Pope explains why he is going to Assisi-III

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahimsa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What if a country full of devil worshipers couldn’t read? Are we to go there and teach the words of the devil to them to make them happy? That is absurd.
Franciscans and Salesians have long led more by example rather than words. The Jesuits often run schools, and schools teach many things. The Dominicans teach some

Not everything is about hellfire and brimstone, sometimes you need to take a more pastoral approach.
 
I said risk damnation, not that damnation was certain.

Abiding by the doctrines of the Catholic Church guarantees salvation. Going any other way, except the Orthodox, does not.

St. Francis was not Pope. He was free to act as he saw fit, I guess. A Pope being photographed on friendly terms with non-believers, even praying in their temples, is not helping our cause on the ground.

I have had conversations with one Muslim and one Protestant in which the first was happy to tell me that “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” had changed and that this proved ours was not the true faith, if it was so elastic. He gave me a lecture on how the Koran, their ulimate authority, had not changed one bit, and was entirely internally consistent.

The Protestant was happy to point out that, given the changes of the past 40 years, we’d surely have women priests etc, soon. It’s hard to dispute when I saw a priest I know being photographed with a female vicar dressed almost exactly as he was at public event: what a joke!

There’s Christian Charity and then there’s merely soft-soaping people. We’ve had too much of the latter. I find people like directness, myself.
Amen.

Surely one can be charitable AND still teach that we have the true faith even without mentioning hellfire and brimstone.
 
They go to foreign lands to educate (and feed, clothe, provide medical care), and carry out the Gospel message themselves. That includes teaching other faith traditions./QUOT

Perhaps that is where they are messing up. Their conscience I guess, they will answer for it. I hope that this insane trend of supporting other religions and teaching people about it will soon stop in the Catholic church.
 
Not everything is about hellfire and brimstone, sometimes you need to take a more pastoral approach.
Who is even mentioning hellfire and brimstone?? Teaching the faith, not watering it down and not crossing the line when it comes to other religions is not some crazy extremist thing. It means being a Christian.
 
OraLabora;8442143:
They go to foreign lands to educate (and feed, clothe, provide medical care), and carry out
the Gospel message themselves. That includes teaching other faith traditions.[/QUOT

Perhaps that is where they are messing up. Their conscience I guess, they will answer for it. I hope that this insane trend of supporting other religions and teaching people about it will soon stop in the Catholic church.
If we teach about the Old Testament, then we’re sort of teaching people about Judaism, yes?

🙂
[/quote]
 
I know that many lay people hate it when the “us-them” distinction comes out; but there are times when it has to come up, because we live in different worlds. This is one of them.

We have to be very patient with each other here. Here’s what I mean. Those of you who are laymen have not made a vow of obedience and you have no moral obligation to stand by the pope. You can be as critical and have as man opinions as you like. Most of the time, they’re not going to be helpful, because the pope has made up his mind; but some people feel good expressing them and that’s fine too. People should have some freedom in expressing opinions as long as they do not cross certain lines.

However, I would also ask for respect and consideration for those of us who Franciscan, Benedictine, Salesian, Dominican, Carmelite, etc. We have surrendered that freedom. I know that there are some loose cannons out there who are religious and run their mouths at every opportunity; but that is not the norm with us.

The norm with us is that unless a pope, bishop or superior is insane or a heretic, we support We obey and we respect his opinions and his actions. We ask only one question, “Is this a defined sin?” Obviously, if the pope says that it is not a defined sin, then we ask no further questions. It is not our right to think or question what our betters do. It is our duty to obey, comply, support and cooperate, because it is pleasing to God and in this case to the pope.

The Vatican has already come out with a statement asking people to support this gathering, because it’s important to the pope. Orders have already been told that they must support this and there is no questioning and no discussion. As far as we’re concerned, the conversation is over. The Holy Father has spoken.

