Learn more about Pope Francis rather than criticize

[Cat]

I don’t know. It feels like the less I know about what this Pope is doing, the more peace of mind I have. Every thing just seems to cause so much confusion, problems and lend itself well for those who want to promote unorthodox thinking. I am sick and tired of reading news in the secular papers of how the Pope is definitely going to change all the “problems” in the church.

Now you may say, that sort of changes will never be introduced. BUT, there are lots of people hoping for those changes. These actions makes them more hopeful and encourage them to pursue their agendas in the Church. It’s like adding gasoline to the fire. The Pope might not light the match himself but the fire will rage. I am tired of hearing my parish priest tell the congregation that this Pope will change all traditions (with a beaming smile) and that everything will be “different”.

For you its probably ok because all you meet are probably your fellow Franciscan buddies who have a good formation. But give a little thought to the lay people who have to put up with this. It used to be that at the end of the day, I could look up to the Pope and still have comfort that I am doing the right thing. Now I have to second guess myself everyday whether anything even matters and re-convince myself that it does.

So I am not sure you appreciate the magnitude of the problem here for a lay person who sees these breaks from traditions. You always make it sound like we are fussing over things when tradition for us lay people is like your spirituality as a Franciscan. Just as you would be upset if a Franciscan superior decided to enforce Dominican spirituality on you (why? Because it is not traditional), so are faithful lay people upset when the man at the helm is doing something completely different from how things used to be.

Eufrosnia, I just wanted you to know that I started another thread and quoted this post in its entirety. I don’t understand one of the sentences in your post, and hope that people can explain it. Hope that’s OK with you.

Thanks!

 

[Eufrosnia]

Eufrosnia, I just wanted you to know that I started another thread and quoted this post in its entirety. I don’t understand one of the sentences in your post, and hope that people can explain it. Hope that’s OK with you.

Thanks!

Yes, I think that is alright.

About the sentence, I must add that the analogies I drew were not meant to be understood as something people in general consider it to be. I was merely trying to show the similarity in the two and how one would be proportionally upset for that sort of change.

 

[Brendan_64]

Well I already have an answer to this so this is a meaningless question. But just for fun, I would reply to you that Pope must get rid of the vows perhaps so that he can have the luxury of more security personnel.

How is a question meaningless because you feel you have the answer? Are you saying that asking people questions are only meaningful if the person you ask doesn’t have an answer? And if that was indeed the case, how would the questioner know the other person hasn’t got an answer until after the question is asked?

Are we all expected to be mind-readers, who only ask questions if we know that person we ask cannot answer the question?

 

[JReducation]

I’ll sit ----------------------------------> :coolinoff:

I just got totally

 

[Eufrosnia]

How is a question meaningless because you feel you have the answer? Are you saying that asking people questions are only meaningful if the person you ask doesn’t have an answer? And if that was indeed the case, how would the questioner know the other person hasn’t got an answer until after the question is asked?

Are we all expected to be mind-readers, who only ask questions if we know that person we ask cannot answer the question?

?? I meant the Brother answered my question and I was satisfied with his answer

 

[sojo]

I think Br. JR posted the relevant canon somewhere else; while a religious elevated to a bishop is dispensed from the obligation of obeying the superior of his community, he continues to be a member of that community. Moreover he is not released from his vows of poverty, etc. By the time a religious gets to be the Holy Father’s age, expecting him to behave differently from his vows just isn’t going to happen. It’s such an integral part of his personality, and something he’s worked at all his life at perfecting, that it would be very difficult to change that. I attended the Easter Vigil with a bunch of Benedictine monks last night, there was a small reception and collation afterwards. I was talking to my spiritual director, (in his mid-70s) and he understood this clearly when we were discussing Francis, he said “he cannot live any differently than his vow of poverty”.

Some of the monks in this community are in their 80s and 90s BTW. It was an inspiration to watch one monk in particular, who walks with a walker, is 91 and yet managed to stand through all the parts we’re supposed to stand at when people 30 years his junior were having to sit. I’m 54 and was quite tired last night and wanted so badly to sit but every time I saw Br. Anselm standing I couldn’t bring myself to sit. Br. Anselm has been a monk for almost as long as the Holy Father is old (70 years!), but the point is that their way of life is so inseparable from their heart, personality and soul now, it’s too much to expect the Holy Father to just suddenly embrace a regal lifestyle.

Thank you for sharing this! How beautiful.

 

[Brendan_64]

?? I meant the Brother answered my question and I was satisfied with his answer

But my question was from me to you. I asked you a question, but you don’t see the need to answer it because Brother J has answered a question you asked of him? It’s not all about you getting answers from others, it’s a two-way process.

 

[Eufrosnia]

But my question was from me to you. I asked you a question, but you don’t see the need to answer it because Brother J has answered a question you asked of him? It’s not all about you getting answers from others, it’s a two-way process.

I thought you asked the question to help me better understand that my question was wrong?

