Message of BenedictXVI on the occasion of dubia Cardinal Meisner's Requiem Mass

[10gr8kids]

That sounds like a personal opinion without a clear rationale. Pope Benedict did the same thing.

Did you read the link I posted? The Church does not infallibly interpret every verse of Scripture. The Church gives us leeway as to what Scripture says to us. Maybe you should give the same courtesy to Pope Benedict.

I really don’t know what you find wrong with what he said about the Bible verse, or what you think it says to you. But, it doesn’t always have to be an either/or.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Did you read the link I posted? The Church does not infallibly interpret every verse of Scripture. The Church gives us leeway as to what Scripture says to us. Maybe you should give the same courtesy to Pope Benedict.

I really don’t know what you find wrong with what he said about the Bible verse, or what you think it says to you. But, it doesn’t always have to be an either/or.

Yes, I read the article. Thanks. I think there is a big difference between interpreting the Bible to make a moral argument and taking the words of Christ and inverting its meaning without explaining why. How did Pope Benedict arrive at his interpretation?

 

[10gr8kids]

Yes, I read the article. Thanks. I think there is a big difference between interpreting the Bible to make a moral argument and taking the words of Christ and inverting its meaning without explaining why. How did Pope Benedict arrive at his interpretation?

It seemed to me the Pope Benedict was saying we aren’t to live just for ourselves, that we are to be concerned about others. Not trying to do whatever it takes to just make ourselves happy.

I don’t know what you think is wrong with that. Maybe that’s not what you take issue with, IDK. Do you think we are literally suppose to hate ourselves? I have never heard anyone give that interpretation.

 

[Robert_Sock]

It seemed to me the Pope Benedict was saying we aren’t to live just for ourselves, that we are to be concerned about others. Not trying to do whatever it takes to just make ourselves happy.

I don’t know what you think is wrong with that. Maybe that’s not what you take issue with, IDK. Do you think we are literally suppose to hate ourselves? I have never heard anyone give that interpretation.

I have nothing against Pope Benedict saying we are not supposed to live just for ourselves, it’s in implying that it OK to love this life, which I believe will lead many astray in that they will lose sight of the Heavenly Kingdom that God has already prepared for us.

 

[10gr8kids]

I have nothing against Pope Benedict saying we are not supposed to live just for ourselves, it’s in implying that it OK to love this life, which I believe will lead many astray in that they will lose sight of the Heavenly Kingdom that God has already prepared for us.

This life seems hard more often than not to me. And sometimes I think I hate this life. Then I feel bad, because God gave us this life as a blessing to us. Yes, it can be hard sometimes, and we need to accept our sufferings. We can’t just be looking at how to make ourselves happy while ignoring the needs of others. Yet, if we accept our sufferings and help others, we should find joy in this life, and love that which is good. It is only when I am pitying myself that I feel like I hate this life, yet even when I love this life, I’m longing for a better one that I have hope in.

 

[Robert_Sock]

This life seems hard more often than not to me. And sometimes I think I hate this life. Then I feel bad, because God gave us this life as a blessing to us. Yes, it can be hard sometimes, and we need to accept our sufferings. We can’t just be looking at how to make ourselves happy while ignoring the needs of others. Yet, if we accept our sufferings and help others, we should find joy in this life, and love that which is good. It is only when I am pitying myself that I feel like I hate this life, yet even when I love this life, I’m longing for a better one that I have hope in.

I’ve been diagnosed with major depression and generalized anxiety disorder and the key for me is to never take my mind off of God and Heaven. I believe Christ had a good reason for saying that we should hate this life (I think of it as a comparison to Heaven), and it has helped me tremendously.

 

[graciew]

I’ve been diagnosed with major depression and generalized anxiety disorder and the key for me is to never take my mind off of God and Heaven. I believe Christ had a good reason for saying that we should hate this life (I think of it as a comparison to Heaven), and it has helped me tremendously.

Well then,Robert. We’ ve read your posts these years. And you sound a very caring person so perhaps if you allow us to say that we get what Benedictt is saying and we also care for you,this isn’tt getting astray.
Do not worry,perhaps what you understand as hate your life,as far as you have been describing throughout the years is not really hate it but care for others and take care of yourself as well.
Be at peace.
We owe Benedict a lot for having been our Holy Father,he has written much and given much example and sounds like we " get" what he is saying without understanding that it is ok to be selfish.
Glad you could read his book. I liked it a lot,it was like meeting him in a living room talking with a person…he is so very warm…
Again,be at peace. It is nice to have you posting.Do not worry.

 

[commenter]

Originally Posted by commenter View Post
"To be really fair, we have to be aware of the times in which we live, which includes rampant anti-religious authority. We always assume secular bias - or “the World” - is something that only influences other people.

