New interview with Pope Francis

[oppositeman]

Our Pope speaks on several topics to Dominique Wolton, a 70-year-old French sociologist and expert in media and political communication. He says a lot of good things but a few caught my attention - this comment sounded an alarm for me.

“The most minor sins are the sins of the flesh,” he said, because the flesh is weak.

I know that Our Lady of Fatima said " “More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”

I suppose this is his personal opinion and he can say what he wants. I just hope he realizes how many people may take these words and take them to heart.

Also, the Pope said the issue should be looked into because “no war is just. The only just thing is peace.” It seems to me that in the old testament God condoned and supported certain wars against the enemies of His chosen people. So, is any war just? Maybe he means starting a war?

here is the full article - %between%

 

[dmar198]

Our Pope speaks on several topics to Dominique Wolton, a 70-year-old French sociologist and expert in media and political communication. He says a lot of good things but a few caught my attention - this comment sounded an alarm for me.

“The most minor sins are the sins of the flesh,” he said, because the flesh is weak.

I know that Our Lady of Fatima said " “More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”

I suppose this is his personal opinion and he can say what he wants. I just hope he realizes how many people may take these words and take them to heart.

Also, the Pope said the issue should be looked into because “no war is just. The only just thing is peace.” It seems to me that in the old testament God condoned and supported certain wars against the enemies of His chosen people. So, is any war just? Maybe he means starting a war?

here is the full article - %between% Regarding the just war quote, I believe Pope Francis is pointing out that * at least one side* is acting unjustly when a war starts. No war should happen. He has consistently said it is okay for a nation to defend itself when attacked and also to go out to fight against evildoers:

“With terrorism one must fight, but I repeat what I said in my previous trip: when an unjust aggressor must be stopped, it must be done with an international consensus.” source

“One nation alone cannot determine how to stop an unjust aggressor. … To stop an unjust aggressor is a right of humanity, but it is also a right of the aggressor to be stopped in order not to do evil.” source

“In reaffirming that it is licit, while always respecting international law, to stop an unjust aggressor, I wish to reiterate, moreover, that the problem cannot be resolved solely through a military response.” source

These messages are very consistent with the Church’s just war doctrine. When he says “no war is just,” I don’t think he means it is never okay to defend yourself or go out to fight evildoers, because he has previously said that is okay (and that’s exactly what the Church’s just war doctrine protects). I think he is pointing out that at least one side in every war is acting unjustly. BTW St. Augustine, considered by some the “father of the just war doctrine” (though it existed before him), said something very similar to what Pope Francis says:

“But, say they, the wise man will wage just wars. As if he would not all the rather lament the necessity of just wars, if he remembers that he is a man… For it is the wrongdoing of the opposing party which compels the wise man to wage just wars.” (City of God Book 19 Chapter 7)

 

[EIF5A]

Hmm…I’m not sure how to reconcile mortal sins with “minor sins”…

Maybe Pope Francis presupposes repentance of those sins after falling to weakness versus continual enormous greed, pride, envy, lack of care of the poor, etc due to indifference…

Someone who sins and knows they are sinning (of the flesh) can still be contrite whereas an indifferent person may not even feel the need for repentance…that’s a sobering thought…

 

[oppositeman]

Regarding the just war quote, I believe Pope Francis is pointing out that * at least one side* is acting unjustly when a war starts. No war should happen. He has consistently said it is okay for a nation to defend itself when attacked and also to go out to fight against evildoers:

“With terrorism one must fight, but I repeat what I said in my previous trip: when an unjust aggressor must be stopped, it must be done with an international consensus.” source

“One nation alone cannot determine how to stop an unjust aggressor. … To stop an unjust aggressor is a right of humanity, but it is also a right of the aggressor to be stopped in order not to do evil.” source

“In reaffirming that it is licit, while always respecting international law, to stop an unjust aggressor, I wish to reiterate, moreover, that the problem cannot be resolved solely through a military response.” source

These messages are very consistent with the Church’s just war doctrine. When he says “no war is just,” I don’t think he means it is never okay to defend yourself or go out to fight evildoers, because he has previously said that is okay (and that’s exactly what the Church’s just war doctrine protects). I think he is pointing out that at least one side in every war is acting unjustly. BTW St. Augustine, considered by some the “father of the just war doctrine” (though it existed before him), said something very similar to what Pope Francis says:

“But, say they, the wise man will wage just wars. As if he would not all the rather lament the necessity of just wars, if he remembers that he is a man… For it is the wrongdoing of the opposing party which compels the wise man to wage just wars.” (City of God Book 19 Chapter 7)

thanks for your helpful (name removed by moderator)ut!

