Pope Francis assures sceptics: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven

[Bubba_Switzler]

Well I guess you have missed other threads that have said sinners have no place in church.

I have never seen that in these forums nor heard it elsewhere. What I have seen are people calling for the denial of Communion to certain politicians who advocate e.g. abortion.

But more importantly, while I have known and heard of many who have left or stayed away from the Church, I’ve never met anyone who did so because he thought the Church did not welcome sinners. The closest I can think of to that might be homosexuals who avoid the Church because they do not consider themselves sinners (are not prepared to repent) and demand that the Church accept them as they are.

Let’s frame the disagreement this way: could we agree on an opinion survey that would resove the question?

I predict that if you asked people why they are not Catholic (left, never joined, etc.) and offered “I am a sinner and the Church doesn’t want me” as an option it would not be selected by any significant number of people.

I am not hear to defend the Jesuits only to tell you to try to keep an open mind. Better men than I thought Pope Francis should be our Pope so maybe people should start looking at why those men picked him in the first place. These are the leader of your Church who picked a man that never aspired to be the Pope. Why?.. It sounds like you will be very uncomfortable while Pope Francis leads the church. All I can say for living through the last few priests is that if you focus on the good they do and the positive traits they have it gets better./QUOTE]
As I noted previously, I’m sure Pope Francis has many other strengths. I have confidence that he will clean up the vatican, for example. I think his pastoral style may benefit the church in many ways. But this isssues is one that interests me.

You must remember Jesuits are not only in universities, they still over see high schools where they very much deal with the reality teen problems and broken or abusive families. With that point your are simply very wrong.

That is all well and good but it is not their historical mission. Their historical mission still needs to be done by someone. If not them then we need a new Jesuit Society to be shock troops in a new counterreformation.

 

[pnewton]

He never used the term “remnant” but that was the gist of it. A remnant strategy does not throw in the towel on the rest, it simply describes where the focus is. Pope Benedict wanted to revitalize the core by, for example, reviving the Latin mass.

Evangelism is more than the mission of the Church. The Catholic Church exists as the fruit of evangelism. I do not see how speaking more Latin is relevant, though perhaps it explains a thing or two. I also hardly see the increase of Latin in liturgy as the “focus” of Pope Benedict’s papacy. He wrote three encyclicals. Not one of them mentioned Latin or pertained to the Liturgy.

Yes, he wrote Summorum Pontificum to help provide a wider use of the Latin Mass, but saying this was his focus is like saying his focus was expansion of the Anglican indult because he wrote one document on that. I think you as seeing the Church from a rather narrow filter. My fear for the “remnant” mentality people is that they will be like the older brother left out of the feast because he was mad that his Father welcomed the prodigal home.

The developed world is not being written off, but the Holy Spirit will move to fertile ground. Our mission is very difficult here, not doubt, but it seems rather clear the direction God is moving us.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Evangelism is more than the mission of the Church. The Catholic Church exists as the fruit of evangelism. I do not see how speaking more Latin is relevant, though perhaps it explains a thing or two. I also hardly see the increase of Latin in liturgy as the “focus” of Pope Benedict’s papacy. He wrote three encyclicals. Not one of them mentioned Latin or pertained to the Liturgy.

Yes, he wrote Summorum Pontificum to help provide a wider use of the Latin Mass, but saying this was his focus is like saying his focus was expansion of the Anglican indult because he wrote one document on that. I think you as seeing the Church from a rather narrow filter. My fear for the “remnant” mentality people is that they will be like the older brother left out of the feast because he was mad that his Father welcomed the prodigal home.

That was just one example. Another thrust was to heal schisms e.g. with Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, and the French ultratraditionalists.

The developed world is not being written off, but the Holy Spirit will move to fertile ground. Our mission is very difficult here, not doubt, but it seems rather clear the direction God is moving us.

That sure sounds like a rationalization of a write-off to me.

 

[Elizabeth502]

This part I completely agree with:

the problem with worldwide figures is that growth in Africa (which you mentioned) and Asia obscures declines in Europe and the Americas.

And, no, the declines are not local to parishes. Abandoning the developed world to atheism is a much broader phenomenon than that. The Church’s challenge is how to sustain Catholicism in the developed world.

