Learn more about Pope Francis rather than criticize

[Lucky7]

This is exactly true, but some of us are worried that the changes to discipline are leading towards doctrine changes later on.

I don’t know if, for me, I am worried about this.

Although I know this pertains to Church law (and not doctrine), I am VERY concerned that there does not appear to be much concern over pro-abortion politicians receiving communion from our Church leaders (including at the Popes installation)…except perhaps Cardinal Burke? We are talking about sacrilege and scandal here. Perhaps the fact that this particular church law is so darn close to divine law that I do not understand ever taking any chances in allowing reception of communion unless it is VERY clear that the politician has recanted his/her views.

Then there is the perception in our Church that it just doesn’t matter what religion you are…we’re all going to Heaven. They are all just different paths to the same place. That is not Catholic teaching. But we have Church leaders attending other religious ceremonies/services and we are now including non-Catholics in rites that up until now only included Catholics. This is not helping to correct the perception that it doesn’t matter what religion you follow. It is helping to reinforce it. It would be great if these things were done but then it was very clear that the Catholic Faith was the one, true Faith and the one sure way of getting to Heaven, but you NEVER hear this.

Maybe, in time, the Pope will make statements about this. I hope so.

Anyway, these are just a couple of my thoughts…I sure hope they didn’t break any rules.

 

[Melchior_1]

This is exactly true, but some of us are worried that the changes to discipline are leading towards doctrine changes later on.

2000 years and Matthew 16 sez otherwise, my friend.

This isn’t meant to “poo-poo” things, I understand your concern. But we need to not elevate things that can (and already have changed over 2000 years) to doctrinal status. Doing so opens things up to the fear that even the things that can’t change could change.

I mean, people in some circles are equating the washing of women’s feet to “female priesthood!”. The very rite of washing of feet is optional, versus JP2 making the infallible statement that the Church has zero ability or authority to “ordain” women.

I like certain practices too. But if I raised them up to a certain devotion or level of love equal (or near) doctrine/dogma, I’m setting myself up to be devastated if it ever changed. It’s just like if McDonald’s took the McDouble off their $1.39 menu here in Canada.

 

[shelby_sun]

Because when people/themedia talk about changes in the Church they mean women priests etc, not streamling the Curia. We all know that and you’d have to be intentionally naieve to think they mean something we here would consider positive.

I apologize if I sound harsh, but I think this is true.

I don’t listen to the media, for me that is naive and foolish. I think, at best, I am smart enough not to get sucked into the medias’ attempt to get people to listen to them. I feel sorry for those who do; is their faith so soft.

Like very few people on this site, except for Bro. who knows more than I, know anything about the Jesuits and that is what is making them scared. The unknown doesn’t mean worse, it means just, that unknown. For those of us that know the Jesuit, we know he is not out to get his name on some new rule or teaching of the church. He is there to serve God, what JP II asked him to do and what the Cardinals, who might know a little more than you or I know, elected him to do, fully knowing his background and his faith. These doubters are not just doubting this Pope, they are doubting all those cardinals and the Holy Spirit. I find it sad after only 3 weeks.

 

[Lucky7]

How do you know that the changes won’t be good one that you might just be OK with. Those talking about a pair of shoes are not focusing on the true meaning of our faith. They are simply a pair of shoes, that Jesus himself never wore.

This Pope was elected 3 weeks ago, and most of the people you have talk with probably know nothing of the Jesuits, because The Jesuit were never mentioned much on this site until I would comment. In fact, six months ago I submitted the question of what people thought of The Society of Jesus, but it never came about.

What if the only changes are in dealing with the corruption and lies the church has to deal with right now. Just because something is good doesn’t mean it can not be improved. Do you really think that as a Jesuit, who traditionally do not aspire to be the Pope, this man wants to come in and change the rules and teaching of the church? No the only thing he has ever wanted to do is serve God and receive no glory for it. JP II changed his life path by asking him to be a cardinal; again that was never his plan. He is more concerned with souls not shoes!!!

I hear you about his Jesuit background and Brother’s explanations about it has most certainly helped me to understand him better (however, with respect to the shoes I’m not sure I understand why a simpler, red shoe wouldn’t have been okay; it would have kept the martyr symbolism in place and also his need to be simpler…the best of both worlds). Anyway, I’m not stuck on the shoes FWIW.

