Pope Francis criticises ‘fundamentalist’ Catholics

[LongingSoul]

Yep. I wonder if those who are sure they know who are the fundamentalists are the fundamentalists? (whatever path they walk - inside or out of the Church - if you catch my drift…)

Cardinal Burke seemed to self identify as a fundamentalist in a strange interview in October with the il foglio newspaper.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Yep. I wonder if those who are sure they know who are the fundamentalists are the fundamentalists? (whatever path they walk - inside or out of the Church - if you catch my drift…)

Well said.

In the world of “fundamentalists”, the otherwise relativistic “loving, caring, and sharing with someone else’s money” fundamentalists are perhaps the most rigid of all.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Cardinal Burke seemed to self identify as a fundamentalist in a strange interview in October with the il foglio newspaper.

One of the reasons I prefer to interpret this remark from the Pope about fundamentalism in Catholicism as being about ecumenism (i.e., how do Catholics treat those who do not share their “absolute truth”) is that it, for a brief time, takes the focus off of our internal squabbles and puts it on an often even uglier sore spot within our ranks which needs attention. Ecumenical outreach was, after all, a big part of Vatican II - and we are not talking “spirit of Vatican II” here. And no one can argue healing the Body of Christ is not good for the Church, be you a “conservative” or “liberal” Catholic. It is the holiday season after all. Let’s bury the hatchet - in shallow ground of course .

 

[Thomas_White]

In a recent talk, Pope Francis spoke of conservatism/fundamentalism, but I don’t believe he meant to equate the two terms. There is a difference, and in its extreme “fundamentalism” becomes a militant ideology (as we seen in parts of the world today).

 

[D0UBTFIRE]

It’s hard to know who he’s talking about. It really is open to interpretation, unfortunately, and so some very devout Catholics might think he’s talking about the SSPX types, while some more liberally minded Catholics will think he’s talking about those who believe/follow all the rules and teachings of the Church. I fall in the latter group, but I do wish he’d clarify.

My favorite definition of Fundamentalism is: “A religion, any religion, that when confronted with a conflict between love, compassion and caring, and conformity to doctrine, will almost invariably choose the latter regardless of the effect it has on it’s followers or on the society in which it is a part.”

To me this is just like the Pharisee’s who would’t help someone on the Sabbath because it constituted “work”.

Or those Catholics who won’t go to their child’s wedding because it’s lacking the proper canonical form.

Or the whole you can’t use contraception even after you’re overwhelmed with the amount of children you and your spouse already have because God forbid marital sexual intimacy be enjoyed by two people who don’t want to have any more children at this time. Rules are rules. No contraception. Marital happiness be damned.

You get the picture. It’s putting rules before people.

 

[LongingSoul]

Well said.

In the world of “fundamentalists”, the otherwise relativistic “loving, caring, and sharing with someone else’s money” fundamentalists are perhaps the most rigid of all.

For a long time, the flaws of liberalism have been held up as the worst sickness of the Church but now it’s prudent to examine the other extreme in the flaws of fundamentalism. I believe we should make a wholesale effort to be clear what fundamentalism refers to in order that we know the enemy we need to fight… especially on a global scale. ‘Relativistic fundamentalist’ is an oxymoron.

 

[Adonia]

Why would he say that? I guess then that he doesn’t like the way his immediate predecessor believed, because if any Catholic was ever a fundamentalist it was and still is Pope Benedict Emeritus. I’m sorry, but this Pope leaves me scratching my head way too often.

 

[kozlosap]

It’s hard to know who he’s talking about. It really is open to interpretation, unfortunately, and so some very devout Catholics might think he’s talking about the SSPX types, while some more liberally minded Catholics will think he’s talking about those who believe/follow all the rules and teachings of the Church. I fall in the latter group, but I do wish he’d clarify.

My favorite definition of Fundamentalism is: “A religion, any religion, that when confronted with a conflict between love, compassion and caring, and conformity to doctrine, will almost invariably choose the latter regardless of the effect it has on it’s followers or on the society in which it is a part.”