And note that it is not merely a case of rich people abandoning Christianity. Atheism has gained ground across the social spectrum in advanced countries. And just as Europe’s atheism has been an appeal for Americans, so European and American atheism will one day become an appeal for Africa and Asia.

This is a very serious problem that the Church must face as a whole.

But this part I do not:

He never used the term “remnant” but that was the gist of it. A remnant strategy does not throw in the towel on the rest, it simply describes where the focus is. Pope Benedict wanted to revitalize the core by, for example, reviving the Latin mass.

In my opinion you have both mischaracterized (labeled) Pope Benedict and misunderstood his approach, and you’ve done it several times on the forum. You turn him into some narrow-minded person without a global vision for the Church nor an appreciation of Her diversity.

And since, as you admit,

He never used the term “remnant”

then it is rather presumptuous of you to use it, to define the mind of a man you have never met. You have reduced him to something which is your own misinterpretation, then elevated that misinterpretation as a fact, when it is actually a caricature of a human being and former Vicar of Christ.

 

[clem456]

The ultimate “church man”, Saul of Tarsus, was an orthodox believer, who held fast to orthodox traditions and persecuted those who would corrupt the true faith and mislead the chosen ones.

He discovered his notion of “church” was a little bit narrow, after having his old self burnt to a crisp during an encounter with the risen Christ.

Francis is gently proposing to the faithful to look around us and ask the same question Paul asked when his world was shattered:
5 “Who are you, Lord?”

Not “how can we protect our -t-raditions, how do we stay where we are and protect ourselves?”,

but “Who are you Lord, in whom do we see your face, where are you asking us to go, what changes are you asking us to make?”

 

[clem456]

Timely words for this discussion from Pope Francis. 5/8/13

Pope Francis stressed the courageous attitude of Paul St Paul at the Areopagus, when, in speaking to the Athenian crowd, he sought to build bridges to proclaim the Gospel. The Pope called Paul’s attitude one that “seeks dialogue” and is “closer to the heart” of the listener. The Pope said that this is the reason why St Paul was a real pontifex: a “builder of bridges” and not of walls. The Pope went on to say that this makes us think of the attitude that a Christian ought always to have.

“A Christian,” said Pope Francis, “must proclaim Jesus Christ in such a way that He be accepted: received, not refused – and Paul knows that he has to sow the Gospel message. He knows that the proclamation of Jesus Christ is not easy, but that it does not depend on him. He must do everything possible, but the proclamation of Jesus Christ, the proclamation of the truth, depends on the Holy Spirit. Jesus tells us in today’s Gospel: ‘When He shall come, the Spirit of truth, shall guide you into all the truth.’ Paul does not say to the Athenians: ‘This is the encyclopedia of truth. Study this and you have the truth, the truth.’ No! The truth does not enter into an encyclopedia. The truth is an encounter - it is a meeting with Supreme Truth: Jesus, the great truth. No one owns the truth. The we receive the truth when we meet [it].

But why did Paul act as he did? First, the Pope said, because “this is the way” of Jesus who “spoke with everyone” with sinners, publicans, teachers of the law. Paul, therefore, “follows the attitude of Jesus”:

“The Christian who would bring the Gospel must go down this road: [must] listen to everyone! But now is a good time in the life of the Church: the last 50 or 60 years have been a good time - for I remember when as a child one would hear in Catholic families, in my family, ‘No, we cannot go to their house, because they are not married in the Church, eh!’. It was as an exclusion. No, you could not go! Neither could we go to [the houses of] socialists or atheists. Now, thank God, people do not says such things, right? [Such an attitude] was a defense of the faith, but it was one of walls: the LORD made bridges. First: Paul has this attitude, because it was the attitude of Jesus. Second, Paul is aware that he must evangelize, not proselytize.

