Learn more about Pope Francis rather than criticize

[Eufrosnia]

I can tell that you’re against it. But the Church does not share your opinion. The Church places a great deal of faith in the grace of the Holy Spirit to speak through words and through gestures. Both need not happen at the same time. Sometimes, one is more appropriate than the other.

Regardless of whether it be through words or actions, it will always be through the Holy Spirit. That is not at debate here.

The point of debate here is whether it is reasonable to justify unreasonable assent due to gesture. Since gesture cannot provide reason to convert, it is not a reasonable methodology for evangelizing in and of itself.

To disagree would require you to provide some Church teaching that the Church is pro-unresaonable assent. But I am willing to bet that there is no such teaching because Council of Trent condemned requiring unreasonable assent under Fideism.

You and many great missionaries disagree, not to mention you and Pope Pius XII, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI and now Pope Francis.

Can you provide actual teaching by at least one of them? Because as far as I am aware, there exists no teaching that says “good works by itself is evangelizing”. Nearly every Pope, including POPE FRANCIS has said that witness through life AND WORDS is evangelizing.

So I am not really sure if they disagree with me at all.

Once upon a time, St. Francis asked Br. Leo to go with him to preach. The arrived at the town. Br. Leo followed Francis waiting to see where they would stop to preach. As they went through the town, Francis greeted everyone and showed great love for the people of that place. When they reached the gate at the other side of the town, Br. Leo asked the Holy Father, “Where are we going to preach?” To which the Holy Father answered, “We just did.”

These are legends though. And you have to admit that we are not to follow St. Francis. We follow the Church of Christ and we interpret and dissect the life of St. Francis through the teachings of the Church. Not the other way around.

Going through a town with smiles and joy is not reason to think the religion of St. Francis true, yes? If you were to put yourself in the shoes of an unbeliever, what part of that story makes you think Christianity is true?

More importantly, are you aware of the names Jim Jones or David Koresh? Do you know why people were drawn to them?

That was not my experience and the Franciscans never tried to convince me to become Catholic. They showed me Catholicism through the way that they imitated Francis’ love for Christ.

As I said before, things are good because you became Catholic this way. But others might have left the very Catholic Church because they felt “love” in the United Church or with a Jim Jones or a David Koresh. Do you realize why the position you are advocating is actually dangerous?

I know that I’m not a great luminary. If an ox like me can see that there is something out of the ordinary to these men, others who are more intelligent can see it more quickly and probably understand it with less questions than I asked.

A person being happy and joyful does not give us reason to think there is something extraordinary in them. You have happy atheists, happy Catholics, happy Buddhists, happy Hindus, happy sociopaths, happy followers of Jim Jones and David Koresh etc.

So how is happiness, joy or love that these people offer any indication that their faith is true?

I would kindly like to request if possible, that you perhaps look in to the figures such as Jim Jones or David Koresh. These people thrived on using the things you want to use to win followers. In fact, one of the common tricks used to recruit is called “love bombing”.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_bombing

But here you are advocating that we use this very principle and methodology as our primary method of evangelizing. Why? We should be, if anything, driving people away from even thinking of doing something of that sort. This is a dangerous position where people have been killed as a result

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_Temple#Mass_murder.2Fsuicide_at_the_Temple.27s_Jonestown_agricultural_commune

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Koresh#Raid_and_siege_by_federal_authorities

What you must remember is that any such thing a Catholic can do, anyone else can do too. What others cannot do is give actual reasons to believe their religion. That is where we should be concentrating on. Not going in to this sort of cheap tactics. Does it work? yes. But it is playing with fire.

So I am not sure why you are honestly advocating this and even claiming that people should follow it.

Also, can we move this discussion to the “Proselytize” thread I opened? I will make the same post there and we can continue on it

Proselytize thread

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=778008

 

[RPRPsych]

Going through a town with smiles and joy is not reason to think the religion of St. Francis true, yes? If you were to put yourself in the shoes of an unbeliever, what part of that story makes you think Christianity is true?

More importantly, are you aware of the names Jim Jones or David Koresh? Do you know why people were drawn to them?

As I said before, things are good because you became Catholic this way. But others might have left the very Catholic Church because they felt “love” in the United Church or with a Jim Jones or a David Koresh. Do you realize why the position you are advocating is actually dangerous?

A person being happy and joyful does not give us reason to think there is something extraordinary in them. You have happy atheists, happy Catholics, happy Buddhists, happy Hindus, happy sociopaths, happy followers of Jim Jones and David Koresh etc.