What is left? We try to understand where this is coming from and what he’s trying to do here. As someone, not so kindly said, “Francis is not a pope”. This was true. However, even popes recognize that there has not been another Christian in history who has reached the perfection of Christianity as he did. Therefore, the popes have great admiration for him, his work and his wisdom. Since this is an area at which he was very good and at which his sons have excelled, it would be silly to have this resource and not make good use of it. That’s why Bl. John Paul and now Pope Benedict have decided to take the Church down the Franciscan path. That’s what this really is. It’s the Franciscan path.

This path is not a familiar one for most lay people. Until Pope John XXIII, every pope that we had was a Thomist and Scholastic. Pope Paul VI was the first pope in over 100 years who was not part of this school. In fact, he was not a theologian at all. He was a lawyer, civil and canon. Pope John Paul I, was a theologian, but did not reign very long. Bl. John Paul was a theologian and philosopher, but he was very much a Carmelite, not a Thomist. The Carmelites are much closer to the Franciscans, than they are to the Dominicans. Now we have Pope Benedict who is definitely a Franciscan. His area of expertise is Franciscan Theology and Franciscan Pastoral Practice. His area of spirituality is Augustinian.

In light of the fact that previous approaches, not matter how noble, did not work to bring people to peaceful co-existence, which is the starting point of all evangelization, there is always room for something new. If we continue to repeat what has not worked, of what use is it?

The idea is to bring the world to live in peace. If these men and women are influential in their respective societies and can deliver this message of peace, why not gather with them and be brothers with them?

As faithful religious, our place is to help others understand what the Holy Father is thinking, what he wants to achieve and the particular school of theology in which he is grounding himself. It is not our role or even our right to have an opinion one way or the other. We don’t become religious to think. We become religious to obey and to serve.

Look at the friars and Poor Clares in Assisi. They have to host this event. Guess what? Francis said that they must do this or suffer for disobeying him. Well . . . no friar or Poor Clare who is faithful is going to refuse to cooperate with the pope, when the Seraphic Father has already laid it down in his rule that you must always comply or suffer for it. You can even be dismissed from the order for not complying, even excommunicated if you push the right buttons.

There is not going to be a lot of support for these concerns from Benedictines, Franciscans, Dominicans, Salesians, Carmelites, Missionaries of Charity and any other religious who is faithful to his tradition, obedient to his founder and faithful to the Holy Father. I’m pretty sure that the same can be said of diocesan priests, even though they are not consecrated men. They have promised to obey their bishops. If their bishops command support, those who are faithful will support the Holy Father.

As Fr. Lombardi said, this is important to the Holy Father. It is a work in which he has engaged for several decades. This is not something new to him. He is a man who has led the Church well, at many levels in the many posts that he has occupied. He has served God’s people well. He has earned the respect and trust of the people of God. Once again, he deserves our best wishes and our support on this even as well. We never know what God has in mind for us and what God can do with this gathering.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
I know that many lay people hate it when the “us-them” distinction comes out; but there are times when it has to come up, because we live in different worlds. This is one of them.

We have to be very patient with each other here. Here’s what I mean. Those of you who are laymen have not made a vow of obedience and you have no moral obligation to stand by the pope. You can be as critical and have as man opinions as you like. Most of the time, they’re not going to be helpful, because the pope has made up his mind; but some people feel good expressing them and that’s fine too. People should have some freedom in expressing opinions as long as they do not cross certain lines.

However, I would also ask for respect and consideration for those of us who Franciscan, Benedictine, Salesian, Dominican, Carmelite, etc. We have surrendered that freedom. I know that there are some loose cannons out there who are religious and run their mouths at every opportunity; but that is not the norm with us.
Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Hello Brother Jay,

The reason I have tried to stay out of this conversation (I tried, but failed 😦 ), is because certain topics only seem to have room for one opinion. Most of the people who don’t agree with the gatherings have true concerns. They are not just mouthing off.

The question is, how does one express oneself and still be respectful to religious as you have stated, without choosing to not participate in the discussion?
 
