is sweet” and His “burden light” (cf. Mt 11:30).…Those who do not want to taste how “sweet the Lord” is (cf. Ps 33:9) and who love “shadows more than the Light” (Jn 3:19) not wanting to fulfill the mandates of God, have been cursed;* of whom it is said through the prophet: “Cursed are they who turn away from Thy mandates.” (Ps 118:21)…Since we ought to confess all our sins to a priest; let us also receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ from him. He who does not eat His Flesh and does not drink His Blood (cf. Jn 6:55.57), "cannot enter into the **Kingdom of God" (Jn 3:5). Nevertheless let him eat and drink worthily, because he who receives “unworthily eats and drinks judgement for himself, not dejudicating the Body of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:29), that is, he does not discern it…**You see, truth is truth. This is why St. Francis risked death to bring the Gospel message to the Sultan - to bring then something they did not have - Salvation…Eternal Life. When the Sultan balked, St. Francis was ready to walk through fire to prove the Truth of the Catholic faith, and the falseity of Islam. Francis was doing this not only in all charity - but because of all charity. You say the charity won the Sultan’s respect. I say yep - along with the zeal and unwavering and outspoken stand for Truth and it’s necessary unwavering and outspoken call to conversion to the One True Church.

And do you really - in all honesty - think St. Francis softened any of this for the Sultan’s ears? And, if so, was that before or after he taunted them with a walk through a blazing fire?

wga.hu/detail/g/giotto/assisi/upper/legend/scenes_2/franc11.jpg

If St. Francis were to bow his head down before a hereitic, an apostate, or an infidel, I say it would be in the manner of his fellow Brothers Berardo, Ortho, Pietro, Accurso and Adutoto - that is to offer the Lord his head in martyrdom - not to offer it to be “blessed.”

There seems to be a popular “revisionist” view of St. Francis - and I don’t think it’s something that just popped up in our own day either. According to Pope Pius XI where I quoted earlier, such a hijacking of St. Francis’ name for novelty was already creaping up back then - what, five popes ago?:…What evil they do and how far from a true appreciation of the Man of Assisi are they who, in order to bolster up their fantastic and erroneous ideas about him, imagine such an incredible thing as that Francis was … the precursor and prophet of that false liberty which began to manifest itself at the beginning of modern times and which has caused so many disturbances both in the Church and in civil society!
Rite Expiatis

And yes, this is the same pope who wrote Mortalium Animos - it is not surprising.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[JReducation]

DunstinDad

I’m glad that you’re reading St. Fracis’ writing, but you’re obviously reading them to press your point and not his.

You’re not understanding Franciscan mysticism.

You’re not understanding Francis’ language and te languge of this day.

You’re not understanding the exegetical interpretations that the great Franciscan scholars, such as St. Bonaventure and Celano gave to these writing.

You are not understanding Francis’ target audience.

Finally, you need to take a good graduate course in Franciscan Mystical Theology.

I will not engage in a discussion on St. Francis’ theology with someone who is using Our Holy Father’s writing for their own agenda. You’re using them to bash Father Cantalamessa.

St. Francis would never allow you to use his words to smash one of his Brothers, just as the Church has never allowed this. There is no reason the rest of us should either.

It is what it is. Friar Cantalamessa is the official preacher to the Pope, a scholar and a very holy man. If there were a problem with his behaviour, he has religious superior to call him taks. This is not your job. You are interfering in the internal affairs of a religious order that has Pontifical Rights and is an excempt religious order, subject only to the authority of the superior general and the pope. You hold neither office.

JR

 

[catharina]

And do you really - in all honesty - think St. Francis softened any of this for the Sultan’s ears? And, if so, was that before or after he taunted them with a walk through a blazing fire?

DustinsDad

While modern man is given to issuing taunts and ridicule,
it’s error to accuse Francis of Assisi of the same.
He TAUNTED no one.

His approach was always one of charity.
He was and is known for his kindness.