So how is happiness, joy or love that these people offer any indication that their faith is true?

But here you are advocating that we use this very principle and methodology as our primary method of evangelizing. Why? We should be, if anything, driving people away from even thinking of doing something of that sort. This is a dangerous position where people have been killed as a result

Oh, please.

Pope Francis is the head of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Saint Francis of Assisi is one of the greatest saints ever, at least in my opinion.

To mention them in the same breath as manipulative, antisocial personalities like Jim Jones or David Koresh is beyond ridiculous. Try getting away with a statement like that in 1600s Spain.

And to compare an example of humility and charity to “flirty-fishing” or “love-bombing” is like comparing apples to poisonous berries.

For shame. Statements like this remind me to what an extent Protestant ideology has infected the minds of the faithful.

 

[Eufrosnia]

Oh, please.

Pope Francis is the head of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Saint Francis of Assisi is one of the greatest saints ever, at least in my opinion.

To mention them in the same breath as manipulative, antisocial personalities like Jim Jones or David Koresh is beyond ridiculous. Try getting away with a statement like that in 1600s Spain.

And to compare an example of humility and charity to “flirty-fishing” or “love-bombing” is like comparing apples to poisonous berries.

For shame. Statements like this remind me to what an extent Protestant ideology has infected the minds of the faithful.

Very good concerns my friend, but I would be able to address them if you can post this on the Proselytize thread. To continue this discussion further on this thread will be out of topic.

 

[RPRPsych]

Very good concerns my friend, but I would be able to address them if you can post this on the Proselytize thread. To continue this discussion further on this thread will be out of topic.

Fair enough, but it looks like the mods have closed that thread. “A time to be silent”, I guess, as King Solomon would have said.

 

[Eufrosnia]

Fair enough, but it looks like the mods have closed that thread. “A time to be silent”, I guess, as King Solomon would have said.

Sigh. Well, hopefully people read what is on that thread and decide for themselves.

Would you like to continue via PM? Because I hate to leave you hanging without an answer

 

[RPRPsych]

Sigh. Well, hopefully people read what is on that thread and decide for themselves.

Would you like to continue via PM? Because I hate to leave you hanging without an answer

Continued. Apologies in advance, I tend to be long-winded.

 

[choliks]

Pope Francis’ Homily on the Ordination of 10 New Priests on April 21, 2013:

Beloved brothers and sisters: because these our sons, who are your relatives and friends, are now to be advanced to the Order of priests, consider carefully the nature of the rank in the Church to which they are about to be raised.

It is true that God has made his entire holy people a royal priesthood in Christ. Nevertheless, our great Priest himself, Jesus Christ, chose certain disciples to carry out publicly in his name, and on behalf of mankind, a priestly office in the Church. For Christ was sent by the Father and he in turn sent the Apostles into the world, so that through them and their successors, the Bishops, he might continue to exercise his office of Teacher, Priest, and Shepherd. Indeed, priests are established co-workers of the Order of Bishops, with whom they are joined in the priestly office and with whom they are called to the service of the people of God.

After mature deliberation and prayer, these, our brothers, are now to be ordained to the priesthood in the Order of the presbyterate so as to serve Christ the Teacher, Priest, and
Shepherd, by whose ministry his body, that is, the Church, is built and grows into the people of God, a holy temple.

In being configured to Christ the eternal High Priest and joined to the priesthood of the Bishops, they will be consecrated as true priests of the New Testament, to preach the Gospel, to shepherd God’s people, and to celebrate the sacred Liturgy, especially the Lord’s sacrifice.

Now, my dear brothers and sons, you are to be raised to the Order of the Priesthood. For your part you will exercise the sacred duty of teaching in the name of Christ the Teacher. Impart to everyone the word of God which you have received with joy. Remember your mothers, your grandmothers, your catechists, who gave you the word of God, the faith … the gift of faith! They transmitted to you this gift of faith. Meditating on the law of the Lord, see that you believe what you read, that you teach what you believe, and that you practice what you teach. Remember too that the word of God is not your property: it is the word of God. And the Church is the custodian of the word of God.

In this way, let what you teach be nourishment for the people of God. Let the holiness of your lives be a delightful fragrance to Christ’s faithful, so that by word and example you may build up the house which is God’s Church.

Likewise you will exercise in Christ the office of sanctifying. For by your ministry the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful will be made perfect, being united to the sacrifice of Christ, which will be offered through your hands in an unbloody way on the altar, in union with the faithful, in the celebration of the sacraments. Understand, therefore, what you do and imitate what you celebrate. As celebrants of the mystery of the Lord’s death and resurrection, strive to put to death whatever in your members is sinful and to walk in newness of life.