Contra Mundum;8442326:
If we teach about the Old Testament, then we’re sort of teaching people about Judaism, yes?

🙂
Of course not. We understand the OT in the light of the NT and interpret it accordingly. And surely you understand there is a difference between Judaism and other, man-made religions?
 
Of course not. We understand the OT in the light of the NT and interpret it accordingly. And surely you understand there is a difference between Judaism and other, man-made religions?
Wait, you mean there’s a difference between Judaism and other religions?

/sarcasm

Seriously though, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with instructing people about different faiths, provided it’s done in light of Catholic teaching.

I said before that Dominicans will often teach philosophy so that we can better understand theology. Not all philosophers are reputable though.

Like Brother JR said, Religious and those associated with Religious have a different set of rules to play by. Dominic said that we are called to preach and teach, tempered by Mercy. When I join the Lay Dominicans, I am bound by the promises and the rules set forth by the Order of Preachers. This includes that although I instruct others, it needs to be done with the heart and soul in mind. If you’re in someone’s culture and someone’s country, you don’t want to run around thumping the Bible in people’s faces. In Francis’ and Dominic’s time, this was practical; if they Bible thumped they would have died. Literally. They taught their followers this, and it has been passed down to this day.
 
OraLabora;8442143:
They go to foreign lands to educate (and feed, clothe, provide medical care), and carry out
the Gospel message themselves. That includes teaching other faith traditions.[/QUOT

Perhaps that is where they are messing up. Their conscience I guess, they will answer for it. I hope that this insane trend of supporting other religions and teaching people about it will soon stop in the Catholic church.
There is nothing insane about it. I suggest you watch the movie “Of Gods and Men”. If all religions get along the world will be a better place, and, I suggest, people of other faiths may finally be able to really hear and believe the Christian message, much more so than if we criticize their beliefs. It’s pretty hard to hear the Christian message, and not in keeping with the Gospels, to be shouting at each other.
11And he said to him: Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord: and behold the Lord passeth, and a great and strong wind before the Lord over throwing the mountains, and breaking the rocks in pieces: the Lord is not in the wind, and after the wind an earthquake: the Lord is not in the earthquake.
Code:
12And after the earthquake a fire: the Lord is not in the fire, and after the fire a whistling of a gentle air.
Code:
13And when Elias heard it, he covered his face with his mantle, and coming forth stood in the entering in of the cave, and behold a voice unto him, saying: What dost thou here, Elias?
1 Kings 19:11-13
[/quote]
 
You know, Brother JR’s latest post makes even more sense when you look at the larger scope of this thread.

A Franciscan religious, a Secular Oblate, and someone whose soon joining the Lay Dominicans are saying one thing, and it appears that there are laymen not associated with any religious on the other side.

It certainly gives some insights into different elements within the Church.
 
I suggest you watch the movie “Of Gods and Men”. If all religions get along the world will be a better place, and, I suggest, people of other faiths may finally be able to really hear and believe the Christian message, much more so than if we criticize their beliefs. It’s pretty hard to hear the Christian message, and not in keeping with the Gospels, to be shouting at each other.
I have seen the film and am very familiar with the story. The monks were engaged with the life of the local community and knew their religion well. Great. But there is a difference between being informed about other religions and teaching them to people.

So many Christians have lost their lives because they refused to accept other religions. And now we are betraying our faith and those who died for it by making everything so acceptable and relative, because we are sophisticated people of the 21st century.

I’m also sick of this Assisi topic and will stay away from now on.
 
Hello Brother Jay,

The reason I have tried to stay out of this conversation (I tried, but failed 😦 ), is because certain topics only seem to have room for one opinion. Most of the people who don’t agree with the gatherings have true concerns. They are not just mouthing off.

The question is, how does one express oneself and still be respectful to religious as you have stated, without choosing to not participate in the discussion?
This is a very fair question and I don’t have the perfect answer. Please take this with a grain of salt. It’s useful, great and if not, throw it in the garbage with the junk mail.