While your own modernist tics seem to allow you to engage in taunting others,
this was not the way of Francis and it’s not the way of his brothers.

You might want to learn to study Francis (and others) prayerfully and with an open mind.

 

[catharina]

I agree that the Church has certainly never stated that one has to consider the TLM to be “more perfect” (I would use the term “better”) than any other form of Mass. The Church has never stated that one form of the Mass is better than another.

As I said prior to seeing this post, while high ranking prelates and others have critiqued the NO, this does not mean that these critiques are part of the official teaching of the Church and Catholics can certainly disagree with these critiques.

Brennan, thanks. With no need to beat a dead horse, I’ll add that one can be “awaiting further word” from Rome (from a Pope) without being accused of

" …implicitly rebuking Cardinal Ratzinger,
(and) … criticizing Cardinal Ottaviani …"

I’ve done neither of those things.
When the Bishop of Rome teaches (as Pope), I accept the teaching.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Brennan, thanks. With no need to beat a dead horse, I’ll add that one can be “awaiting further word” from Rome (from a Pope) without being accused of

" …implicitly rebuking Cardinal Ratzinger,
(and) … criticizing Cardinal Ottaviani …"

I’ve done neither of those things.
When the Bishop of Rome teaches (as Pope), I accept the teaching.

Hi Catharina,

When I said you were implicitly rebuking people like Cardinals Ratzinger, Ottaviani, Fr. Fessio and others I meant that if you hold the position that it is wrong or invalid to argue that one form of Mass (the liturgy, not the sacrament), is better than another then this implicitly rebukes anyone who has argued that one form of Mass is better than another. If you don’t hold that position, then good, and you would not be rebuking anyone.

 

[DustinsDad]

DunstinDad

I’m glad that you’re reading St. Fracis’ writing, but you’re obviously reading them to press your point and not his.

That’s quite an accusation. But of course I would say the contrary is true - and am actually using quotes and sources to back it my position. The problem is, you are citing nothing specific to back it up your position or to counter the plain historical record as I’ve presented.

You’re not understanding Franciscan mysticism.

St. Francis’ mysticism is totally irrelevant to this discussion.

You’re not understanding Francis’ language and te languge of this day.

I am understanding precisely Francis’ language and the language of “this day” - if you think it means something else then demonstrate it precisely with sound clear arguments and examples and facts. Say what you mean and what you actually believe. It’s not that difficult.

You’re not understanding the exegetical interpretations that the great Franciscan scholars, such as St. Bonaventure and Celano gave to these writing.

I quoted St. Bonaventure, and frankly - what he wrote sounds quite contrary to your modernist ecumenical description of the St. Francis / Sultan interaction.

You are not understanding Francis’ target audience.

That argument, I’m afraid, doesn’t hold up to the light of scrutiny. Just one example where it fails…in a nutshell.

• St. Francis says to deny Christ’s presence in the Eucharist damns one - anyone - to hell.
• You say this was only true for Franciscan friars (though the follow up shows he wrote the same thing for all the faithful - indeed, “everyone in the whole world” was addressed).
• Now you say there are several orders of protestant “Franciscan” friars.
• By your own words these protestant “Franciscan” friars are damned to hell because they do not recognize the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist - and they have no valid priesthood to make the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist a reality in the first place…and this is something to be celebrated as a great step forward Are you going to say they are inculpable for their ignorance when they are supposedly “Franciscan” in the first place? Where is the charity in this nonsense? To make these souls “feel better” while they are objectively speaking, on their merry way to Hell for clinging to a heretical and dogmatically condemned false teaching?

Finally, you need to take a good graduate course in Franciscan Mystical Theology.

Well it’s back this this again. Seems, depending on who’s teaching - folks can have the faith educated right out of 'em. Radical Traditionalist opinion? A personal attack on you? Hardly. It’s the state of the world in which we live:

• Catholic College Leaders Expect Pope to Deliver Stern Message
• Pope Benedict Clamps Down on Catholic Higher Education?