You will gather others into the people of God through Baptism, and you will forgive sins in the name of Christ and the Church in the sacrament of Penance. Today I ask you in the name of Christ and the Church, never tire of being merciful. You will comfort the sick and the elderly with holy oil: do not hesitate to show tenderness towards the elderly. When you celebrate the sacred rites, when you offer prayers of praise and thanks to God throughout the hours of the day, not only for the people of God but for the world—remember then that you are taken from among men and appointed on their behalf for those things that pertain to God. Therefore, carry out the ministry of Christ the Priest with constant joy and genuine love, attending not to your own concerns but to those of Jesus Christ. You are pastors, not functionaries. Be mediators, not intermediaries.

Finally, dear sons, exercising for your part the office of Christ, Head and Shepherd, while united with the Bishop and subject to him, strive to bring the faithful together into one family, so that you may lead them to God the Father through Christ in the Holy Spirit. Keep always before your eyes the example of the Good Shepherd who came not to be served but to serve, and who came to seek out and save what was lost.

source: Catholic News Agency

also from the Vatican website.

 

[OraLabora]

I’ve had non-Catholics and even non-Christians say that he is softening their attitude toward Catholicism.

This is true. My wife mentioned yesterday that her Anglican pastor, very low-church and fairly hostile to Catholicism, has even been quoting Pope Francis in his sermons, is clearly more sympathetic to Catholicism, and even quotes St. Francis!.

Our Holy Father is achieving something remarkable…

 

[Sirach2]

Thanks for the reprint of Pope Francis’ homily, Choliks. As I watched him speaking, I was deeply moved by these words, “Today I ask you in the name of Christ and the Church, never tire of being merciful.” It was good to read the entire speech again!

 

[choliks]

Thanks for the reprint of Pope Francis’ homily, Choliks. As I watched him speaking, I was deeply moved by these words, “Today I ask you in the name of Christ and the Church, never tire of being merciful.” It was good to read the entire speech again!

No problem. i’m still looking for the full text of his homilies on “lukewarm Christians building a smaller church” and “ideologues falsify the Gospel.”

 

[Lucky7]

No problem. i’m still looking for the full text of his homilies on “lukewarm Christians building a smaller church” and “ideologues falsify the Gospel.”

Notice they aren’t in the mainstream media.

 

[JReducation]

Pope Francis’ Homily on the Ordination of 10 New Priests on April 21, 2013:

source: Catholic News Agency

also from the Vatican website.

I read it too. It’s a beautiful homily. I wanted to watch the ordination; but I’m in bed again.

This is true. My wife mentioned yesterday that her Anglican pastor, very low-church and fairly hostile to Catholicism, has even been quoting Pope Francis in his sermons, is clearly more sympathetic to Catholicism, and even quotes St. Francis!.

Our Holy Father is achieving something remarkable…

I hear many people speak about him and I’ve seen many blogs and articles by non Catholics that are very favorable. People are paying attention to him.

As I’ve said before, each pope has an audience. Pope John Paul’s audience was the young. Pope Benedict’s audience was the traditionalist and that scholar. Pope Francis’ audience is going to be the man on the street. If we watch closely, What we see is the Holy Spirit blanketing humanity, one segment at a time.

Notice they aren’t in the mainstream media.

I don’t think that they were meant for the general public. If I’m not mistaken, they were for the curia. I know that when popes, bishops and religious superiors speak to the “inner circle” they don’t always want their talks circulating. The original and any copies are destroyed or locked away for historians.

Of course the media is also selective about what it prints too. The Vatican is not the only one who keeps things out of the public eye. What a surprise. Right?

 

[McCall1981]

As I’ve said before, each pope has an audience. Pope John Paul’s audience was the young. Pope Benedict’s audience was the traditionalist and that scholar. Pope Francis’ audience is going to be the man on the street. If we watch closely, What we see is the Holy Spirit blanketing humanity, one segment at a time.

Interesting way to look at it.

I’ve been noticing that a lot of people, myself very much included, seem to group JP II, Benedict and Francis together, like they are linked to each other somehow. I see this all the time, like that pic that says “This is what we believe, this is why we believe it, now go do it”. Whenever people frame macro issues of the Church, its always “JP II did this, Benedict continued by doing this, Francis is continuing by doing this…” but it seems like we rarely include Popes before JP II.