I’ll tell you what I tell my novices. They still let me do formation work, can you belive that?

If you have permission to ask a question, by all means ask. However, remember that you’re seeking to understand, you’re not calling another person’s interity, intentions or credibility into question.

If the other person is interested in your opinion and asks for it, by all means share it. You’re doing the other person an act of kindness. However, if the other person is a person in authority and he is not interested in your opinion, for whatever reason, . . . let it go. Life is short and eternity is forever. Your time and energy are better spent on becoming holy than on offering advise or expressing concerns that the other person is not interested in hearing and is not going to hear. Even Jesus refused to speak to Pilate, because he knew that Pilate was not really interested in Truth.

I tell them to remember that the law says that we, the faithful, have a right to express our concerns. However, it does not say that the Church has a duty to act according to those concerns. At the end of the day, there will always be someone with concerns. Therefore, the Church, in this case, the pope, has to do what he believes is right. I always like to remind them of something that Paul VI said when he was going to write Humanae Vitae, actually when he wrote it.

He gave it to several cardinals for feedback. It came back dripping in red ink. It looked as if it were bleeding. He handed it to his secretary and told him to print it in its original form. The secretary asked him if he was not concerned about the feedback from the cardinals. He said, “Nothing is ever going to make Catholics happy. Print it.”

The point is that popes often ignore all of these concerns, because they know that nothing is going to make Catholics happy. They don’t even try. They go for what they think is good for the Church and for the world.

I tell my novices, not to judge the actions of popes, unless they think that they can do the job themselves. Pope Benedict XVI was asked why he had changed his position on a few things, one of them was the OF. He said, “When you’re not the pope, it’s very easy to have an opinion. When you’re the pope, all of your opinions are useless, because you’re seeing the world through a different window.”

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Another thing to take into consideration is the void that exists amongst most Catholics when it comes to doctrine, in 2011.

They don’t know it.

Quiz them on a few fashionable Catholic topics and you will see where their sympathies, but not their knowledge, lies. Even RCIA teachers get it wrong. Dissent is rife, even amongst the clergy.

The laity see our clergy cosying up to Protestants and the conclusion is drawn; their way is valid.

The next king of England, Charles, has said that he would like to be “The Defender Of All The Faiths.”

The president of Ireland, a Catholic, Mary McAleese, thought it right to take communion at an Anglican service.

We’re heading into a false peacetime where the Truth will be muzzled in the name of fashion. That entente will then crumble, due to its falsity and the traditionalists, who follow the hard sayings of Jesus and his Saints, will be left to uncover the treasure at the heart of our religion once again.
 
I
St. Francis was not Pope. He was free to act as he saw fit, I guess. A Pope being photographed on friendly terms with non-believers, even praying in their temples, is not helping our cause on the ground.
I am pretty certain that the Pope too is free to act as he sees fit. As far as being on friendly terms with non-believers, I think it does help our position, as do the past two pontiffs. It is certainly more likely to have people listen to our teaching than something like an inquisition, or some of the extreme acts by other Catholics of a less mainstream persuassion.

As much as some will criticize the Holy Father, I bet most are willing to socialize with non-Catholics sans soapbox. Does anyone talks sports? Do we talk politics? Do we even talk about what others do in the course of their faith? I do all the above at work and in public. Not ever event is a teaching moment to teach every truth.
 
I am pretty certain that the Pope too is free to act as he sees fit. As far as being on friendly terms with non-believers, I think it does help our position, as do the past two pontiffs. It is certainly more likely to have people listen to our teaching than something like an inquisition, or some of the extreme acts by other Catholics of a less mainstream persuassion.