I will not engage in a discussion on St. Francis’ theology with someone who is using Our Holy Father’s writing for their own agenda. You’re using them to bash Father Cantalamessa.

I haven’t been discussing Father Cantalamessa for quite some time, let alone “bashing” him personally. We are now discussing the modern ecumenical movement in general and the use or misuse of St. Francis of a model thereof.

You are feeling uneasy because what you have been taught is being challenged. For some reason, this is bothering you…but not enough apparently, to get into specifics of the challenges to your understanding. I’m sorry, but like I said to you a long time ago - this place is a discussion board, it’s not the homepage for the JReducation lecture series.

The fact that you come onto the Tradional Catholicism sub-forum and deign to lecture folks here of the greatness of the very things that you know they have legitimate concerns about is quite bold - the fact that you belittle challenges to your glowing reports as if they are beneath you is also quite bold - if not a little boorish.

But peace in Christ anyway,
DustinsDad

 

[catharina]

Hi Catharina,

When I said you were implicitly rebuking people like Cardinals Ratzinger, Ottaviani, Fr. Fessio and others I meant that if you hold the position that it is wrong or invalid to argue that one form of Mass (the liturgy, not the sacrament), is better than another then this implicitly rebukes anyone who has argued that one form of Mass is better than another. If you don’t hold that position, then good, and you would not be rebuking anyone.

Brennan, I see your point.

It would have been simpler and more accurate if I’d stated the reverse of what you’d said. You said: “And while the Church says the NO is a valid Mass, and Catholics should agree with that, there is no requirement whatsoever for any Catholic to hold that it is as great a form of worship as the TLM.” My response was much too awkward and should have said simply this: “There is no requirement for any Catholic to hold that the TLM is a greater form of worship than the NO Mass.” So, as prior, we are dealing with opinions when we speak of this issue.

 

[catharina]

…

The fact that you come onto the Tradional Catholicism sub-forum and deign to lecture folks here of the greatness of the very things that you know they have legitimate concerns about is quite bold - the fact that you belittle challenges to your glowing reports as if they are beneath you is also quite bold - if not a little boorish.

But peace in Christ anyway,
DustinsDad

" …belittling … bold … boorish."
“But peace in Christ anyway …”

Now THAT’S taunting.

 

[DustinsDad]

" …belittling … bold … boorish."
“But peace in Christ anyway …”

Now THAT’S taunting.

Not to mention accurate.

 

[catharina]

Not to mention accurate.

“” …belittling … bold … boorish."
“But peace in Christ anyway …”

Now THAT’S taunting."

Yes, that’s what I said to you and you agree.

Always interesting to learn one’s explanation for a habitual lack of charity.
That is: if it’s “accurate” in your mind, then taunting is fine.
I’ll confirm that I’m not even slightly surprised.

I used to wonder at the wrath contained within your posts.
Seemingly you have a way with insults that can’t be stopped.

Now maybe I understand it.

You sound like an angry, wrathful man because you are an angry, wrathful man? Is it as simple as that? Whatever. As long as you manage to keep it clear that while YOU choose to taunt others, taunting was NOT a practice of St. Francis of Assisi. I’m re-stating that original point since you continue to ignore it - but you did accuse Francis of taunting the sultan. (Only in your dreams.) Francis did not indulge in taunting others. Get it? Yet?

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Brennan, I see your point.

It would have been simpler and more accurate if I’d stated the reverse of what you’d said. You said: “And while the Church says the NO is a valid Mass, and Catholics should agree with that, there is no requirement whatsoever for any Catholic to hold that it is as great a form of worship as the TLM.” My response was much too awkward and should have said simply this: “There is no requirement for any Catholic to hold that the TLM is a greater form of worship than the NO Mass.” So, as prior, we are dealing with opinions when we speak of this issue.