It’s like there were the Popes before JP II who are in one group, and JP II himself and the ones since him are in another group. I certainly think of it that way too, though I don’t really know why.

I wonder why that is? Maybe we feel like JP II started something that is still going on?

 

[JReducation]

Interesting way to look at it.

I’ve been noticing that a lot of people, myself very much included, seem to group JP II, Benedict and Francis together, like they are linked to each other somehow. I see this all the time, like that pic that says “This is what we believe, this is why we believe it, now go do it”. Whenever people frame macro issues of the Church, its always “JP II did this, Benedict continued by doing this, Francis is continuing by doing this…” but it seems like we rarely include Popes before JP II.

It’s like there were the Popes before JP II who are in one group, and JP II himself and the ones since him are in another group. I certainly think of it that way too, though I don’t really know why.

I wonder why that is? Maybe we feel like JP II started something that is still going on?

I think that they belong together by eras. For example: Pius XII, John XIII and Paul VI all lived during the age of transition. The world was changing very rapidly around them, from WW II to the Sexual Revolution and the advent of secularism. They dealt with the need to respond to a changing world. They each spoke to the masses.

I think that from Pope John Paul I to Pope Francis, these men have spoken to target audiences within the masses. Even John Paul I, who is often the forgotten pope, was not as anonymous as we think. As Cardinal Luciani, he was very much in touch with the needs of clergy and religious.

 

[Rich_C]

I’m beginning to see the problem with this conversation. I don’t think that we disagree. I’m thinking that we have two languages going on simultaneously and we’re thinking that it’s just English, which it’s not.

Allow me to explain. To the religious, the cleric, the theologian the term “evangelize” and the term “proselytize” are two very different activities. …When it became clear that there was a higher good in Jerusalem, ministering to the Christians who were losing their faith, preserving the sacred places for the Christian community, and serving the victims of horrible conflicts, he understood that standing on the corner or under a tent was going to get the friars kicked out or killed and that the Christians in Jerusalem and the holy sites would be lost forever.

When he returns to Italy and he informs Pope Gregory IX of his mission, it is Pope Gregory who agrees that nagging and proselytizing in Jerusalem is was not a good idea. We have to observe that they are speaking about a very specific situation. This situation was so specific, that the Holy See took charge of this particular Franciscan mission to ensure that it’s carried out according to the understanding of St. Francis and Pope Gregory. To this day, this mission exists and operates the same way.

It makes more sense now that I see it as a pragmatic choice based on the Church’s unwillingness to lose access to the Holy Land when it was run by Islam.

Recently, under Pope Benedict, the “not preaching to Jews” has been expanded beyond the Holy Land.

According to Jimmy Akin and others, that was the pope’s private opinion, and was intended to discourage attempts to bring Jews corporally into the Church (like he did with the Anglicans), but did not discourage the conversion of individuals who happen to be Jewish.

 

[JReducation]

It makes more sense now that I see it as a pragmatic choice based on the Church’s unwillingness to lose access to the Holy Land when it was run by Islam.

According to Jimmy Akin and others, that was the pope’s private opinion, and was intended to discourage attempts to bring Jews corporally into the Church (like he did with the Anglicans), but did not discourage the conversion of individuals who happen to be Jewish.

Jimmy’s interpretation is a little different from mine. I agree that it is an attempt to protect the Jews from having Christianity preached in their face, if you know what I mean.

As to “private opinion” I’m not so sure about that. Each time that a pope speaks about pastoral matters, it’s only private if he says so. Otherwise, one always assumes that he is speaking as the Bishop of Rome. For example, in his books on Jesus of Nazareth, the Holy Father makes it explicitly clear that he’s a theologian, not the pope. In the book Light of the World, there are answers that he gives which he prefaces with, "I think . . . " Then there are answers where he simply says, “The sky is up and the ground is down.” In the former, he’s a theologian thinking or a priest thinking. In the former, he’s a figure of authority.

I do agree with Jimmy that the pope has not said that we hide Christianity from Jews. He himself has set the example. When visiting the synagogue in NY, his first comment was, “I’m reminded of Jesus entering such a place as this.”

To understand what Pope Benedict meant by this statement is easy, but no one wants to go there. Just observe how he deals with the Jews and do likewise. It’s that simple.

I have never understood why Catholics want a pope whom they’re going to ignore, criticize and cherry pick. If you stop and think, the last 200 years have been a blessing to the Church. She has been governed by very holy popes. Yet, Catholics don’t speak with the same tone and respect as the popes do. Catholics don’t trust the popes interpretations of previous statements and papal positions. Catholics juxtapose one pope against another, forgetting that each had a personality and an agenda.