I think what was upsetting ot me was the description of a priest sending the very clear message that traditional is bad and yay, it will change!. I hate when references to pre-Vatican II ways (the “old” ways) are almost scoffed at/laughed at…during mass. It seems disrespectful. And I wouldn’t even call myself a traditionalist. Why is tradition so bad? Why should we be happy (“beaming smile” of the priest) that we’re getting rid of traditional ways? What message does that send???

Again, perception.

 

[OraLabora]

Exactly. And it doesn’t help when other posters either poo-poo (I’m not saying you Brother) our concerns at best or get angry/self-righteous with or insult us at worst. Comments pointing out how they don’t have these same concerns because they trust our Pope is not really helpful. However, I think I have seen a change in some posters since I’ve been speaking up about this in another thread, including offers to pray for us…and I am so appreciative of those posters.

These concerns are REAL. The fact that there are so many of us is good reason to pay attention to it. We are not dissenters of doctrine. We are not happy with the fact that we even HAVE these concerns and we are really hoping that we are WRONG.

Brother has helped me to a point; however, I am still struggling…and although others have been able to communicate how they are feeling in some great posts, I am still trying to figure out what is troubling me. I don’t think it is just post-election for me either, so I may be different than others in that I am not just focused on what has been taking place post-election.

Change, any change, is unsettling for many people. I know from my experience in the workplace. Bring in a new boss, or the company gets sold, and fear sets in, and often, negative self-preserving behaviours kick in as well.

We need to learn to let go. Jesus made a promise to Peter. Either we believe that promise or we don’t; if we don’t, our faith is built on sand. In unsettling times I find the 1500 year-old Rule of Saint Benedict enormously comforting. I became interested in Benedictine spirituality around the time of the 9/11 disasters. Like many folks I was deeply disturbed by those events. I was a practicing Catholic at that time but my faith had stagnated after being back in the Church for about 4 years or so, and 9/11 didn’t help.

I decided to go to Mass at the local Benedictine monastery. The beautiful liturgy all in Gregorian chant got the gears turning in my mind; then it struck me. The Benedictines have been around for 1500 years. What did they see in those 1500 years? The Dark Ages; plagues, wars, genocides, the Reformation (which in some places caused them to be chased away or suffer greatly), WWI, WWII, the Holocaust, and the list is endless. Yet they’re still around (and the next year I started my oblate formation because of it; I figured any spirituality that can survive all that must be something!). Why is it still around? Because the Church they belong to is still around and their spirituality has contributed to enriching that Church. Why is that Church still around? Because Jesus made an irrevocable promise to Peter. If we let fear of that promise being broken get into our hearts, the Devil has won.

Thus, we need to learn to let go, to surrender to God, to trust FULLY in God. Francis is His chosen one to lead the Church through these troubled times. Trust God. Trust that His choice is right, trust the Promise to Peter.

 

[shelby_sun]

I recognize that the Pope doesn’t like them, but in reality it isn’t about him. St. Elizabeth of Hungary didn’t like all of the fanciness and finery that came from being married to one of the nobility either, but she knew what was expected of her station in life and so she humbled herself and wore it anyway. However in her humility, underneath her rich clothes, she wore a hair shirt which no one knew about. Later, when her husband had passed away, she embraced exterior poverty in addition to the interior humility she had been cultivating because her station in life had now allowed it. St. Thomas More acted similarly. As Lord Chancellor of England, he was expected to dress and present himself in a particular manner. However, to prevent himself from becoming attached to this way of living, he wore a hair shirt underneath his rich clothes.

In addition, I would ask you to please explain to me how a visible reminder that the Church is redeemed by the blood of Christ and built on the blood of martyrs will do anything but help the pope lead the Church in her work to save souls.

People seem to have the opinion that too many little traditions that are not part of Sacred Tradition have crept into things over the many years of the Church. The reality is not that we have too many of them, but rather than people are not taught what they mean, which leads to them thinking that they are not important or simply frivolous and can be done away with. If Catholics understood the significance and symbolism behind all of the papal dress and other pious traditions in the Church, the pope would be a Catechism in motion every time he walked across the room.