Hi Catharina,

I agree with what you’ve said. There certainly is no requirement to hold that the TLM is a greater form of worship than the NO. However, I do think when reading articles such as von Hildebrand’s “The Case for the Latin Mass” or “The Ottaviani Intervention” we are dealing with arguments (and I would say strong arguments) rather than just opinions. The word opinion sometimes connotes something completely arbitrary, like whether or not someone likes ice cream. Yet, of course, one is free to disagree with or even argue against the arguments these authors make. We certainly aren’t dealing with infallible dogma here.

 

[JReducation]

DD

If you believe that I’m so bold and boorish, you have an easy choice. Don’t come onto this post or if you choose to do so, ignore my posts. Life can be very simple

As to your using Francis to represent your position on Ecumenism, if Francis were alive he would have read Et Unum Sint and would have followed the Holy Father’s teachings in that document, especially where it says

Speaking of the lack of unity among Christians, the Decree on Ecumenism does not ignore the fact that "people of both sides were to blame"

“It follows that these separated Churches and Communities, though we believe that they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and value in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.[12] (Chap I Parr 11)

**The separated brethren also carry out many of the sacred actions of the Christian religion. Undoubtedly, in many ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community, these actions can truly engender a life of grace, and can be rightly described as capable of providing access to the community of salvation". **(Chap I Parr 13)

You always quote the writings of previous popes. Here is another encyclical. One encyclical is as good as another, is it not? Francis would accept this. If you want to be like him, you must start to think like him.

Nor do I wish to overlook the Day of Prayer for Peace in Europe, especially in the Balkans, which took me back to the town of Saint Francis as a pilgrim on 9-10 January 1993, (Cahp II Parr 76)

**In 1986, at Assisi, during the World Day of Prayer for Peace, Christians of the various Churches and Ecclesial Communities prayed with one voice to the Lord of history for peace in the world. That same day, in a different but parallel way, Jews and representatives of non-Christian religions also prayed for peace in a harmonious expression of feelings which struck a resonant chord deep in the human spirit. ** (Ibid)

The Brothers welcomed the Holy Father and the other pilgrims to the Mother House of their Order as St. Francis would have done, not in opposition to his wishes. Had there been a conflict between the mind of St. Francis and the pilgrimage, the Mother House would not have been selected for the site of the ecumenical pilgrimage. This house is not the property of the diocese of Assisi nor under the jurisdiction of the local Bishop. It is directly under the jurisdiction of the Superior General of the Conventual FRanciscan Friars. It is protected by Canon Law as an excempt community.

**Where there is a sincere desire to follow Christ, the Spirit is often able to pour out his grace in extraordinary ** (Chap III Parr 84)

This is why Franciscans accept their Franciscan Brothers in the Anglican and Lutheran churches. They trust the sincere desire to follow Christ on the part of these Brothers and in the power of the Holy Spirit to pour out his grace upon them. The unity is based on faith in the power of the Holy Spirit to reunited them someday.

**93. Associating himself with Peter’s threefold profession of love, which corresponds to the earlier threefold denial, his Successor knows that he must be a sign of mercy. His is a ministry of mercy, born of an act of Christ’s own mercy. This whole lesson of the Gospel must be constantly read anew, so that the exercise of the Petrine ministry may lose nothing of its authenticity and transparency. ** (Parr 93)

The Holy Father speaks of the connection between his ecumenical mission and Christ’s mercy. Francis would have had no objection to any act of mercy toward the separated bretheren.

As a final note. Once again, you cited a document out of context. The document that you sited from St. Francis was written as the rule for the Secular Franciscan Order, The Letter to the Faithful. There were no Protestants in Francis day, only Muslims, Jews and Orthodox. He already had a good relationship with these groups. The Brothers were already allowed to exercise their ministry in Palestine along with the Orthodox clergy. They still share that ministry today.

Go back and read the entire Franciscan Ombnibus of Sources or drop the subject.

JR

 

[Jeanette_L]

I’m starting to think that no one arguing for the ‘Traditionalist’ (I use that term loosely, extreme really seems to be more the case) ideas here, has any understanding of the philosophy behind our faith or any of the true Doctors of the Church, it’s great Saints or the teaching Magisterium, which have all given us a richer understanding of the Christian message as the centuries progress and their insight into the riches of our faith deepens.