Citing his predecessor, Pope Benedict, Francis went on to say that the Church “does not grow by means of proselytizing," but “by attraction, by witnessing, by preaching,” and Paul had this attitude: proclamation does not make proselytization – and he succeeds, because, “he did not doubt his Lord.” The Pope warned that, “Christians who are afraid to build bridges and prefer to build walls are Christians who are not sure of their faith, not sure of Jesus Christ.” The Pope exhorted Christians to do as Paul did and begin to “build bridges and to move forward”:

"Paul teaches us this journey of evangelization, because Jesus did, because he is well aware that evangelization is not proselytizing: it is because he is sure of Jesus Christ and does not need to justify himself [or] to seek reasons to justify himself. When the Church loses this apostolic courage, she becomes a stalled Church, a tidy Church a nice, a Church that is nice to look at, but that is without fertility, because she has lost the courage to go to the outskirts, where there are many people who are victims of idolatry, worldliness of weak thought, [of] so many things. Let us today ask St Paul to give us this apostolic courage, this spiritual fervor, so that we might be confident. ‘But Father,’ [you might say], ‘we might make mistakes…’ … ‘[Well, what of it,’ I might respond], ‘Get on with you: if you make a mistake, you get up and go forward: that is the way. Those who do not walk in order not to err, make a the more serious mistake.

Text from page en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/08/pope_francis_at_wednesday_mass:_build_bridges,_not_walls/en1-690203
of the Vatican Radio website

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

then it is rather presumptuous of you to use it, to define the mind of a man you have never met. You have reduced him to something which is your own misinterpretation, then elevated that misinterpretation as a fact, when it is actually a caricature of a human being and former Vicar of Christ.

How do you know that I’ve never met Pope Benedict? And if I had would that qualify me to use the label/term? Why do you presume that any labeling or categorization is a reduction or misrepresentation? Is “labeling” Pope Francis a pastoral pope a misleading and reductive caricature?

Sorry, I just don’t buy the while premise of your complaint quite apart from any disagreement on how best to characterize Pope Benedit’s pontificate.

 

[shelby_sun]

I have never seen that in these forums nor heard it elsewhere. What I have seen are people calling for the denial of Communion to certain politicians who advocate e.g. abortion.

But more importantly, while I have known and heard of many who have left or stayed away from the Church, I’ve never met anyone who did so because he thought the Church did not welcome sinners. The closest I can think of to that might be homosexuals who avoid the Church because they do not consider themselves sinners (are not prepared to repent) and demand that the Church accept them as they are.

Let’s frame the disagreement this way: could we agree on an opinion survey that would resove the question?

I predict that if you asked people why they are not Catholic (left, never joined, etc.) and offered “I am a sinner and the Church doesn’t want me” as an option it would not be selected by any significant number of people.

I am not hear to defend the Jesuits only to tell you to try to keep an open mind. Better men than I thought Pope Francis should be our Pope so maybe people should start looking at why those men picked him in the first place. These are the leader of your Church who picked a man that never aspired to be the Pope. Why?.. It sounds like you will be very uncomfortable while Pope Francis leads the church. All I can say for living through the last few priests is that if you focus on the good they do and the positive traits they have it gets better./QUOTE]
As I noted previously, I’m sure Pope Francis has many other

 

[pnewton]

The ultimate “church man”, Saul of Tarsus, was an orthodox believer, who held fast to orthodox traditions and persecuted those who would corrupt the true faith and mislead the chosen ones.

He discovered his notion of “church” was a little bit narrow, after having his old self burnt to a crisp during an encounter with the risen Christ.

Francis is gently proposing to the faithful to look around us and ask the same question Paul asked when his world was shattered:
5 “Who are you, Lord?”

Let us look at what Jesus said at that encounter.

"We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’

We need to watch those goads.

 

[TMC]

Bubba Switzler;11282147:

I have never seen that in these forums nor heard it elsewhere. What I have seen are people calling for the denial of Communion to certain politicians who advocate e.g. abortion.

But more importantly, while I have known and heard of many who have left or stayed away from the Church, I’ve never met anyone who did so because he thought the Church did not welcome sinners. The closest I can think of to that might be homosexuals who avoid the Church because they do not consider themselves sinners (are not prepared to repent) and demand that the Church accept them as they are.

Let’s frame the disagreement this way: could we agree on an opinion survey that would resove the question?

I predict that if you asked people why they are not Catholic (left, never joined, etc.) and offered “I am a sinner and the Church doesn’t want me” as an option it would not be selected by any significant number of people.

They still do missionary work and they teach and require all there students to be Men for Others which mean they go out to all areas of their community and the world to help others. It doesn’t sound like you know much about the Jesuits of today, just as a didn’t know much about Pope Benedict, but I was never as closed minded about him.