To me this is just like the Pharisee’s who would’t help someone on the Sabbath because it constituted “work”.

Or those Catholics who won’t go to their child’s wedding because it’s lacking the proper canonical form.

Or the whole you can’t use contraception even after you’re overwhelmed with the amount of children you and your spouse already have because God forbid marital sexual intimacy be enjoyed by two people who don’t want to have any more children at this time. Rules are rules. No contraception. Marital happiness be damned.

You get the picture. It’s putting rules before people.

EXACTLY!

 

[Ridgerunner]

For a long time, the flaws of liberalism have been held up as the worst sickness of the Church but now it’s prudent to examine the other extreme in the flaws of fundamentalism. I believe we should make a wholesale effort to be clear what fundamentalism refers to in order that we know the enemy we need to fight… especially on a global scale. ‘Relativistic fundamentalist’ is an oxymoron.

Relativism is and can be very much fundamentalistic if one thinks of “fundamentalism” in terms of a rigid and unyielding ideology that demands unwavering adherence from all, and by force if necessary.

My goodness, we’re seeing freedom of religion swept aside by an ideology that confronts the Church and tells it, for example, that it must conform to its relativistic mores or be punished if it doesn’t. Jonathan Edwards would have been slack-jawed with admiration had he seen such militant intolerance.

 

[pianistclare]

EXACTLY!

+1 (re: D0ubtfire’s post)
And for those who say they’ve never met people like this…check out some of the sub forums. There are loads of people who feel this way.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Or the whole you can’t use contraception even after you’re overwhelmed with the amount of children you and your spouse already have because God forbid marital sexual intimacy be enjoyed by two people who don’t want to have any more children at this time. Rules are rules. No contraception. Marital happiness be damned.

You get the picture. It’s putting rules before people.

How about the alternative? How about simply admitting that one is sinning in using artificial contraception, confessing it, at least having some intention of amendment, and going on one’s way?

Seems easier to me than rationalizing it against the clear teaching of the Church. And a lot happier, too.

 

[friardchips]

How about the alternative? How about simply admitting that one is sinning in using artificial contraception, confessing it, at least having some intention of amendment, and going on one’s way?

Seems easier to me than rationalizing it against the clear teaching of the Church. And a lot happier, too.

The Pope was emphasising that we need to concentrate on the bigger underlying issues and not saying that we should go ahead and be free to sin in the meantime!

 

[RACJ]

For a long time, the flaws of liberalism have been held up as the worst sickness of the Church but now it’s prudent to examine the other extreme in the flaws of fundamentalism. I believe we should make a wholesale effort to be clear what fundamentalism refers to in order that we know the enemy we need to fight… especially on a global scale. ‘Relativistic fundamentalist’ is an oxymoron.

Maybe it’s because I’m not a Catholic, but honestly, Pope Francis’ statements usually leave me confused. I rarely had this problem with former Popes.

 

[pianistclare]

The Pope was emphasising that we need to concentrate on the bigger underlying issues and not saying that we should go ahead and be free to sin in the meantime!

Right. There are people who criticize propel for using NFP because they don’t believe they have a serious issue. No one ever ADVOCATEs sin.

 

[friardchips]

Maybe it’s because I’m not a Catholic, but honestly, Pope Francis’ statements usually leave me confused. I rarely had this problem with former Popes.

It is a good thing. It means you are having to discern. There are a lot of lies about and a lot of agendas. He is the perfect Pope for the times because we have to trust and put heart into our research. It teaches us to learn how to put away the journalistic calumny and hear the Holy SPirit speak through him with our faith and faith-filled reason. We have to really listen. Every Pope for each era must challenge us not make us all complacent. No one said that Catholicism is about painting by numbers. Our integrity is needed in order to be wise for there are, as another poster said, wolves on the prowl. If we pray then we will hear. The Lord said that His sheep know His voice.

 

[Prodigal_40s]

As a native Italian speaker, I can assure you that the problem is not in the translation. I think his Holiness often fails to explain and clarify what he says.