If we just imitate the pope’s behavior toward Jews, we would probably not have to worry about conversions. People would be moved by love and curiosity to approach Catholicism.

 

[physell]

The day of the conclave I sat and watched, actually was 1 hour late for work that day! When they announced the Pope we all had our ideal pope step out onto that balcony. When Pope Francis walked out what I saw on his face was humility and love. I didn’t take into consideration that he was a Jesuit, or that he wasn’t who millions thought would walk out. But nonetheless his presence spoke to me. I don’t claim to know alot, but I know what was in my heart that very moment. And when they announced his name, I was truly sure we had gotten the most perfect man to represent us. Our Catholic Church has been plagued with so much controversy for many years now. Moreso with the Residential School issues, the sexual abuse scandals and many, many other issues. “Rebuild my Church” what a humble and bold statement that comes from his name. His Humility speaks volumes to common people from common roots. Put aside all the hoopla of his backround, (it is relevant yes) and realize that our Lord put him in the position to lead our church for a reason. Too often in our lives we get caught up in “Things” rather than what is in our hearts. Our world has changed so much that what our children see (richness and wealth) is what they look to aquire and aspire to have. Not that it is wrong to have wealth, but in this day and age our young and even our older folks are moving away from God. Instead of looking at who/what/why? look at it as a gift given to us by our Lord God. Perhaps we have to learn to humble ourselves a bit more and look more into our hearts rather than worry about ones backround. Pope Francis I believe is here to teach us how to be more in touch with the suffering of others and put ourselves second. He will be a great role model no matter what backround he has… this is just my opinion, as a person who always looked at the Church as way above us and untouchable, today I feel our Pope is here to make them less untouchable and more human.

 

[Rich_C]

Jimmy’s interpretation is a little different from mine.

Fair enough. That’s why I like to read multiple explanations of recent teachings.

As to “private opinion” I’m not so sure about that. Each time that a pope speaks about pastoral matters, it’s only private if he says so. Otherwise, one always assumes that he is speaking as the Bishop of Rome.

But the late holy father spoke about his ideas on the converting Jews in his personal book, Jesus of Nazareth.

For example, in his books on Jesus of Nazareth, the Holy Father makes it explicitly clear that he’s a theologian, not the pope.

That’s what I was going to say. He wrote about it in his private book. Not that I’m his judge, but well-known, orthodox and learned Catholics say that we are not bound to follow his every word in these books, when the say things the Church hasn’t said before.

To understand what Pope Benedict meant by this statement is easy, but no one wants to go there. Just observe how he deals with the Jews and do likewise. It’s that simple.

You say it’s easy. Jimmy Akin says you have to know a lot of background to understand it, and that there are important distinctions to be made.

I have never understood why Catholics want a pope whom they’re going to ignore, criticize and cherry pick. If you stop and think, the last 200 years have been a blessing to the Church. She has been governed by very holy popes. Yet, Catholics don’t speak with the same tone and respect as the popes do. Catholics don’t trust the popes interpretations of previous statements and papal positions. Catholics juxtapose one pope against another, forgetting that each had a personality and an agenda.

Are you talking about me or is this a non sequitur? I don’t think disagreeing with your interpretation of papal writings amounts to not trusting popes, or being disrespectful of popes. Emminent apologists disagree with you; I’m only taking my views from them.

If we just imitate the pope’s behavior toward Jews, we would probably not have to worry about conversions. People would be moved by love and curiosity to approach Catholicism.

I certainly learned a lot from the pope’s restraint in dealing with all sorts of people and his charity. I wish I could be as half as holy as him on my best days.

 

[physell]

I certainly learned a lot from the pope’s restraint in dealing with all sorts of people and his charity. I wish I could be as half as holy as him on my best days.

This

 

[McCall1981]

Interesting homily from Pope Francis today. Here is the EWTN article, I don’t have the full text:

ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/Vatican.php?id=7499

I particularly liked this part:


“Sometimes it’s closed: we are sad, we feel desolation, we have problems with knocking, with knocking at that gate. Do not go looking for other gates that seem easier, more comfortable, more at hand. Always the same one: Jesus. Jesus never disappoints, Jesus does not deceive, Jesus is not a thief, not a robber. He gave his life for me. Each of us must say this: ‘And you who gave your life for me, please, open, that I may enter.’”