You seem to want all of us to focus on sinners and converting, but again that is not meant for all of us. Some of us focus on our own relationship with God and how we can go out and help other in other ways than converting them. I know you will say the Bible says to evangelize, but it also say many other things. Pope Francis wants to focus on other things and there is nothing wrong with that, it is just not to your liking.

No, I don’t agree your survey would come out the way you think. Why do you think they are leaving the church? Because it is more fun and lively elsewhere? No, it is because they don’t think certain things are a sin and the Catholic church is telling them they are sinners for those things and must repent before taking the Eucharist.

The Vatican and The church has seemed to become more of a government bureaucracy that the Catholic church. Jesuits focus on the Ten Commandments and the Sacrament,s which is hard enough for most people to handle. Learning all the “rules” of the Church in every area they are now getting into would make anyone’s head explode.

I know quite a few former Catholics who would say they left (at least in large part) because they perceive that the Church does not want them.

EDIT - just saw that the quote function is screwed up on this post. I think most or all of the above quoted material is actually from shelby sun.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

They still do missionary work and they teach and require all there students to be Men for Others which mean they go out to all areas of their community and the world to help others. It doesn’t sound like you know much about the Jesuits of today, just as a didn’t know much about Pope Benedict, but I was never as closed minded about him.

You seem to want all of us to focus on sinners and converting, but again that is not meant for all of us. Some of us focus on our own relationship with God and how we can go out and help other in other ways than converting them. I know you will say the Bible says to evangelize, but it also say many other things. Pope Francis wants to focus on other things and there is nothing wrong with that, it is just not to your liking.

Yes, they still do missionary work indistinguishable from a plethora of other Catholic and non-Catholic institutions. But they have lost interest in their unique historical mission of evangilism and apologetics. Of course, the Church has many objectives which it furthers through a variety of institutions some of which are given narrower missions. The Jesuits were once just such an institution.

Let me offer an analogy. Imagine that the military got bored with defending the country and switched to running parks. Critics would ask, who will defend the country? They would criticize the military, why aren’t you doing your job? But the military apologists would answer, look at all the beautiful parks we are running. How dare you question us!

No, I am not impressed with the new “Jesuit Way” and I have no confidence in Pope Francis application of it to the problem we are discussing. Pope Francis is pope, he can do what he wants. But he is not God. He cannot command the outcome he desires. He is humbled by reality just the same as the rest of us.

I predict that if you asked people why they are not Catholic (left, never joined, etc.) and offered “I am a sinner and the Church doesn’t want me” as an option it would not be selected by any significant number of people.

No, I don’t agree your survey would come out the way you think.

But you agree that this would be a very indicative question to answer, right? If you were proven wrong and the number of people who agreed were insignificant you would conced my point about Pope Francis and the “Jesuit Way”, right?

Why do you think they are leaving the church? Because it is more fun and lively elsewhere? No, it is because they don’t think certain things are a sin and the Catholic church is telling them they are sinners for those things and must repent before taking the Eucharist.

The Vatican and The church has seemed to become more of a government bureaucracy that the Catholic church. Jesuits focus on the Ten Commandments and the Sacrament,s which is hard enough for most people to handle. Learning all the “rules” of the Church in every area they are now getting into would make anyone’s head explode.

Taking the Eucharist is not the same as attending mass. But even so I doubt you would get a significant number of people saying that the don’t attend mass because they must repent before taking the Eucharist.

(Priests don’t generally have a litmus test before offering the Eucharist. The Church has rules but rules on taking the Eucharist are as easily broken as the rules that give rise to barring the Eucharist.)

Yes, the Church is telling people that they are sinners and in extreme cases that they “must repent before taking the Eucharist.” All that is required is something like, “Father forgive me, yesterday I raped and murdered 100 children.” This same person can go and rape and murder another 100 children tomorrow and repent again and take the Eucharist. Tyrany! Tyrany!

So who is leaving the Church? Those who are unrepentent. And not because they are unwelcome. Rather because they are demanding that the Church stop calling them sinners and asking them to repent before taking the Eucharist. Because they are demanding the Church bend to their rules. Are they leaving because they are having more fun with their own rules? Certainly. But also because they believe there are no rules or because they have subscribed to a competing moral system.