As much as some will criticize the Holy Father, I bet most are willing to socialize with non-Catholics sans soapbox. Does anyone talks sports? Do we talk politics? Do we even talk about what others do in the course of their faith? I do all the above at work and in public. Not ever event is a teaching moment to teach every truth.
You’re addressing two things that we should really thing about, one of them without realizing it. The first is that we’re trying to handcuff the pope. The pope can do whatever he wants and he does not need our approval or our opinion. We have to get past ourselves folks. We’re not that important to the day to day decisions that the pope makes. On many of these decisions he doesn’t even care what his cardinals think, must less the bus driver up the street, the teacher at the local school, or the business man downtown. He knows that he’s not going to please everyone. If he stopped to care, he’d be crippled. So he goes with what his heart and mind tell him is good for the Church and the world, not what we tell him.

The second point that you’re addressing indirectly was the comment about St. Francis. St. Francis was not pope. However, popes envy him and his brothers. They have been more successful in evangelizing and making friends fo the Church than have the popes. For this reason the popes look to Francis.

In a statement about 6 months to a year ago, the Holy Father corrected the Italian bishops for not being familiar with St. Francis and not following his spirit and manner of doing things. The funniest part of the whole speech is that there is only one bishop in Italy who is Franciscan. The bishops were confused, because the Holy Father pointed to this man as a model for them. Francis was a layman who later became a religious brother. He was not a priest, much less a bishop. However, popes find him influential and holy enough to imitate.

“The motto of the story is, if your pope find this important, you better take a closer look.” This is not my quote. This came from one of the Italian bishops who was at the receiving end of the pope’s speech, not the Franciscan one either, but a Salesian.

Pnewton is right. We cannot handcuff the pope and we certainly cannot tell the pope which saint he wants to imitate or use as his mentor in a given situation. These saints are going to change from one situation to another, because the saints have different gifts.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
St. Francis was not Pope.
He may not be the Pope, but 1.7 million people call him Holy Father to this day. Throw in another 150,000 when you count the Dominicans.

I think it’s safe to say if we all TRIED to be like Francis (let alone actually be like him), this world would be a better place.
 
The laity see our clergy cosying up to Protestants and the conclusion is drawn; their way is valid.
Their way is not necessarily invalid though. There are elements of Truth in Protestantism. The picture might be out of focus sometimes, sometimes grievously so, other times not so much. This fact however, does not invalidate the parts that are valid; the Church teaches this. Most Protestants are Protestants in good faith, and love Christ with all their heart. It is most emphatically not a sin to be Protestant. It is a sin to become Protestant if you’re Catholic. For most Protestants though, it was their forefathers who sinned 500 or so years ago, and they were brought up in Protestant cultures and Protestant families. How could they be anything other than Protestant in those circumstances? Their Protestantism is just as deeply in their culture as Catholicism is in Ireland or Italy.

Look at it this way: we are told as Catholics to care for the souls of our brothers. If we drive a brother or sister to sin, their sin stains us as well. This is important to remember, because if we do not act in charity when we try to “fraternally correct” them, and we drive them even further from our Church, then we have sinned as grievously as we claim we do when we do not “fraternally correct” them. I have heard it often on this site that we are to fraternally correct our brothers as justification for pointing out others’ errors, but if we do so clumsily, then we have accomplished nothing or worse. It’s not as easy to do as it is to say.

It’s therefore a very delicate balance, especially for a layperson. IMHO the only path that works is to try to lead as holy a life as possible. One can control one’s own holiness, one can’t control someone else’s. But if our own holiness has encouraged someone else’s holiness then that is when have been good witness to our faith. That is regardless of the other’s faith. If it encourages a Protestant to be more holy, even if it doesn’t encourage the Protestant to convert, then we have done a good thing, better than if we confront them with their “error” and drive them away. If it encourages a militant fundamentalist toward peace, then you’ve done a good thing, even if the militant doesn’t convert. The world will be a slightly better place for it. Living the Gospel and spreading the Gospel does not mean force-feeding the Gospel. The Gospel is spread through deeds and Christian charity, not lofty words.

