Learn more about Pope Francis rather than criticize

[McCall1981]

Mc Call,what if you think Francis is not just making decisions or plannning strategies but discerning?
He comes from religiuos tradition,as thread points out .
Let´s do away with the idea of strategy,if this leads us to tricky things.
How does that sound?

Sure, whatever word you want to use (I dont mean “strategy” to have any negative connotations)

Doctrine is pristine, the real world is messy

 

[Brendan_64]

But can we be certain that BXVI recognized him? I can not see the Eucharist in the photo on the link. Also, would not have BXVI given it to him in the mouth, and not on the hand?

Of course he would have recognised him. He was very well known and a friend of Pope John Paul II. cardinal Ratzinger would have certainly met him before.

And yes he did receive Communion from Cardinal Ratzinger.

Cardinal Kasper (who was President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity) said, “Brother Roger received communion several times from the hands of Pope John Paul II, who had become friends with him from the days of the Second Vatican Council, and who was well acquainted with his personal journey with respect to the Catholic Church. There was nothing secret or hidden in the attitude of the Catholic Church, neither at Taizé or in Rome. During the funeral of Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger only repeated what had already been done before him in Saint Peter’s Basilica, at the time of the late pope. There was nothing new or premeditated in the Cardinal’s act.”

And it was given in the hand (although I fail to see how this in itself would be an issue). I don’t see how you assume that Cardinal Ratzinger would not have given Holy Communion in the hand. It is not for the person receiving to decide how they wish to receive, not for the person giving to decide how they wish to give it. Since receiving on the hand was entirely permitted by Pope Benedict (indeed it was the norm amongst most of Catholics) I don’t see how you can assume that Pope Benedict disapproved of it 9and even if he did it’s up to the person receiving to decide).

 

[allhers]

I have to ask this question, because it’s been bugging me for weeks. Well, only since the election of Pope Francis. When I sit and listen to priests, brothers, sisters, theologians and apologists speak about this pope, the one thing that comes up in everyone’s mind is that he’s a consecrated religious. He is a Jesuit who is heavily influenced by the Franciscan school of ministry. We don’t speak of him as a Pope without speaking about his roots in the religious life. Because to do so is to take him out of context. When you take someone out of context, you’re not going to understand them and you’re going to miss a lot of the richness that’s there.

God gives to the Church many gifts and one of the greatest gifts that he has given to the Church is the religious life. In Vita Consecrata the Church states that even though the consecrated life is not part of the hierarchy of the Church, it is essential to the life of the Church. It is so essential that is is born in Christ’s life itself. Christ was the first consecrated religious. He lived in community with his Apostles. He lived according to the Evangelical Counsels. He was a servant to all. He was a contemplative. He was a mystic and he was a common laborer. The mission given to him by his Father was his Rule of Life. That’s really beautiful.

However, when people discuss Pope Francis on these forums and other forums on the Internet, they talk about him as if they were speaking about Pope Benedict, John Paul II, John XXIII and so forth. None of those popes were consecrated religious. In fact the popes whom we have had who came to us from the religious life were very revolutionary. Let’s take Clement V. The Benedictine who legalized abdication. Pius V, the Dominican who unified the Roman Rite. Clement XIV, the Franciscan who suppressed the Jesuits, because his order asked him to do so. Those are just some of the religious. The point is that these men brought rather interesting qualities, thoughts, behaviors, customs, changes and gifts to the papacy.

We look at Pope Francis and I don’t see many people on these forums

a. Remember that he’s a religious

b. Remember that he is a Jesuit trained in Ignatian thought and Ignatian pedegogy; therefore, when he speaks he’s going to use that system.

c. Remember the he is a follower of the Franciscan school of ministry, which is very emphatic that voluntary poverty is a means to salvation and necessary if one is to do pastoral care among the voiceless.

d. Remember that he is a consecrated religious who is disciplined in asceticism and trained to live without many things that most people take for granted. When presented with these extras, the immediate reaction of the religious is a question. “Do I really need this?”

e. Remember that every religious, even if he’s a pope, has a duty to his vows. They do not cease to exist.

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?

St. Francis was always one of my favorite Saints, when I was real little I came to love him and read all about him, he touched my heart in many ways. I was very happy to hear our Pope took the name Francis.

I was also taught by (first my parents and then Franciscans and then Dominicans and had a Bishop once (God rest his soul) that was a Passionist. They were all awesome.
Fr. Mitch from, EWTN is a Jesuit.

People need to just love, not come up with reasons to be unkind.