Most of the people whose judgement is distorted, or weakened, by the current anti-religious authority bias would be on the Left. But in recent years there’s a whole media industry developed on the Right, with websites competing to entice you to evaluate rather than obey the pastor, the bishop, and the pope. (They never suggest you evaluate the website)."

True though that may be, I feel fully entitled to evaluate to words and actions of those you mention.

Sure.
I am just pointing out a tendency in the past couple decades in certain circles: “I’ll obey the Pope (or my bishop) **only **when they are teaching the truth”. In Catholicism, truth is interpreted by the *Living *Magisterium. If you hear some website say we should be selectively obedient to the current pope or bishop, you have to ask what other template the website is using. Then evaluate their template, too.

 

[Rau]

Sure.
I am just pointing out a tendency in the past couple decades in certain circles: “I’ll obey the Pope (or my bishop) **only **when they are teaching the truth”. In Catholicism, truth is interpreted by the *Living *Magisterium. If you hear some website say we should be selectively obedient to the current pope or bishop, you have to ask what other template the website is using. Then evaluate their template, too.

Remember that much of what a pope (let alone a bishop) says is not of the Magisterium, often not even a matter of Faith and morals, and does not obligate obedience or acceptance.

And of course those criticizing pope and bishops should also be scrutinized.

 

[commenter]

Remember that much of what a pope (let alone a bishop) says is not of the Magisterium, often not even a matter of Faith and morals, and does not obligate obedience or acceptance.

And of course those criticizing pope and bishops should also be scrutinized.

I think Catholic dissenters on the Left, by far the bigger problem IMHO, accept the assumptions of Protestantism - that they don’t have to obey the Magisterium, just the Bible. They evaluate the current Magisterium based on that.

Dissenters on the Right accept the assumptions of Eastern Orthodoxy - they don’t have to obey the Magisterium, just Tradition. They evaluate the current pope and bishop based on that.

In both cases, they don’t benefit from the current pope and bishop. When I taught one semester at a local college, the attitude of the graduate students (Education majors) was that they did not want to learn anything they didn’t already know. I suspect this attitude is prevalent in higher education in the USA.

Catholicism is based on the tripod: Scripture, Tradition, and the living Magisterium.

 

[Rau]

…Catholicism is based on the tripod: Scripture, Tradition, and the living Magisterium.

Yes. And I trust you agree that much of what a Pope and bishops say is not “of the Magisterium”. It is not something requiring obedience or acceptance.

 

[commenter]

Yes. And I trust you agree that much of what a Pope and bishops say is not “of the Magisterium”. It is not something requiring obedience or acceptance.

OK.
But then, how do you know what is, and what isn’t, if there is reference to faith and morals? I am not so much looking at popes and bishops, as I am looking at myself, and human nature.
Caveat:
If a statement by a pope calls on me to change my opinion or practice on something, I would strongly, strongly, be aware of how much I will be tempted to automatically put that statement in the category of “not of the Magisterium”.

Now, I may choose to not regard as Magisterial an impromptu statement, made in the back of a plane, maybe in response to an earlier context that I don’t know. Pope Francis will often present one side of an argument, then a few minutes later present the opposite side, as that is his style. You can certainly regard as non-magisterial either of the sides he may have taken in that conversation, especially if taken out of context.

But that is different from someone defining a **direct **statement as non magisterial, really because they disagree with it. If someone says a **direct **papal statement is non magisterial because it disagrees with Tradition (or Scripture, for that matter)…well…the Magisterium is the interpreter of Tradition and Scripture. If you reject Pope Francis’ interpretation of Tradition as non authoritative, then what about the last pope’s interpretation of Tradition, or more importantly for us, the next pope’s? In fact, that is what Tradition is - Pope Pius XII’s interpretation of this, Pope Pius XI’s interpretation of that, etc.

Don’t think of Tradition as a body of wisdom apart from living popes, since all that is there, was said or confirmed by living popes.

 

[Rau]

But that is different from someone defining a **direct **statement as non magisterial, really because they disagree with it.

Sure, but it remains perfectly fine to disagree with the bishop who believes migration targets should be doubled or long hair in Church is wrong or Catholic children must attend a catholic school or on innumerable other matters. We need the skill to distinguish statements of a prudential nature by church leaders from statements from their authoritative office.

I’d just add that effective magisterial communication is likely to rely on a thread of consistency. Should successive Pope’s argue a point in manners which can’t be reconciled with each other, it is unrealistic to expect harmony to ensue.

 

[graciew]

Sure, but it remains perfectly fine to disagree with the bishop who believes migration targets should be doubled or long hair in Church is wrong or Catholic children must attend a catholic school or on innumerable other matters. We need the skill to distinguish statements of a prudential nature by church leaders from statements from their authoritative office.