Because I know only the Jesuits, I cannot even fathom the idea of Jesus walking around in red shoes or living in the Vatican apartment. It just does register to me at all. These things are created by men not Jesus. Jesus was a simple carpenter never aspiring to be anything but the Son of God, our Savior, not our rich savior. If people will just start to learn instead of fear, they just might understand how the Jesuits think and how holy it can be. There is no amount of material glory of tradition for God that can ever take the place of loving each other, no matter what religion we are, in the name of God.

 

[Lucky7]

Because I know only the Jesuits, I cannot even fathom the idea of Jesus walking around in red shoes or living in the Vatican apartment. It just does register to me at all. These things are created by men not Jesus. Jesus was a simple carpenter never aspiring to be anything but the Son of God, our Savior, not our rich savior. If people will just start to learn instead of fear, they just might understand how the Jesuits think and how holy it can be. There is no amount of material glory of tradition for God that can ever take the place of loving each other, no matter what religion we are, in the name of God.

So then shoud we expect all familiar tradition to go by the waist side? And since you mentioned “no matter what religion you are”, does that mean that it doesn’t matter what religion we are (getting back to another concern of mine)?

 

[shelby_sun]

I hear you about his Jesuit background and Brother’s explanations about it has most certainly helped me to understand him better (however, with respect to the shoes I’m not sure I understand why a simpler, red shoe wouldn’t have been okay; it would have kept the martyr symbolism in place and also his need to be simpler…the best of both worlds). Anyway, I’m not stuck on the shoes FWIW.

I think what was upsetting ot me was the description of a priest sending the very clear message that traditional is bad and yay, it will change!. I hate when references to pre-Vatican II ways (the “old” ways) are almost scoffed at/laughed at…during mass. It seems disrespectful. And I wouldn’t even call myself a traditionalist. Why is tradition so bad? Why should we be happy (“beaming smile” of the priest) that we’re getting rid of traditional ways? What message does that send???

Again, perception.

Your are right. I do not care about tradition as much as I care about the state our church is in, but I know others find comfort in those traditions, but remember they are not gone forever. This man is not trying to change these things because they are bad for the church. He is doing it because it is who he truly is as a Jesuit.

The Pope is also not try to convert all Catholics to become like all Jesuits. Please remember, this was not his plan, JP II ask this of him him as a duty to God, he has never dreapt or thought of being the Pope, he can only be who he is.

Again, I would ask those having difficulty, to have patience and let God guide this man on the difficult journey he has before him. If he needs to wear his old black shoe to focus on his job, then lets us try to understand, and wait to see how he guides the church. No need to get anxious yet, but having crippling anxiety myself I do see how it can get out of hand so fast.

This sounds dramatic, but the Jesuit truly have saved my life and my faith.

 

[shelby_sun]

So then shoud we expect all familiar tradition to go by the waist side? And since you mentioned “no matter what religion you are”, does that mean that it doesn’t matter what religion we are (getting back to another concern of mine)?

Maybe for a while, but not forever. Each Pope has that choice in certain matters. It should not matter what religion a person is to treat them with equality, respect, and kindness as a human being. Why would that ever be in question?

 

[McCall1981]

I don’t know if, for me, I am worried about this.

Although I know this pertains to Church law (and not doctrine), I am VERY concerned that there does not appear to be much concern over pro-abortion politicians receiving communion from our Church leaders (including at the Popes installation)…except perhaps Cardinal Burke? We are talking about sacrilege and scandal here. Perhaps the fact that this particular church law is so darn close to divine law that I do not understand ever taking any chances in allowing reception of communion unless it is VERY clear that the politician has recanted his/her views.

Then there is the perception in our Church that it just doesn’t matter what religion you are…we’re all going to Heaven. They are all just different paths to the same place. That is not Catholic teaching. But we have Church leaders attending other religious ceremonies/services and we are now including non-Catholics in rites that up until now only included Catholics. This is not helping to correct the perception that it doesn’t matter what religion you follow. It is helping to reinforce it. It would be great if these things were done but then it was very clear that the Catholic Faith was the one, true Faith and the one sure way of getting to Heaven, but you NEVER hear this.