They can go to this link for news from the Vatican
news.va/en

I found this message from him on there on my birthday:
Never speak poorly of others news.va/en/news/never-speak-poorly-of-others

 

[McCall1981]

Couldn’t agree more. Francis is not a president or a politician. He is Pope. That infallibility claim seems to jar with lots of ‘modern’ Catholics.

Well, point taken, but still, the Pope can and does make mistakes and sin just like the rest of us. When and if that happens, we’re not obligated to like and agree with everything he does.

 

[graciew]

Sure, whatever word you want to use (I dont mean “strategy” to have any negative connotations)

Doctrine is pristine, the real world is messy

oh yes,by all means,I understand you don´t.

 

[Boulder257]

You know, it was only about 100 years ago that most Catholics wouldn’t have even known the name of the Pope, let alone know what he looked like or what he was doing. Fast forward to today and we not only know his name, what he looks like and what he is doing, but now we have the audacity to tell him he is not doing his job right! We even give him our oh so worldly advice and opinions on everything from abortion and contraception to liturgical changes!

I’m sorry, there are days I would like to go back in time when the laity had little to say in Church matters and the Pope, Cardinals and Bishops decided pretty much everything without our “learned” and sage advice. Listening to some of the lay people on these forums complain about the Pope - and darned near everything else concerning the Church - is really tiresome. When did all of these lay people become such experts on Church matters? Did I miss that boat? When did it pull out? I mean, the Church has done pretty well without the advice from CAF members for something like 2000 years, and I think it will last another 2000 years without our (name removed by moderator)ut.

For me it’s all about obedience - period…

 

[Lucky7]

Well, point taken, but still, the Pope can and does make mistakes and sin just like the rest of us. When and if that happens, we’re not obligated to like and agree with everything he does.

Exactly. I"m really getting tired of the comments that make it seem that the (any) Pope is infallible in all that he does and that we are required to agree with him on EVERYTHING. No, that is NOT Catholic teaching.

I understand that some are frustrated with those of us who have concerns or questions, but I wish they would stop talking like anything the Pope does is infallible.

 

[Mystrx]

I think everyone one needs to relax, we’ve been doing this for 2000 years and it’ll work out just fine. Personally I haven’t really had any complaints about Pope Francis. In fact so far I’m quite happy with what he’s doing.

 

[surritter]

I really do not understand the number of criticisms that I am seeing on these forums and elsewhere. The Holy Father has barely had time to get settled and already people are criticizing him…

Please everyone, take a deep breath and allow the Holy Spirit to work through our new Holy Father. I believe that we all could learn a great deal from him. Lastly, remember that the Holy Spirit knows the master plan and we do not. We may not like some things that the Pope is doing, we may not understand them, but we should trust and have faith that all is working for God’s ultimate purpose, for as the Lord Himself promised, the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church and the successors of St. Peter!

Hold on – while I agree with your post, it must also be pointed out that the Holy Spirit does NOT guide everything that the pope does. The only guarantee we have is that the Holy Father can never officially teach in error when it comes to faith and morals.

But there is no guarantee that every liturgical action he does is to be lauded as perfect.
(Again, I’m not in the “complaining” camp; I’m just pointing out an important Catholic fact about the papacy.)

 

[allhers]

Exactly. I"m really getting tired of the comments that make it seem that the (any) Pope is infallible in all that he does and that we are required to agree with him on EVERYTHING. No, that is NOT Catholic teaching.

I understand that some are frustrated with those of us who have concerns or questions, but I wish they would stop talking like anything the Pope does is infallible.

It would be nice also, if you would go to the Vatican web site, they have a news link on Vatican news on there.
Then you could get your questions answered instead of just listening to what the media, or one another is saying about him.
They have already explained so many things that people on here complain about, no he is not changing anything to do with the Priesthood, one of the women was Catholic and one was Muslim, to leave her out would have been unkind and not the mission of the Church, there were 10 young males and 2 young females whose feet he washed.
They had written to him and asked that he come there to pray the Mass for them. Their letters were very touching and I saw that he is a very loving, Christ-like man by going to them.
www.vatican.va
and for the news link
news.va/en

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Exactly. I"m really getting tired of the comments that make it seem that the (any) Pope is infallible in all that he does and that we are required to agree with him on EVERYTHING. No, that is NOT Catholic teaching.

I understand that some are frustrated with those of us who have concerns or questions, but I wish they would stop talking like anything the Pope does is infallible.

But all he has done since becoming Pope, basically, is celebrate Masses and other liturgies. And he is protected when speaking/acting/teaching about faith and morals.