 

[oppositeman]

Hmm…I’m not sure how to reconcile mortal sins with “minor sins”…

Maybe Pope Francis presupposes repentance of those sins after falling to weakness versus continual enormous greed, pride, envy, lack of care of the poor, etc due to indifference…

Someone who sins and knows they are sinning (of the flesh) can still be contrite whereas an indifferent person may not even feel the need for repentance…that’s a sobering thought…

These one line short statements he makes without explanation leaves a lot of room for people to make of it what they will - and I think that is irresponsible and dangerous and I don’t think that is what a good shepherd should do. This has been a problem from the beginning of his papacy.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

These one line short statements he makes without explanation leaves a lot of room for people to make of it what they will - and I think that is irresponsible and dangerous and I don’t think that is what a good shepherd should do. This has been a problem from the beginning of his papacy.

More Pope bashing.

 

[twf]

I can see where the Holy Father is coming from regarding the flesh. Even the Catechism acknowledges that culpability for masturbation, in particular, can be mitigated due to force of habit- basically sins of the flesh can be addictive and full consent isn’t given. Our Lord in Matthew 25 gives several reasons for damnation… failing to feed the hungry, failing to help the poor… he doesn’t mention “sins of the flesh” at all in that particular parable of the final judgment. How do we reconcile this with Our Lady’s statement at Fatima? When She said “sins of the flesh” does that really equate “sexual sin” as most here seem to think?

 

[oppositeman]

I can see where the Holy Father is coming from regarding the flesh. Even the Catechism acknowledges that culpability for masturbation, in particular, can be mitigated due to force of habit- basically sins of the flesh can be addictive and full consent isn’t given. Our Lord in Matthew 25 gives several reasons for damnation… failing to feed the hungry, failing to help the poor… he doesn’t mention “sins of the flesh” at all in that particular parable of the final judgment. How do we reconcile this with Our Lady’s statement at Fatima? When She said “sins of the flesh” does that really equate “sexual sin” as most here seem to think?

both our Pope and Our Lady of Fatima are speaking of “sins of the flesh” - sexual sin is just one of the sins of the flesh - so they both use the same term - so the pope give says “most minor” and Our Lady tells us what seems to be that many are in hell for these sins - these are at opposite ends of the spectrum - I don’t see how they could both be correct.

 

[Expatreprocedit]

“The most minor sins are the sins of the flesh,” he said, because the flesh is weak.

I know that Our Lady of Fatima said " “More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”

CS Lewis said something similar to Pope Francis in Mere Christianity, that the core of Christian moral teaching does not lie in sexual morality. That doesn’t mean sexual morality can be discarded of course. I doubt Pope Francis would say that it does.

I will leave to Catholics to debate whether statements attributed to the Theotokos in a private revelation are to regarded as magisterial authority.

 

[Tim_D]

“The most minor sins are the sins of the flesh,” he said, because the flesh is weak.

I know that Our Lady of Fatima said " “More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”

I suppose this is his personal opinion and he can say what he wants. I just hope he realizes how many people may take these words and take them to heart.

I said the exact same thing on another thread about the same topic. The reply was that the “sins of the mind” are the major sins and that “the most minor sins are the sins of the flesh.”

I don’t buy it. That presumes an awful lot that a person has fully and completely thought out a sin regarding sex and then wholly follows through on it. Many sins are reactionary in nature. That is why we pray to help us avoid “near occasions of sin.” Many a sinful sex act has been committed with little to no forethought. I think what the pope said is irresponsible.

 

[Tim_D]

More Pope bashing.

No it isn’t. We can examine the record and see the many times that Pope Francis has said things off the cuff or like someone’s favorite uncle instead of the Vicar of Christ and has had the need of Vatican spokesmen to “clarify” what he said.

 

[EIF5A]

Is it not Magisterial teaching that sexual relations outside of marriage are grave sins?

The private revelation doesn’t seem to be at odds with what’s been taught — just reminds us of the danger of sins, particularly sins of the flesh since we are weak.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

First off, the apparitions at Fatima are private revelations and do not constitute dogma.

What the visionaries saw, was according to their own intellect and cultural understandings and should not be applied as absolute’s.

Devotion to Our Lady of Fatima is fine, but love of God and neighbor comes first. Those are the two commandments Jesus gave us.

2nd, Pope Francis is explaining what we know, that for a sin to be mortal, it must be grave, and done with full knowledge and consent. However, the conditions for a sin to be mortal, are not infallible, but a guide which St Augustine used.