Once I had an evangelical Protestant tell me at the monastery that the monastery was “all works of men”, and that he “followed the Bible only”. I didn’t take the bait. Instead I told him that if he loved scripture, the monks had a great way of reading and meditating scripture called Lectio Divina, and encouraged him to look it up on the Internet, that it would give him a fresh way to read and meditate scripture. I spoke to him on his level. No attempt to convert, no getting drawn into a futile argument. Just planting a seed using something we both shared, a love of God and the Bible.

The Holy Father has to balance this on a much larger scale, in a much more public manner. Instead of criticism, he should be in all our prayers for a successful meeting.
He may not be the Pope, but 1.7 million people call him Holy Father to this day. Throw in another 150,000 when you count the Dominicans.

I think it’s safe to say if we all TRIED to be like Francis (let alone actually be like him), this world would be a better place.
Amen!
 
The reason for choosing Assisi was because the pope wanted to deliberately use St. Francis’ method of evangelization through peaceful co-existence. This is a very ancient tradition that goes back 800 years and seems to have worked better than in your face preaching. The Franciscans have had more success with pagans than any other group of missionaries, starting with earning trust. This is what the pope is going for. As the Vatican said, this is his ministry and it’s very important to him. We owe him support.
Brother, your replies on this thread have been phenomenal. I have learned so much about the Franciscans, and the insights drawn from your knowledge of what happened between St. Francis and the Sultan of Egypt are profound and so important.

Thank you so much for taking the time to explain all this. Many here need to hear what you have conveyed.
I have had conversations with one Muslim and one Protestant in which the first was happy to tell me that “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” had changed and that this proved ours was not the true faith, if it was so elastic. He gave me a lecture on how the Koran, their ulimate authority, had not changed one bit, and was entirely internally consistent.
Islam isn’t a very nuanced faith. Its doctrines and theology are straightforward, rational, and always philosophically accessible. But they have no real room for mystery, so I don’t think the rationalistic thought processes of a Muslim are a good standard for judging how much Catholic Christianity can validly change or adapt.
The Protestant was happy to point out that, given the changes of the past 40 years, we’d surely have women priests etc, soon.
Did this Protestant have any specifics? On what matter exactly has the Catholic Church changed so fundamentally that that Protestant’s expectation becomes reasonable and responsible? I’m confident that just a little further questioning would help that Protestant see the absurdity of his conclusion. There are far more issues on which the Catholic Church has remained miraculously resolute, such as contraception.
It’s hard to dispute when I saw a priest I know being photographed with a female vicar dressed almost exactly as he was at public event: what a joke!
See, I guess this is why we disagree: I wouldn’t see a picture like that and think, “Hey, these two clearly agree with each other religiously.” I would rather think something like, “Hey, that’s nice - these two are working with or engaging with each other despite their differences.”

Everyone knows the Catholic Magisterium has not wavered from the opinion that the Church literally cannot confer sacerdotal ordination on women.
Now we have Pope Benedict who is definitely a Franciscan. His area of expertise is Franciscan Theology and Franciscan Pastoral Practice. His area of spirituality is Augustinian. He is a man who has led the Church well, at many levels in the many posts that he has occupied. He has served God’s people well. He has earned the respect and trust of the people of God. Once again, he deserves our best wishes and our support on this even as well. We never know what God has in mind for us and what God can do with this gathering.
Well said, as always. 🙂
I think it’s safe to say if we all TRIED to be like Francis (let alone actually be like him), this world would be a better place.
Most definitely!
Look at it this way: we are told as Catholics to care for the souls of our brothers. If we drive a brother or sister to sin, their sin stains us as well. This is important to remember, because if we do not act in charity when we try to “fraternally correct” them, and we drive them even further from our Church, then we have sinned as grievously as we claim we do when we do not “fraternally correct” them. I have heard it often on this site that we are to fraternally correct our brothers as justification for pointing out others’ errors, but if we do so clumsily, then we have accomplished nothing or worse. IMHO the only path that works is to try to lead as holy a life as possible. One can control one’s own holiness, one can’t control someone else’s. But if our own holiness has encouraged someone else’s holiness then that is when have been good witness to our faith.
Well said, OraLabora.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top