I’d just add that effective magisterial communication is likely to rely on a thread of consistency. Should successive Pope’s argue a point in manners which can’t be reconciled with each other, it is unrealistic to expect harmony to ensue.

Rau, it isn t very usual to go straining or filtering what is or isn t excatedra,or magisterial as it is dealt with here. It isn t the way we all go about it…just to met you know …
Not saying it is right or wrong,just that it is kind of strange. One listens,prays, but it is unarguable that we are listening to men with a lot of training,education and experience.
So going every now and then to documents,apart from what one learns and incorporates in Mass,will generally at least,in my experience,prove them quite right and /or worth considering.
So this filtering,passing through a strainer…well,I do not really know if it is such a good exercise unless one has made sure one knows and has an idea .
It can be quite a useless and challenging exercise for persons who are relatively new in Catholicism.
At least advice listening carefully,reading to learn, sounds more profitable than this selective kind of reading all the time.

Perhaps I am wrong…
Just a thought,Rau…

 

[Rau]

Perhaps I am wrong…

It’s a personal thing I think. You may prefer to go along with whatever a Church leader says, regardless of the subject, and regardless of the nature of the communication. I don’t think it is difficult to distinguish what is authoritative from what is opinion - do you? And I certainly don’t think it is unusual to process what is said (regardless of who is saying it) through the conscious mind.

 

[graciew]

It’s a personal thing I think. You may prefer to go along with whatever a Church leader says, regardless of the subject, and regardless of the nature of the communication. I don’t think it is difficult to distinguish what is authoritative from what is opinion - do you? And I certainly don’t think it is unusual to process what is said (regardless of who is saying it) through the conscious mind.

I am in the process of thinking aloud with you.
I agree it isn t that difficult but…it is better and less difficult when one listens to the priest and Bishop directly related to us. To begin with…
I find that much if what isn t familiar to us complicates things to understand.
Perhaps,it is like driving. One first learns the basics and we move around familiar and comfortable streets before going downtown or into the highway.
Something like that. And yes,it is a personal thought,agree.
Thanks for the exchange of thoughts!

 

[reggieM]

It’s a personal thing I think. You may prefer to go along with whatever a Church leader says, regardless of the subject, and regardless of the nature of the communication. I don’t think it is difficult to distinguish what is authoritative from what is opinion - do you? And I certainly don’t think it is unusual to process what is said (regardless of who is saying it) through the conscious mind.

I think I’m agreeing with gracie here, but I would say it can be pretty difficult to sort through opinion from doctrine if one is just reading ideas that come from the Holy See (or the Vatican newspaper or news reports).

A bedrock of truth, especially for all new Catholics, is that the Church cannot create new doctrines. The truths required for salvation are the same today as they were in the first century.

The exception to this is pastoral practice that we have to follow - like fasting regulations or obligatory Masses. But here, I think we should expect the parish priest to make those things clear to everybody.

I think it’s virtually impossible to read and sort through every document from the Holy See – even the contemporary ones, and then figure out what is binding and what is non-infallible. I would think the bishops should do that - and then communicate to the priests.

Otherwise we would all have to become theologians and that’s just not reasonable.

 

[commenter]

I think I’m agreeing with gracie here, but I would say it can be pretty difficult to sort through opinion from doctrine if one is just reading ideas that come from the Holy See (or the Vatican newspaper or news reports).

A bedrock of truth, especially for all new Catholics, is that the Church cannot create new doctrines. The truths required for salvation are the same today as they were in the first century.

The exception to this is pastoral practice that we have to follow - like fasting regulations or obligatory Masses. But here, I think we should expect the parish priest to make those things clear to everybody.

I think it’s virtually impossible to read and sort through every document from the Holy See – even the contemporary ones, and then figure out what is binding and what is non-infallible. I would think the bishops should do that - and then communicate to the priests.

Otherwise we would all have to become theologians and that’s just not reasonable.

Suggestions:

• Ignore **anything **attributed to a “friend of the pope”.
• Ignore anything written in a “Vatican newspaper”, unless the author has a specific rank in the Church. If the author is a cardinal in charge of X, he still is not the pope, even if he works in the Vatican, though his remarks are worthy of consideration.
• If a pope or bishop endorses some particular scientific theory, say on global warming, that is science, not faith and morals.
• If a pope makes a statement in response to a question, we don’t really know the whole context. There could have been earlier questions and comments we don’t have. This is not the Church teaching on faith and morals.
• A conference of bishops does not have the same authority as a bishop ordinary speaking to his own diocese - assuming the bishop is in union with the pope. The bishop does not have to be in union with the national conference of bishops.
• If a papal statement makes you feel uncomfortable, don’t judge it to be non magisterial for that reason. That may be part of your conversion. And mine.