And what’s more surprising is that you all continually quote philosophers such as von Hildebrand and seemingly don’t even ‘get’ philosophy in general, which is apparent by your total lack of understanding of someone such as St. Francis, one of many I dare say.

If you don’t get the big picture, or the philosophy of Christianity, you will forever be stuck in extreme thoughts and unable to move forward with the Church. This is truly a waste of precious time and energy since there is much to be done and lived in trying to win this world for Christ.

You continually quote people, and yet don’t get the totality of their teachings at all, this is what JR is trying to convey, in very clear and simple terms and yet it seems to be lost on you.

This is very much like arguing with Fundamentalist Protestants, who keep going back to the same one or two verses of scripture, almost always taken out of context, and certainly not interpreted in the* light of all scripture*, to drive home a point that does not mesh with the totality of the Bible and the Christian message as we all know it, as has been handed down and worked out through the centuries until now.

It doesn’t matter how many refutations you can reasonably and logically put forth, they keep hanging onto those same two verses come %$&^ or high water, never hearing a word you say. It then becomes pointless to continue the conversation.

The Church is moving forward, with or without you. You can grudgingly waste your precious years on this planet in mourning over something you have no power or authority to change, or you can choose to be obedient to the authority of the Church and pray for it’s leaders without murmurings against them, which is what we are all exhorted to do by the Apostle Paul. If any of you think that murmurings and strife are going to get you any rewards on the other side, I feel very very sad for you, how you are misguided.

Even if you are convinced that the Church is in error and going down the wrong path, what one of you has been placed in any position of authority to do anything about this? I dare say not one. In this case, you are instructed by the scriptures to pray for those in authority over you and to love and obey, as obedience is better than sacrifice and love covers a multitude of sins. Let the Holy Spirit use your prayers to place the right people where needed to do the correcting, this is not your job.

I just don’t get the whole thing, how you think you can be doing the Body of Christ any good with all this strife. It creates an unhealthy organism to be constantly against the one you say you love.

 

[JReducation]

I’m starting to think that no one arguing for the ‘Traditionalist’ (I use that term loosely, extreme really seems to be more the case) ideas here, has any understanding of the philosophy behind our faith or any of the true Doctors of the Church, it’s great Saints or the teaching Magisterium, which have all given us a richer understanding of the Christian message as the centuries progress and their insight into the riches of our faith deepens.

And what’s more surprising is that you all continually quote philosophers such as von Hildebrand and seemingly don’t even ‘get’ philosophy in general, which is apparent by your total lack of understanding of someone such as St. Francis, one of many I dare say.

If you don’t get the big picture, or the philosophy of Christianity, you will forever be stuck in extreme thoughts and unable to move forward with the Church. This is truly a waste of precious time and energy since there is much to be done and lived in trying to win this world for Christ.

You continually quote people, and yet don’t get the totality of their teachings at all, this is what JR is trying to convey, in very clear and simple terms and yet it seems to be lost on you.

This is very much like arguing with Fundamentalist Protestants, who keep going back to the same one or two verses of scripture, almost always taken out of context, and certainly not interpreted in the* light of all scripture*, to drive home a point that does not mesh with the totality of the Bible and the Christian message as we all know it, as has been handed down and worked out through the centuries until now.

It doesn’t matter how many refutations you can reasonably and logically put forth, they keep hanging onto those same two verses come %$&^ or high water, never hearing a word you say. It then becomes pointless to continue the conversation.

The Church is moving forward, with or without you. You can grudgingly waste your precious years on this planet in mourning over something you have no power or authority to change, or you can choose to be obedient to the authority of the Church and pray for it’s leaders without murmurings against them, which is what we are all exhorted to do by the Apostle Paul. If any of you think that murmurings and strife are going to get you any rewards on the other side, I feel very very sad for you, how you are misguided.