Today we know through science, that the human body goes through various biological changes which are hormone driven and not all acts of the flesh are committed without strong influences caused by the chemical processes.

As someone pointed out from the Catechism, maturity and frequency can determine the culpability for such acts. A good confessor will know how to help a person with this.

At one time, rage and suicide were considered mortal sins which a person would be damned to hell for.

Today, we know that rage is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain and the person ends up reacting before they’re even aware of what they’re doing. Same with suicide, We know know that depression and other mental illnesses are a major cause. Heck, just a few centuries ago, mental illness was treated as demonic possession.

Remember, the first and foremost responsibility for humans is to reproduce. The biological urges to reproduce are strong and diverse. It doesn’t matter if you’re married or single, the biological urges are there and they are strong.

For the most part, we learn to control our sexual urges and the older we get, our biological makeup changes and it becomes easier.

Salvation isn’t about those who have the strongest willpower will be saved, but that God loves us and sent Jesus to save us, even while we were yet sinners.

Lastly. we in the West have created a reward and punishment system in Christianity, in which God will only love those who are worthy and of course many Christians see others as far less worthy than themselves. God loves us all, irrespective of our self-worth.

When Pope Francis said we are all children of God, fundamentalists had a melt down.

That reaction really speaks to the flaws in some Christians today, for it they knew God, they would see Him in everyone and everything.

Jim

 

[oppositeman]

No it isn’t. We can examine the record and see the many times that Pope Francis has said things off the cuff or like someone’s favorite uncle instead of the Vicar of Christ and has had the need of Vatican spokesmen to “clarify” what he said.

and let’s not dismiss the damage statements like this have done to people who take his words to heart.

 

[kozlosap]

First off, the apparitions at Fatima are private revelations and do not constitute dogma.

What the visionaries saw, was according to their own intellect and cultural understandings and should not be applied as absolute’s.

Devotion to Our Lady of Fatima is fine, but love of God and neighbor comes first. Those are the two commandments Jesus gave us.

2nd, Pope Francis is explaining what we know, that for a sin to be mortal, it must be grave, and done with full knowledge and consent. However, the conditions for a sin to be mortal, are not infallible, but a guide which St Augustine used.

Today we know through science, that the human body goes through various biological changes which are hormone driven and not all acts of the flesh are committed without strong influences caused by the chemical processes.

As someone pointed out from the Catechism, maturity and frequency can determine the culpability for such acts. A good confessor will know how to help a person with this.

At one time, rage and suicide were considered mortal sins which a person would be damned to hell for.

Today, we know that rage is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain and the person ends up reacting before they’re even aware of what they’re doing. Same with suicide, We know know that depression and other mental illnesses are a major cause. Heck, just a few centuries ago, mental illness was treated as demonic possession.

Remember, the first and foremost responsibility for humans is to reproduce. The biological urges to reproduce are strong and diverse. It doesn’t matter if you’re married or single, the biological urges are there and they are strong.

For the most part, we learn to control our sexual urges and the older we get, our biological makeup changes and it becomes easier.

Salvation isn’t about those who have the strongest willpower will be saved, but that God loves us and sent Jesus to save us, even while we were yet sinners.

Lastly. we in the West have created a reward and punishment system in Christianity, in which God will only love those who are worthy and of course many Christians see others as far less worthy than themselves. God loves us all, irrespective of our self-worth.

When Pope Francis said we are all children of God, fundamentalists had a melt down.

That reaction really speaks to the flaws in some Christians today, for it they knew God, they would see Him in everyone and everything.

Jim

Great post! Those who question Papa Francis’ and his adherence to living out the Gospels given to us by the Lord should read some of his writings concerning how we should live. Pope Francis was not strictly an academic, he was very much a Pastor whom understood the stresses of everyday life. There are members of the Church who seem to need very specific “rules” in order to be content in their spiritual lives. In other words, there are those who consider any sexual sin to be much more serious than being a racist or treating those different from you with distain.

Flame away, but IMHO Papa Francis is helping to bring the Church kicking and screaming into the current century where living like a respectful and loving person is stressed. Thank you Papa, for reminding us what Jesus taught.

 

[oppositeman]

First off, the apparitions at Fatima are private revelations and do not constitute dogma.

What the visionaries saw, was according to their own intellect and cultural understandings and should not be applied as absolute’s.

Devotion to Our Lady of Fatima is fine, but love of God and neighbor comes first. Those are the two commandments Jesus gave us.