 

[graciew]

I’ll sit ----------------------------------> :coolinoff:

I just got totally

jajajajaj Water break!Keep your cleats on,Brother! The game is “Follow the Leader” , and He wants us all in His team!

 

[jwinch2]

Why do we take Pope Francis out of context? We do we not factor in that he’s a religious whenever we analyze what he does or say?

This is a fair question. I don’t doubt for a second that Pope Francis’ decision making and personal spirituality will be always based on the tradition of the Spiritual Exercises, etc.

However, one could just as easily ask the question of why it seems to be OK to project the charism of a particular religious order onto the entire Church universal. In addition, being influenced by St. Francis is not remotely the same thing as being a Franciscan, as you well know. Moreover, there are many approaches to poverty and humility in the Catholic Church which are just as valid and august.

Finally, as noted above, the Pope most certainly remains a Jesuit until the day he dies. However, when he became a bishop, he was released from his vows of poverty and obedience. This is so he does not run into conflict with his vow of obedience to his superior while acting in the interest of his diocese, etc. and also because canon law requires a bishop to own property. Obviously, when one is elected Pope/Bishop of Rome, this continues to hold true unless the Pope changes canon law.

 

[McCall1981]

I don’t know. It feels like the less I know about what this Pope is doing, the more peace of mind I have. Every thing just seems to cause so much confusion, problems and lend itself well for those who want to promote unorthodox thinking. I am sick and tired of reading news in the secular papers of how the Pope is definitely going to change all the “problems” in the church.

Now you may say, that sort of changes will never be introduced. BUT, there are lots of people hoping for those changes. These actions makes them more hopeful and encourage them to pursue their agendas in the Church. It’s like adding gasoline to the fire. The Pope might not light the match himself but the fire will rage. I am tired of hearing my parish priest tell the congregation that this Pope will change all traditions (with a beaming smile) and that everything will be “different”.

For you its probably ok because all you meet are probably your fellow Franciscan buddies who have a good formation. But give a little thought to the lay people who have to put up with this. It used to be that at the end of the day, I could look up to the Pope and still have comfort that I am doing the right thing. Now I have to second guess myself everyday whether anything even matters and re-convince myself that it does.

So I am not sure you appreciate the magnitude of the problem here for a lay person who sees these breaks from traditions. You always make it sound like we are fussing over things when tradition for us lay people is like your spirituality as a Franciscan. Just as you would be upset if a Franciscan superior decided to enforce Dominican spirituality on you (why? Because it is not traditional), so are faithful lay people upset when the man at the helm is doing something completely different from how things used to be.

Very well said, thank you

 

[Melchior_1]

However, one could just as easily ask the question of why it seems to be OK to project the charism of a particular religious order onto the entire Church universal. In addition, being influenced by St. Francis is not remotely the same thing as being a Franciscan, as you well know. Moreover, there are many approaches to poverty and humility in the Catholic Church which are just as valid and august.

We should maybe ask Pius V (Dominican) and Pius X (Secular Franciscan) these things? Or JP2 (IIRC he was a third order Carmelite?)

It’s like the old expression; you can take the boy from the country, but you can’t take the country from the boy".

 

[Lucky7]

I am tired of hearing my parish priest tell the congregation that this Pope will change all traditions (with a beaming smile) and that everything will be “different”.

I’m sorry, but I find this terribly disturbing, but unfortunately not very surprised.

 

[jwinch2]

Finally, I have not seen or heard any of the lay faithful as filled with angst as I’m hearing you.

They are all over the place. Half the Catholics I know who are actually practicing their faith feel this way. Many people are very concerned, and not just the anti-Vatican II crowd. You aren’t going to see much of it here on CAF because the rules, to include the new ones about the Pope, are preventing such discussion. However, in private messages and on other forums, it is highly discussed. Heck, there was even an article written by the Associated Press on it just the other day.

 

[Melchior_1]

You know what sets me at ease in so many areas? That any of the “changes” are to disciplines and practices. We’ve had those changed in the past.

Doctrine cannot be changed, nor dogma.

Fearing for the safety of the Church over matters that could’ve changed at any other point in the last 1900+ years. At that point, we might be concerned with practices being elevated to the level of doctrine.

 

[Lucky7]

They are all over the place. Half the Catholics I know who are actually practicing their faith feel this way. Many people are very concerned, and not just the anti-Vatican II crowd. You aren’t going to see much of it here on CAF because the rules, to include the new ones about the Pope, are preventing such discussion. However, in private messages and on other forums, it is highly discussed. Heck, there was even an article written by the Associated Press on it just the other day.

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.

 

[shelby_sun]

I’m sorry, but I find this terribly disturbing, but unfortunately not very surprised.

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!!!

 

[McCall1981]

You know what sets me at ease in so many areas? That any of the “changes” are to disciplines and practices. We’ve had those changed in the past.

Doctrine cannot be changed, nor dogma.

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

 

[jwinch2]

He is more concerned with souls not shoes!!!

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.

 

[McCall1981]

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.

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.