Pope Francis criticises ‘fundamentalist’ Catholics

[graciew]

It is not a case of leavened versus unleavened bread. It’s whether or not the scrapings hoarded together by the POWs—regardless of whether the bread is leavened or not—could constitute valid matter. Say the priest attempts to celebrate such a Mass using bread and water. The water of course can’t be confected, and thus no Mass can be celebrated. But he can still confect the species of the bread. Say he does so, which is a grave abuse on its own, even if there is no ill will in his intend.

Say that bread has been laying under his pillow, with dirt having been mixed in with the crumbs. Say it’s deteriorated to literal grimy little crumbs held in the palm of his hand. And a storm blew in the night before and made the particles moist and damp.

I would have a hard time believing that the matter there can any longer be considered bread. We believe that when the accidents of the Most Holy Eucharist disappear, through digestion for instance, that the Real Presence ceases to be. If the contents in the priest’s hand has less resemblance to what 15 minutes in our digestive system does to the Most Holy Eurcharist, then I don’t think that he can validly confect the Eucharist in this scenario.

That " matter" that could not longer be considered bread ,as you say , was this poor priest’s food…
What are we talking about ?

 

[pnewton]

I And yet after I told this story in this forum, I was informed that his masses did not include all the requisite components and therefore were not valid.

Well, it looks like it happened again!

I thank you for an excellent story, as well as a demonstration of the Holy Father’s point. The idea of a “grave abuse” as a result of the devotion of this holy priest is ludicrous. Canon Law, the General Instructions, all were made for Man. Man was not created for Canon Law or the GIRM.

 

[edwest2]

I’ve met “fundamentalist” Catholics who also believe:

-Galileo was wrong ("flat-earthers’).
-Home-schooling is the only way to educate their children
-Having less than 4 children is “selfish”

Why should this bother you? I mean that in the sense of “why complain about it if a solution isn’t offered?”

Without solutions, only division is created. Solutions are better.

Ed

 

[LongingSoul]

That " matter" that could not longer be considered bread ,as you say , was this poor priest’s food…
What are we talking about ?

My sense exactly, gracie. Pope Francis made the comment to the Lutheran woman’s question last week regarding Communion as viaticum ie. food for the final journey. To ignore that the Eucharist was instituted in the context of the final meal of Christ is to rob everyone of the fullness of Eucharist.

Aquinas in speaking of quantities says…

Much is opposed to little, and great to small. But there is no quantity, however small, of the bread and wine which cannot be consecrated. Therefore, neither is there any quantity, however great, which cannot be consecrated.newadvent.org/summa/4074.htm#article2

How many specks of host are washed down the bathroom sink when someone cleans their teeth or flosses after Mass? How many minuscule specs of the Sacred Body of Christ remain in the contours of the hand of the Communicant or the Priest to be deposited on the seat back in front as the Communicant returns to their seat… or is wiped on the clothes or through the hair of an unsuspecting Communicant who isn’t careful enough? What of those who experience unexpected waste evacuations before the host is properly dissolved? Why are there not sacred decontamination rooms beside the altar to prevent such gravely sacrilegious happenstances?

As pnewton wisely reflects "Canon Law, the General Instructions, all were made for Man. Man was not created for Canon Law or the GIRM."

 

[fred_conty]

Originaly Posted by Thomas White
It seems the question cannot even be framed. Belief is the assumption or trust that something is true.

But in the case of Catholic Dogma, it is infallable truth, unalterable and eternal.

An “absolute truth” is a universal that is an unalterable and permanent fact. It is not belief.

The church says that we can know there is a God by our reason alone.
It also says that we know there is a God by our faith.
These two mesh … reason and faith on the same truth.

Pope Francis has said fundamentalism is the belief that one is in possession of the “absolute truth”, and belief is by definition not “absolute truth”.

In my opinion, this is not what he is getting at. I believe what he is saying is that we use it as a weapon to beat up on others. That is, I know that Christ used his apostles to guide and direct his church. And I go to the bible and promptly beat the others over the head with my knowledge.
I still have absolute truth, but my use of it is hurting others, not done in a welcoming and warm way. I believe he said “hurt”.

I don’t think he really got into the finery of “absolute” vs “faith”.

The belief that human beings are made in the image and likeness of God cannot be known as an “absolute truth” as the result of belief, as the term is commonly understood. It is a belief.

Again I did not see this as the Pope’s point of discussion.
I believe it was more in the line of respecting others and abiding with what Jesus said about loving others. Beating them up with absolute truths may sometimes win an argument, but will tend to lose the person.

It certainly did not have anything to do with bending our infallible faith or twisting it around for others. And I’m not accusing you of this, but just explaining what some seem to fear.