2nd, Pope Francis is explaining what we know, that for a sin to be mortal, it must be grave, and done with full knowledge and consent. However, the conditions for a sin to be mortal, are not infallible, but a guide which St Augustine used.

Today we know through science, that the human body goes through various biological changes which are hormone driven and not all acts of the flesh are committed without strong influences caused by the chemical processes.

As someone pointed out from the Catechism, maturity and frequency can determine the culpability for such acts. A good confessor will know how to help a person with this.

At one time, rage and suicide were considered mortal sins which a person would be damned to hell for.

Today, we know that rage is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain and the person ends up reacting before they’re even aware of what they’re doing. Same with suicide, We know know that depression and other mental illnesses are a major cause. Heck, just a few centuries ago, mental illness was treated as demonic possession.

Remember, the first and foremost responsibility for humans is to reproduce. The biological urges to reproduce are strong and diverse. It doesn’t matter if you’re married or single, the biological urges are there and they are strong.

For the most part, we learn to control our sexual urges and the older we get, our biological makeup changes and it becomes easier.

Salvation isn’t about those who have the strongest willpower will be saved, but that God loves us and sent Jesus to save us, even while we were yet sinners.

Lastly. we in the West have created a reward and punishment system in Christianity, in which God will only love those who are worthy and of course many Christians see others as far less worthy than themselves. God loves us all, irrespective of our self-worth.

When Pope Francis said we are all children of God, fundamentalists had a melt down.

That reaction really speaks to the flaws in some Christians today, for it they knew God, they would see Him in everyone and everything.

Jim

Regardless, I believe the Pope is sending the wrong message, and a dangerous one at that. Those that previously believed that sins of the flesh were serious may no longer do so and because of his words further separate themselves from their salvation by rationalizing that it’s just a “little sin” and commit these offenses against God. It is much more responsible of the Pope to strike a note on the other end of the spectrum.

Well we do know a lot more than we did about human sexuality - but God has always know these things and He has put His seal on our bible - what was true then is true now. Just because we understand it better doesn’t change how God sees them. We know God takes into account culpability. People in Christ’s day had no more or less sexual urges.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Regardless, I believe the Pope is sending the wrong message, and a dangerous one at that. .

Actually Pope Francis is sending the message of the Good News of Salvation through Jesus Christ.

Just as Jesus message was rejected by the Pharisees, so too Pope Francis message will be rejected by those who follow religion without the experience of faith given through love from God.

There are people who have received the gift of faith in Jesus Christ and know God’s love and mercy because they have experienced it. Others will believe in the religion they follow in order to satisfy a need for belonging to a group. One is based on love, the other merely an ego-identity attachment.

Pope Francis obviously has tasted Divine Love and is sharing it.

Jim

 

[oppositeman]

Actually Pope Francis is sending the message of the Good News of Salvation through Jesus Christ.

Just as Jesus message was rejected by the Pharisees, so too Pope Francis message will be rejected by those who follow religion without the experience of faith given through love from God.

There are people who have received the gift of faith in Jesus Christ and know God’s love and mercy because they have experienced it. Others will believe in the religion they follow in order to satisfy a need for belonging to a group. One is based on love, the other merely an ego-identity attachment.

Pope Francis obviously has tasted Divine Love and is sharing it.

Jim

well one of us is wrong so let us both hope that the one in error realizes it before it is too late. Thanks for your comments and blessings !!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

well one of us is wrong so let us both hope that the one in error realizes it before it is too late. Thanks for your comments and blessings !!

I’m with Pope Francis on this, so you’re saying he could be wrong too ?

Jim

 

[oppositeman]

I’m with Pope Francis on this, so you’re saying he could be wrong too ?

Jim

This is what Dr. Feser, a catholic philosopher and teacher says:

Some people think that Catholic teaching is that a pope is infallible not only when making ex cathedra declarations, but in everything he does and says. That is also simply not the case. Catholic doctrine allows that popes can make grave mistakes, even mistakes that touch on doctrinal matters in certain ways.
Papal teaching, then, including exercises of the extraordinary Magisterium, cannot contradict Scripture, Tradition, or previous binding papal teaching. Nor can it introduce utter novelties. Popes have authority only to preserve and interpret what they have received. They can draw out the implications of previous teaching or clarify it where it is ambiguous. They can make formally binding what was already informally taught. But they cannot reverse past teaching and they cannot make up new doctrines out of whole cloth.

edwardfeser.blogspot.ca/2015/11/papal-fallibility.html

I have another thread going in spirituality - “can catholic teaching be changed?”
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=1063429