Maybe, in time, the Pope will make statements about this. I hope so.

Anyway, these are just a couple of my thoughts…I sure hope they didn’t break any rules.

Very interesting post, made me have to clarify my own thoughts on this. I completely agree with your positions here in your examples. But for me, these things fall into the catagory of “whats the best strategy to most effectively promote the Catholic faith in the world”. While I personaly agree with you, Im also ok with (for instance) a Pope or Cardinal diverging from what you said here because they believe another “strategy” will work better. For instance, Cardinal Dolan gives communion to Biden with the strategy of “you catch more flies with honey…”. Even though I dont agree with his strategy here, I have to acknowledge he could be right. Same thing with Francis washing womens feet. I THINK its a setting a bad example etc, but since its a subjective I have to acknowledge he may very well be right.

Where I diverge is at things like doctrine, where there is no subjective opinion. Abortion is wrong period. I might disagree with someones strategy for how to best stop abortions, but as long as the doctrine itself remains absolute Id be able to feel ok with it (ok, I might get a little frustrated but you know what I mean).

 

[Lucky7]

Your are right. I do not care about tradition as much as I care about the state our church is in, but I know others find comfort in those traditions, but remember they are not gone forever. This man is not trying to change these things because they are bad for the church. He is doing it because it is who he truly is as a Jesuit.

The Pope is also not try to convert all Catholics to become like all Jesuits. Please remember, this was not his plan, JP II ask this of him him as a duty to God, he has never dreapt or thought of being the Pope, he can only be who he is.

Again, I would ask those having difficulty, to have patience and let God guide this man on the difficult journey he has before him. If he needs to wear his old black shoe to focus on his job, then lets us try to understand, and wait to see how he guides the church. No need to get anxious yet, but having crippling anxiety myself I do see how it can get out of hand so fast.

This sounds dramatic, but the Jesuit truly have saved my life and my faith.

I wonder whether part of his adjustment however is trying to fit his Jesuit background into his role. To be fair, I think he is on a learning curve there as well. I wonder if he will get to a point where he will think about Jesuit vs universal and sometimes choose against what he is used to/what he would have done as a Jesuit. I have to think that not all of his decision can be “Jesuit” as Pope.

I am trying to be patient, truly I am. Patience is not one of my better virtues, but I am trying to remember to give it time. As I have said on a number of occasions I am trying to remain hopeful that this Pope is laying the groundwork for the more difficult issues that needs to be addressed. I am hoping that the things that I’m concerned about will be among those things addressed.

And I think it is wonderful that the Jesuits have saved your life. That’s beautiful and not dramatic at all. God Bless you!

 

[Jaysuitical]

My first reaction to the announcement that he was a Latin American Jesuit was “Uh oh,” because so many of the Jesuits of the Americas, in both hemispheres & Europe became active in dissent from Church teaching. Pope Francis is very much a novelty for many Catholics – a Jesuit who really is loyal to the Holy See, his vows & Church teaching all at once. When I was considering vocation in the 1990s, I couldn’t find a Jesuit anywhere in my diocese who wasn’t handing on false teaching in the name of the Vatican II popes – John XXIII would’ve been horrified to see how many things were done in his name, and Paul VI was quite anguished because he could never find out where the “smoke of Satan” was coming from (mainly from those who were telling him one thing while they were doing another).

Pope Francis has already re-converted me to the whole of Church teaching after years of believing the most bellicose & most acidic critiques of Vatican II made in the name of fidelity to tradition. So the example of real poverty, real obedience, and real humility are quite powerful. Imagine if the whole Jesuit order becomes what it once was!!!

 

[Lucky7]

Maybe for a while, but not forever. Each Pope has that choice in certain matters. It should not matter what religion a person is to treat them with equality, respect, and kindness as a human being. Why would that ever be in question?

I think I jsut misunderstood your phrasing.

 

[Lucky7]

Anyway, I’ve got to go for now. I hope you all have had a wonderful Easter!! Thank you for the respectful dialogue!

 

[shelby_sun]

I wonder whether part of his adjustment however is trying to fit his Jesuit background into his role. To be fair, I think he is on a learning curve there as well. I wonder if he will get to a point where he will think about Jesuit vs universal and sometimes choose against what he is used to/what he would have done as a Jesuit. I have to think that not all of his decision can be “Jesuit” as Pope.