Just one last note about knowing better, and digging deeper, into the mysteries of God. It is not a question of mere curiosity that we do this. Rather it is a real help in our spiritual lives to understand our relationship with God, and He to us. The doctrine of the Trinity, and the manhood of Christ, help immensely in our association and intimate connection with God. For instance, to know there 3 persons doesn’t really have an impact, but to know that the Father has not only his beloved Son, but now has adopted us as his true sons/daughters, and that we now belong to his household as his son/daughters, we can say with emotion “Our Father…” He is truely our Father and we can readily and easily now talk to him as Our Father and not a remote isolated being. I could go on with this, but this is enough for the point.

The more I know, the more I want to know, … everything I can know. Because it means a better and higher imtimacy with our loving and wonderful Father.

I think what your spiritual stream of thought is comming from the eastern tradition of remaining in mystery. While the western tradition is knowledge leading to knowing God deeper.

 

[Thomas_White]

But in the case of Catholic Dogma, it is infallable truth, unalterable and eternal.

I would suggest reading the dogmatic constitution on divine revelation, Dei Verbum. It would hopefully assist you in attaining an understanding of this truth.

 

[clem456]

The notion that belief is separated from knowledge of truth is simply not Christian.
Faith and reason are compatible and intertwined.

What?
Look at the Incarnation.
God condescends. He reveals himself.

Read Benedict’s Regensburg address. Some of the thought presented on this thread is more in line with Islam than Christianity. (No offense to Islam)

Read Fides et Ratio.

 

[clem456]

In terms of the debates concerning the issue of “absolute truth”, the Pope is not denying “absolute truth”. He is denying the ability of any individual to have the capacity to ever fully “grasp” it:

books.google.co.uk/books?id=anb9k3l4vNYC&pg=PA31&dq=absolute+truth+pope&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiNgfvJ7NHJAhXCuhQKHc8cCp8Q6AEIJTAB#v=onepage&q=absolute%20truth%20pope&f=false

In it’s essence, truth is a person. Jesus Christ. Christ is not a piece of intellectual property.
So absolute truth cannot be possessed like a car, as if carrying a bible around gives one possession of absolute truth.

This does not excuse us from learning and proclaiming the truth, and acknowledging absolutes, as God has revealed to us. (and I am sure this not what you meant)
Otherwise, why would he reveal himself?
Does God give us absolutes to be known, or doesn’t he? (thou shall not kill? feed the hungry, clothe the naked?)
If we cannot acknowledge, and believe, and proclaim, absolutes revealed by God, no stop sign anywhere has any meaning, and we all know the tragic results. In our society and many others, the turning from absolutes is frequently an excuse from the hard work of love.

 

[Thomas_White]

In it’s essence, truth is a person. Jesus Christ. Christ is not a piece of intellectual property.
So absolute truth cannot be possessed like a car, as if carrying a bible around gives one possession of absolute truth.

This does not excuse us from learning and proclaiming the truth, and acknowledging absolutes, as God has revealed to us. (and I am sure this not what you meant)
Otherwise, why would he reveal himself?

Does God give us absolutes to be known, or doesn’t he? (thou shall not kill?

Were the commandment ‘Thou shall not kill’ an “absolute truth”, there could be no instance where the killing of anything was justified.

 

[friardchips]

In it’s essence, truth is a person. Jesus Christ. Christ is not a piece of intellectual property.
So absolute truth cannot be possessed like a car, as if carrying a bible around gives one possession of absolute truth.

This does not excuse us from learning and proclaiming the truth, and acknowledging absolutes, as God has revealed to us. (and I am sure this not what you meant)
Otherwise, why would he reveal himself?
Does God give us absolutes to be known, or doesn’t he? (thou shall not kill? feed the hungry, clothe the naked?)
If we cannot acknowledge, and believe, and proclaim, absolutes revealed by God, no stop sign anywhere has any meaning, and we all know the tragic results. In our society and many others, the turning from absolutes is frequently an excuse from the hard work of love.

Very good explanation. First paragraph in particular.

 

[philipl]

It is typically based on personal/heretical understanding of scripture, doctrine, dogma, etc.

Fundamentalism is also typically a kind of idolatry where the individual or group places too much focus on one part of the religion and misconstrues or ignores the rest of the teachings.

I know many charismatic Catholic those two quotes would apply to their understanding of Catholicisms. Now I did remove part of your quote because you qualify.

Fundamentalism leads to Islamic Terrorists, Westboro Baptist Church, etc.

Fundamentalism often condones or commits violence and/or hateful language/acts against non-believers.

A few examples of potential Catholic Fundamentalists would be:
– Catholics who hate all Protestant and/or Orthodox Christians
– Catholics who claim Vatican II is not a valid council
– Catholics who claim all non-Catholics are automatically going to Hell
– Catholics who claim all baptised Catholics are automatically going to Heaven
– Catholics who refuse to socially interact or allow their children to interact with non-Catholics
– Catholics who believe Jews should be eliminated
– Catholics who believe the Holocaust is a lie.