I don’t think the Holy Father is good at communicating. A good quality for a Pope should be that he’s a good theologian and communicator. The Pope Emeritus was both

 

[Thomas_White]

For a long time, the flaws of liberalism have been held up as the worst sickness of the Church but now it’s prudent to examine the other extreme in the flaws of fundamentalism. I believe we should make a wholesale effort to be clear what fundamentalism refers to in order that we know the enemy we need to fight… especially on a global scale. ‘Relativistic fundamentalist’ is an oxymoron.

I agree. I believe there is a continuum from ‘conservatism’ to ‘fundamentalism’, and for some this has evolved to a questionable extreme, as we see for example with the rejection of Catholic social teaching, the obsessive focus on a few specific teachings already very well-known to Catholics and the rejection of the moral teachings of the papal encyclical Laudato Si by some conservatives. This perspective is simplistic, leads to a judgmental outlook and what is only worse is when it is either not realized or when it is denied that it is a rejection of Catholic teaching.

The result is a ‘blinkered’ and closed perspective that becomes centered on what is incorrectly believed to be static doctrine. And this really is simplistic. As Pope Francis has said, it is a legalism and clericalism that presents the greatest threat to the church today. These are strong words from the Holy Father, and they should be taken very seriously.

 

[LongingSoul]

It is a good thing. It means you are having to discern. There are a lot of lies about and a lot of agendas. He is the perfect Pope for the times because we have to trust and put heart into our research. It teaches us to learn how to put away the journalistic calumny and hear the Holy SPirit speak through him with our faith and faith-filled reason. We have to really listen. Every Pope for each era must challenge us not make us all complacent. No one said that Catholicism is about painting by numbers. Our integrity is needed in order to be wise for there are, as another poster said, wolves on the prowl. If we pray then we will hear. The Lord said that His sheep know His voice.

I’m definitely on your wavelength. This is a time of making the royal Priesthood of the people in some way manifest through the Church.

1141 The celebrating assembly is the community of the baptized who, "by regeneration and the anointing of the Holy Spirit, are consecrated to be a spiritual house and a holy priesthood, that through all the works of Christian men they may offer spiritual sacrifices."9 This “common priesthood” is that of Christ the sole priest, in which all his members participate:10

Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that full, conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy, and to which the Christian people, “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a redeemed people,” have a right and an obligation by reason of their Baptism.11 - Catechism of the Catholic Church

And Pope Francis being a Jesuit living by the Rule of St Ignatius and being a spiritual director (remember he said he wanted to lead the Curia in the Spiritual Exercises)…is the perfect Pope to lead us in contemplating gospel stories for Truth and Gods will. Spiritual Directors don’t tell people what they have to believe. They refer them to relevant gospel stories and encourage the personal, living relationship between Christ and the directee.

 

[utah_rose]

I think I’ve met a total of two people who were of this type.

The number of Catholics I have met who think sex outside of marriage, contraception, consistently missing mass, and think euthanasia is okay? In the hundreds.

Sort of focusing on the speck in the eyes of the faithful while ignoring the beam.

I’m a cradle Catholic and can’t think of any Catholic I’ve met either that thinks this way. However, for a time before World War 11 and during were a lot of even American Catholics who did believe that non Catholics went to hell. In fact I believe we learned that in parochial school. Also anti Semitism was alive and well too as well as racial intolerance. However I believe in the last 50 years or so, that’s changed. I’m hoping that the Pope isn’t meaning that traditional Catholics are fundamentalists, that is, some of us who occasionally attend a Tridentine Mass, receive Communion on the tongue, and don’t question Church doctrine on marriage, abortion, or Communion for remarried couples.

 

[phil19034]

Why would he say that? I guess then that he doesn’t like the way his immediate predecessor believed, because if any Catholic was ever a fundamentalist it was and still is Pope Benedict Emeritus. I’m sorry, but this Pope leaves me scratching my head way too often.

Pope Benedict is NOT a fundamentalist. He is orthodox.

A fundamentalist is NOT orthodox.

At least not the way the Pope is using the term.