I am trying to be patient, truly I am. Patience is not one of my better virtues, but I am trying to remember to give it time. As I have said on a number of occasions I am trying to remain hopeful that this Pope is laying the groundwork for the more difficult issues that needs to be addressed. I am hoping that the things that I’m concerned about will be among those things addressed.

And I think it is wonderful that the Jesuits have saved your life. That’s beautiful and not dramatic at all. God Bless you!

Thank you. Pray for me as I will for you.

 

[shelby_sun]

Very interesting post, made me have to clarify my own thoughts on this. I completely agree with your positions here in your examples. But for me, these things fall into the catagory of “whats the best strategy to most effectively promote the Catholic faith in the world”. While I personaly agree with you, Im also ok with (for instance) a Pope or Cardinal diverging from what you said here because they believe another “strategy” will work better. For instance, Cardinal Dolan gives communion to Biden with the strategy of “you catch more flies with honey…”. Even though I dont agree with his strategy here, I have to acknowledge he could be right. Same thing with Francis washing womens feet. I THINK its a setting a bad example etc, but since its a subjective I have to acknowledge he may very well be right.

Where I diverge is at things like doctrine, where there is no subjective opinion. Abortion is wrong period. I might disagree with someones strategy for how to best stop abortions, but as long as the doctrine itself remains absolute Id be able to feel ok with it (ok, I might get a little frustrated but you know what I mean).

That is extremely open minded of you, and something needed more, even from myself. No one knows the best way to reach everyone, but you are very good to try to be open to the possibilities of other ways.

 

[CB_Catholic]

This is exactly true, but some of us are worried that the changes to discipline are leading towards doctrine changes later on.

If you have this worry, then you are not trusting the Holy Spirit to guide the Church as He has the past 2000 years. The Holy Spirit has protected the Church from doctrinal and dogmatic error since the beginning, and Christ has made the promise that He will guide the Church into all truth. No Pope has ever taught error in the matter of faith and morals, even if they were sinful men or made mistakes in other areas. That is a core teaching of the Catholic Church, and it is heresy to claim that doctrinal error can be taught by any Pope. It has never happened in 2000 years and will never happen.

Do not make the mistake of elevating disciplines to the level of doctrine. Do not make the mistake of elevating traditions to Sacred Tradition. Do not make the mistake of believing a Pope can change doctrine or dogma. It is not the Pope who is in error, but those who have this belief that changes to discipline can lead to changes in doctrine later on. Here is an article which explains this very clearly and will help you to understand the grave error in what you have stated:

catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility

 

[McCall1981]

Pope Francis is very much a novelty for many Catholics – a Jesuit who really is loyal to the Holy See, his vows & Church teaching all at once.

This is exactly what I hope for from him, and if this is true, he would be well worth “the wait” that some of us are going through.

 

[McCall1981]

That is extremely open minded of you, and something needed more, even from myself. No one knows the best way to reach everyone, but you are very good to try to be open to the possibilities of other ways.

I should say I TRY to do this, whether I succeed very well is up for for debate

 

[McCall1981]

If you have this worry, then you are not trusting the Holy Spirit to guide the Church as He has the past 2000 years. The Holy Spirit has protected the Church from doctrinal and dogmatic error since the beginning, and Christ has made the promise that He will guide the Church into all truth. No Pope has ever taught error in the matter of faith and morals, even if they were sinful men or made mistakes in other areas. That is a core teaching of the Catholic Church, and it is heresy to claim that doctrinal error can be taught by any Pope. It has never happened in 2000 years and will never happen.

Do not make the mistake of elevating disciplines to the level of doctrine. Do not make the mistake of elevating traditions to Sacred Tradition. Do not make the mistake of believing a Pope can change doctrine or dogma. It is not the Pope who is in error, but those who have this belief that changes to discipline can lead to changes in doctrine later on. Here is an article which explains this very clearly and will help you to understand the grave error in what you have stated:

catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility

You are totally correct here, and while I know this is true intellectually, I unfortunately struggle with having faith in it

Thank you for the link