Fundamentalism also leads some to take weird or nonsensical positions as well. Like people who refuse legitimate medical treatments out of religious objections to all medicine.

In regards to the Catholic Church, any one who is truly faithful to the Church is NOT a “fundamentalist”

I have never met any catholic that held even one of those beliefs, much less all of them. What do you mean eliminated?

 

[Thomas_White]

But in the case of Catholic Dogma, it is infallable truth, unalterable and eternal.

"8. And so the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a special way by an unending succession of preachers until the end of time…

“This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens throught the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see Luke 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fullfillment in her.” –Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, ‘Dei Verbum’, Solemnly Promulgated by His Holiness Pope Paul VI on November 18, 1965 (emphasis added)

A perspective contrary to this dogmatic teaching where one believes they are in possession of the “absolute truth” is fundamentalism. It is disconcerting to see views that are not understood presented in a misleading way as though they were church teaching.

I think what your spiritual stream of thought is comming from the eastern tradition of remaining in mystery. While the western tradition is knowledge leading to knowing God deeper.

I have no idea what you are trying to say by this ad hominem remark. But suffice it to say that there is a good reason why Catholicism is widely known as the Catholic faith rather than neo-Scholastic philosophy.

 

[Brendan]

The Church IS in possession of such truths. Such as the Trinity consisting of Three Divine Persons in One Godhead.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The Church IS in possession of such truths. Such as the Trinity consisting of Three Divine Persons in One Godhead.

But this is only “revealed” truth, not the complete truth which we will not know in this mortal life.

There is far more to be revealed in the next life.

Jim

 

[Thomas_White]

The Church IS in possession of such truths. Such as the Trinity consisting of Three Divine Persons in One Godhead.

This was explained in my comment #194. It is the belief that one fully understands this continuing revelation that is fundamentalism. CCC 251 provides that the Trinity is an ineffable mystery “infinitely beyond all that we can humanly understand”. This is the Catholic teaching on this question.

I can only point out the error and cannot provide the perspective necessary for understanding this very important teaching.

 

[Brendan]

But this is only “revealed” truth, not the complete truth which we will not know in this mortal life.

There is far more to be revealed in the next life.

Jim

It is BECAUSE it is reveald that we know that statement is an absolute Truth

God the Father is God
God the Son is God
God the Holy Spirit is God
In union they form one Godhead.

Each of those statements is an absolute Truth. God the Father will never cease to be God, God the Son will never cease to be God. God the Holy Spirit will never cease to be God. They will never be partially Divine. Again, all of those statements are absolute Truths.

And we know this BECAUSE they have been revealed.

 

[Brendan]

This was explained in my comment #194. It is the belief that one fully understands this continuing revelation that is fundamentalism. CCC 251 provides that the Trinity is an ineffable mystery “infinitely beyond all that we can humanly understand”. This is the Catholic teaching on this question.

I can only point out the error and cannot provide the perspective necessary for understanding this very important teaching.

Yes, I acknowledge that we will be drawn into further knowledge of the Trinity, And those Truths that we we will know, likewise will have absolute Truth.

Just as the Truths that we already know of the Trinity are absolute Truths.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

It is BECAUSE it is reveald that we know that statement is an absolute Truth

God the Father is God
God the Son is God
God the Holy Spirit is God
In union they form one Godhead.

Each of those statements is an absolute Truth. God the Father will never cease to be God, God the Son will never cease to be God. God the Holy Spirit will never cease to be God. They will never be partially Divine. Again, all of those statements are absolute Truths.

And we know this BECAUSE they have been revealed.

If we do not have the full truth revealed, it can not be the absolute truth as we understand it.

Remember, the Church teaches that the Holy Trinity is a “Mystery.”

234 The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the “hierarchy of the truths of faith”. The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men “and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin”.

Jim

 

[Brendan]

If we do not have the full truth revealed, it can not be the absolute truth as we understand it.

Remember, the Church teaches that the Holy Trinity is a “Mystery.”

Jim

Being a Mystery only means that not all the Truths are knowable, the ones that are absolute.

Do you deny that Holy Spirit is God? is that Truth contingent on another Truth? Is that Truth alterable?

 

[Thomas_White]

Yes, I acknowledge that we will be drawn into further knowledge of the Trinity, And those Truths that we we will know, likewise will have absolute Truth.

Just as the Truths that we already know of the Trinity are absolute Truths.

Perhaps the difficulty is in understanding the meaning of the words “absolute truth”. CCC 251 states that certain terms are used “to signify an ineffable mystery” and that this mystery (which is the Trinity) is “infinitely beyond all we can humanly understand”. Terms like “Father”, “Son” and “person” are used to signify something that is infinitely beyond human understanding, and it is thus an error to give these words a literal meaning.

Simply stated, it is the teaching of CCC 251 that what these words signify is infinitely beyond human understanding. And that means a person does not know the “absolute truth” of this mystery, either in part or in whole.