The other things we’ve heard about are things like what shoes he’s wearing. That doesn’t rise to the level of faith and morals, but wearing black shoes isn’t sinful and isn’t going to bring down the church.

I understand that you have a concern and it is causing anxiety, but I still just can’t wrap my head around the concern.

I am praying for you Lucky and anyone else who feels anxious and torn over this. I don’t have to understand it to know that it worries you.

 

[tabycat]

You know, it was only about 100 years ago that most Catholics wouldn’t have even known the name of the Pope, let alone know what he looked like or what he was doing. Fast forward to today and we not only know his name, what he looks like and what he is doing, but now we have the audacity to tell him he is not doing his job right! We even give him our oh so worldly advice and opinions on everything from abortion and contraception to liturgical changes!

I’m sorry, there are days I would like to go back in time when the laity had little to say in Church matters and the Pope, Cardinals and Bishops decided pretty much everything without our “learned” and sage advice. Listening to some of the lay people on these forums complain about the Pope - and darned near everything else concerning the Church - is really tiresome. When did all of these lay people become such experts on Church matters? Did I miss that boat? When did it pull out? I mean, the Church has done pretty well without the advice from CAF members for something like 2000 years, and I think it will last another 2000 years without our (name removed by moderator)ut.

For me it’s all about obedience - period…

 

[tabycat]

I think that the ones with the clamplants would just take a deep breath and hold all, or at least most, of their complants for six months or a year and give Pope Francis a chance and be greatful that his family name is not de Medci! :knight1:

 

[jwinch2]

I’m beginning to see the wisdom of Brother’s belief that history is not taught enough.

I could not agree more. If more people understood the history of the Church, to include the symbols used by her, there might be less iconoclasm.

 

[McCall1981]

As one of the resident “people in this forum who are suspicious of Pope Francis” I am happy to point out that he recently said something very encouraging about his views on Confession. From Vatican Radio:

“He said, ‘Open the doors of the Church, and then the people will come in…if you keep the light on in the confessional and are available, then you will see what kind of line there is for confession’…The Pope said he was confident of the need of the people of God for priests to open the doors and allow the people to meet God,” Msgr. Feroci told Vatican Radio.

 

[Lucky7]

It would be nice also, if you would go to the Vatican web site, they have a news link on Vatican news on there.
Then you could get your questions answered instead of just listening to what the media, or one another is saying about him.
They have already explained so many things that people on here complain about, no he is not changing anything to do with the Priesthood, one of the women was Catholic and one was Muslim, to leave her out would have been unkind and not the mission of the Church, there were 10 young males and 2 young females whose feet he washed.
They had written to him and asked that he come there to pray the Mass for them. Their letters were very touching and I saw that he is a very loving, Christ-like man by going to them.
www.vatican.va
and for the news link
news.va/en

I will. Thank you!

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

And it was given in the hand (although I fail to see how this in itself would be an issue). I don’t see how you assume that Cardinal Ratzinger would not have given Holy Communion in the hand. It is not for the person receiving to decide how they wish to receive, not for the person giving to decide how they wish to give it. Since receiving on the hand was entirely permitted by Pope Benedict (indeed it was the norm amongst most of Catholics) I don’t see how you can assume that Pope Benedict disapproved of it 9and even if he did it’s up to the person receiving to decide).

zenit.org/en/articles/aide-pope-prefers-communion-on-tongue

 

[Lucky7]

As one of the resident “people in this forum who are suspicious of Pope Francis” I am happy to point out that he recently said something very encouraging about his views on Confession. From Vatican Radio:

“He said, ‘Open the doors of the Church, and then the people will come in…if you keep the light on in the confessional and are available, then you will see what kind of line there is for confession’…The Pope said he was confident of the need of the people of God for priests to open the doors and allow the people to meet God,” Msgr. Feroci told Vatican Radio.

Keep it coming Pope Francis!

 

[po18guy]

I could not agree more. If more people understood the history of the Church, to include the symbols used by her, there might be less iconoclasm.

The tail on a kite is behind it in the airflow, stabilizing it. History, which is behind the Church in the flow of time, serves the same purpose. Without the stabilizing influence of that “tail”, the Church is subject to the winds of fashion.

As to icons, some of those who condemn statues probably have fish icons on their cars.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

The tail on a kite is behind it in the airflow, stabilizing it. History, which is behind the Church in the flow of time, serves the same purpose. Without the stabilizing influence of that “tail”, the Church is subject to the winds of fashion.

As to icons, some of those who condemn statues probably have fish icons on their cars.

Brilliant post!