Even if you are convinced that the Church is in error and going down the wrong path, what one of you has been placed in any position of authority to do anything about this? I dare say not one. In this case, you are instructed by the scriptures to pray for those in authority over you and to love and obey, as obedience is better than sacrifice and love covers a multitude of sins. Let the Holy Spirit use your prayers to place the right people where needed to do the correcting, this is not your job.

I just don’t get the whole thing, how you think you can be doing the Body of Christ any good with all this strife. It creates an unhealthy organism to be constantly against the one you say you love.

This ties in very nicely with what St. Elizabeth Ann Seton said to her Sisters and students as she was dying, “No matter what happens, be children of the Church.”

Being a mother of five children whom she raised to obery her in all things and show respect for her authority as mother, I believe that she would know exactly what it means to be a child of Holy Mother Church.

JR

 

[JReducation]

If anyone is really interested in Franciscan history, this is for you.

The Letter to the Faithful that DD cited was written by St. Francis and published by Celano and St. Bonaventure who are considered the two greatested Franciscan historians and exegetes.

What happened was simple. Many lay people were so inspired by the life of St. Francis and his Brothers and by the life of St. Clare and her Sisters that that married couples were willing to separate to join the two Orders that Francis had founded.

Francis did not want them to abandon their families and their married state, even though the Church allows couples to do this to join religioius orders, to this day.

He wrote a letter to this group of people, whom he called The Faithful. It was his idea to give them a rule of their own that they could live at home with their families and still belong to the Franciscan family.

Francis was never very creative with names. The original name of the Brotherhood was the Lesser Brothers. The original name that he gave the Poor Clares was The Poor Ladies and to the Secular Franciscans he gave the name, The Faithful.

Later this document was abrogated by Pope Gregory the Great, because he felt that it was too strict. He renamed the community as the Third Order. In the 1960s, Pope Paul VI ordered the document abrogated again and rewritten and to delete all of the language that used such terms as “damned”, because he believed that the language did not mean the same thing today as Francis meant it when he wrote it. Paul VI believed that it sounded as if Francis was calling his follower to damn those who did not believe, which was not the case. There is only one condemnation that has been allowed to stay in the Rule of St. Francis and it’s in the rule of the friars, not the two other orders. Paul VI also renames the Order as the Secular Franciscans and took out all of the medieval language, leaving the piety and faith of St. Francis intact, as well as his love of charity and poverty.

Both popes felt that the essence of the letter was to call the Brothers and Sisters who make up the Secular Franciscan Order to holiness by following the Gospel and that it was not Francis’ intention to condemn or judge anyone, because it was inconsistent with the way that he actually lived. Therefore, it was unlikely that he would write one thing and live according to another set of values. They felt that he was quoting from sources that were commonly used in the Middle Ages, which he was often prone to do to drive home a point, such as love for the Eucharist and the priesthood. Both popes felt that this message could be preserved without the language that could distract from the original thought of St. Francis.

How do they know the original thought of St. Francis? Through 800 years the three branches of the Friars Minor: Capuchins, Conventuals and Franciscans, all of which Francis founded, have preserved his traditions. Just like the tradition of the Church gave birth to the Scriptures and to the teachings of the Magisterium, the traditions of the Order gave birth to greater clarity of the things that really mattered to our Holy Father St. Francis:

the Gospel
Obedience to the Church
the Eucharist
the cross
holy poverty
detachment
charity
simplicity
brotherhood
conversion from sin
respect for priests
prayer
contemplation
perfect imitation of Christ

Whe Francis uses the term faithful, he is speaking to those holy men and women who wanted to be more faithful to the Gospel by joining his order.

So, he created a third order for them. This is not third in dignity, but third in chronology. They are truly an order with Pontifical Rights and all of the excemptions and privileges that come with that status. They follow their own rule, which as I have explained above has been edited by two popes, even renamed.

Paul VI’s version can be found online under Secular Franciscans. This is the rule that Secular Franciscans follow today.

JR