And the Jesuit answer is…stop telling people that they are sinners.

No, I am not impressed with the “Jesuit way”.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I know quite a few former Catholics who would say they left (at least in large part) because they perceive that the Church does not want them.

I would challenge that. I suspect that if you dig just a little deeper you will find that they are really objecting to what the Church is asking of them. The Church says X is a sin. They like doing X and see no wrong with doing X. They feel uncomfortable at Church as a result or maybe even they want to punish the Church for saying X is a sin.

They are not saying that they do X and they know they shouldn’t do X and while they want to stop doing X they still find themselves doing X and as a result the Church doesn’t want them.

 

[TMC]

I would challenge that. I suspect that if you dig just a little deeper you will find that they are really objecting to what the Church is asking of them. The Church says X is a sin. They like doing X and see no wrong with doing X. They feel uncomfortable at Church as a result or maybe even they want to punish the Church for saying X is a sin.

They are not saying that they do X and they know they shouldn’t do X and while they want to stop doing X they still find themselves doing X and as a result the Church doesn’t want them.

I am talking about my close friends and family members. I believe what they tell me. But I guess you know them better than I. It is easy to “win” when you simply deny that others are even capable of understanding their own motives and actions.

 

[TMC]

Why are some referring t the Pope’s statements as the “Jesuit way”? His statements, approach and attitude are Catholic, Christian and Gospel-based. They are not merely “Jesuit”. Why try and limit his statements to one sect of Catholicism?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Why are some referring t the Pope’s statements as the “Jesuit way”? His statements, approach and attitude are Catholic, Christian and Gospel-based. They are not merely “Jesuit”. Why try and limit his statements to one sect of Catholicism?

That was Shelby’s explanation but is seems plausible to me. Pope Francis is a Jesuit, after all. Should we be surprised that his approach reflects his Jesuit training?

I am talking about my close friends and family members. I believe what they tell me. But I guess you know them better than I. It is easy to “win” when you simply deny that others are even capable of understanding their own motives and actions.

Pick the person you know best and explain his thinking to us.

 

[pnewton]

So who is leaving the Church? Those who are unrepentent. And not because they are unwelcome. Rather because they are demanding that the Church stop calling them sinners and asking them to repent before taking the Eucharist. Because they are demanding the Church bend to their rules. Are they leaving because they are having more fun with their own rules? Certainly. But also because they believe there are no rules or because they have subscribed to a competing moral system.

This is true, although I would add some leave because they consider their own rules more catholic than the Catholic Church. Unrepentance happens on both side of the spectrum and pride is as big a stumbling block as sex.

Now, as to being unwelcome, you and I know that all are welcome, but some do not *feel *welcome. Perception here is 90% of reality, or at least of that person’s reality. I appreciate the line Pope Francis is walking. When presented with people, he welcomes and opens the door. When he is presented with behavior, he states Church teaching. We are not sinners in the hands of an angry God. We are children of the Father whose behavior angers the Father, whose love for the children never diminishes.

So, when speaking about atheists, Pope Francis addresses the person. He never said atheism is good or acceptable.

 

[shelby_sun]

Yes, they still do missionary work indistinguishable from a plethora of other Catholic and non-Catholic institutions. But they have lost interest in their unique historical mission of evangilism and apologetics. Of course, the Church has many objectives which it furthers through a variety of institutions some of which are given narrower missions. The Jesuits were once just such an institution.

Let me offer an analogy. Imagine that the military got bored with defending the country and switched to running parks. Critics would ask, who will defend the country? They would criticize the military, why aren’t you doing your job? But the military apologists would answer, look at all the beautiful parks we are running. How dare you question us!

No, I am not impressed with the new “Jesuit Way” and I have no confidence in Pope Francis application of it to the problem we are discussing. Pope Francis is pope, he can do what he wants. But he is not God. He cannot command the outcome he desires. He is humbled by reality just the same as the rest of us.

But you agree that this would be a very indicative question to answer, right? If you were proven wrong and the number of people who agreed were insignificant you would conced my point about Pope Francis and the “Jesuit Way”, right?

Taking the Eucharist is not the same as attending mass. But even so I doubt you would get a significant number of people saying that the don’t attend mass because they must repent before taking the Eucharist.

(Priests don’t generally have a litmus test before offering the Eucharist. The Church has rules but rules on taking the Eucharist are as easily broken as the rules that give rise to barring the Eucharist.)

Yes, the Church is telling people that they are sinners and in extreme cases that they “must repent before taking the Eucharist.” All that is required is something like, “Father forgive me, yesterday I raped and murdered 100 children.” This same person can go and rape and murder another 100 children tomorrow and repent again and take the Eucharist. Tyrany! Tyrany!

So who is leaving the Church? Those who are unrepentent. And not because they are unwelcome. Rather because they are demanding that the Church stop calling them sinners and asking them to repent before taking the Eucharist. Because they are demanding the Church bend to their rules. Are they leaving because they are having more fun with their own rules? Certainly. But also because they believe there are no rules or because they have subscribed to a competing moral system.

And the Jesuit answer is…stop telling people that they are sinners.

No, I am not impressed with the “Jesuit way”.

Nor should you be, they are not here to impress you, nor do they care if you are or are not impressed with them. My faith is not about being impressed. People are not leaving the church because of Pope Francis, that was happening before he came along.

I refer back to everything Bro. has said about all the religious and non-religious in the Church. He has great information and great wisdom.

Let me ask you, if The Church goes the way you think it will go, what will you do? Will you stay?

 

[shelby_sun]

Why are some referring t the Pope’s statements as the “Jesuit way”? His statements, approach and attitude are Catholic, Christian and Gospel-based. They are not merely “Jesuit”. Why try and limit his statements to one sect of Catholicism?

That was Bubba’ label. Your are right. Bro. explains it very well in all his post. Pope Francis has been strongly guide by many different types of saint and experience, just as I am sure all the pope have. But as Bro.said he is the first religious priest in a very long time so he will make some very uncomfortable for a while, especially if they have not been around a religious order. He is trying to be Christ like, not “Vatican like”.

 

[TMC]

That was Shelby’s explanation but is seems plausible to me. Pope Francis is a Jesuit, after all. Should we be surprised that his approach reflects his Jesuit training?

Saying that his training and education influence him (which is true for all of us) is far different from describing his statements and/or his style as the “Jesuit way.” I suspect some are using the term to limit the impact of what he is saying, suggesting that his statements are somehow limited to a small audience, or colored by a limited background.

Pick the person you know best and explain his thinking to us.

As I said, they feel rejected by the Church. Their stories are too complicated (and personal) to relate here in detail. In short, some are divorced and remarried women who have left the Catholic Church for other denominations. The believe the Church has rejected them in several ways, including by telling them they are no longer welcome to be full participants in the Church. I know you will say they rejected the Church, or earned the Church’s rejection with their actions, but I am talking about their perceptions not yours. I know at least four women in this situation.

A few are women that believe the Church has rejected them by being demeaning and disrespectful toward women generally. Again, I know you will disagree with their perception, but their perception is real to them and a cause for them to leave.

And you know what happens when women leave the Church - they take their men with them. Husbands, sons, and sometimes even brothers and fathers.

Come to think of it, most of the fallen away men I know have not left because they feel rejected, but either because they disagree with the Church’s teaching in some important way, or because they are following their women.

I also know a few gay people who feel the Church holds them to a much harsher standard, and deals with them much more harshly, then the Church does their heterosexual peers. Again - their perception and their reason for leaving, whether you agree with them or not.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

That was Bubba’ label. Your are right. Bro. explains it very well in all his post. Pope Francis has been strongly guide by many different types of saint and experience, just as I am sure all the pope have. But as Bro.said he is the first religious priest in a very long time so he will make some very uncomfortable for a while, especially if they have not been around a religious order. He is trying to be Christ like, not “Vatican like”.

Saying that his training and education influence him (which is true for all of us) is far different from describing his statements and/or his style as the “Jesuit way.” I suspect some are using the term to limit the impact of what he is saying, suggesting that his statements are somehow limited to a small audience, or colored by a limited background.

Luckily for us the internet never forgets…

I was raised with a loving, merciful God who loved all His children whether they accepted that love or not, a Jesuit way.

Enough said on that, I think.