Pope Francis' Daily Homilies

[JReducation]

Whether religious or not, popes have the responsibility of saying things that are not confusing in matters of faith and morals (as do all of our leaders). This homily is confusing to many as evidenced by the numerous posts we have seen here on CAF and on other websites.

Did he not think that by saying “Atheists are redeemed, not just Catholics” that a plethora of people (some innocently and some not so innocently) would translate that as “Atheists are saved, not just Catholics”? Or better yet, that they are saved by their good works?

This man is intelligent and he knows the Faith, so I just don’t get why he would leave those comments out there like that.

Because that’s not the way that Ignatian pedagogy works. The subject was good works, not the difference between redemption and salvation. That’s another subject for another talk. In the Ignatian method, you don’t blend subjects. That’s why I said that each sermon must be thought of as a chapter of a larger book. If one goes to another chapter, one will find a sermon on salvation.

It has nothing to do with being intelligent. It has to do with being a Jesuit and he’s not going to be anything other, no matter how much we would like it to be so. Each time we’ve had a religious as pope, this has always been the challenge. The Church has had to accommodate. We will too. We have to give ourselves time. We’re trying too hard and too fast to get a grip on this pope’s approach without understanding his formation and his commitment to the two schools to which his is committed. He is committed to the Franciscan school by choice and special devotion and to the Jesuit school by vows. The former is one that he can drop, but the latter has been his way of living for the past 40 years or so. We cannot undo that. He’s going to speak like a Jesuit and we need to go slowly.

It’s important not to look to the media, but to look at his collection of sermons and other works to find the answers to these kinds of questions. Most important, we must apply what he says to our own salvation, before we get too concerned about how everyone else is going to spin this. Hence the first question in the Ignatian exercises. “What is God telling me about my salvation?” Notice that the first question is about ME and MY salvation. The rest of the world comes later. If listen to a Jesuit pope and I remember that this is what the Ignatian system calls for, I try to understand the statement in that context without bringing in other questions. The other questions will only distract me and I won’t get the full benefit of his sermon.

 

[Limosa]

Thank you and bless you, Brother JR. The good you do here and elsewhere is manifest.

Pace e bene – Peace, and all Good.

 

[McCall1981]

Because that’s not the way that Ignatian pedagogy works. The subject was good works, not the difference between redemption and salvation. That’s another subject for another talk. In the Ignatian method, you don’t blend subjects. That’s why I said that each sermon must be thought of as a chapter of a larger book. If one goes to another chapter, one will find a sermon on salvation.

It has nothing to do with being intelligent. It has to do with being a Jesuit and he’s not going to be anything other, no matter how much we would like it to be so. Each time we’ve had a religious as pope, this has always been the challenge. The Church has had to accommodate. We will too. We have to give ourselves time. We’re trying too hard and too fast to get a grip on this pope’s approach without understanding his formation and his commitment to the two schools to which his is committed. He is committed to the Franciscan school by choice and special devotion and to the Jesuit school by vows. The former is one that he can drop, but the latter has been his way of living for the past 40 years or so. We cannot undo that. He’s going to speak like a Jesuit and we need to go slowly.

It’s important not to look to the media, but to look at his collection of sermons and other works to find the answers to these kinds of questions. Most important, we must apply what he says to our own salvation, before we get too concerned about how everyone else is going to spin this. Hence the first question in the Ignatian exercises. “What is God telling me about my salvation?” Notice that the first question is about ME and MY salvation. The rest of the world comes later. If listen to a Jesuit pope and I remember that this is what the Ignatian system calls for, I try to understand the statement in that context without bringing in other questions. The other questions will only distract me and I won’t get the full benefit of his sermon.

I know you’re saying we need to look to ourselves first, but please help me understand about those other people.

What about all the people out there (atheists or Catholics) who now think that atheists are saved?

(And thanks for discussing this, I’m sure it’s not easy to do at the moment)

 

[Lucky7]

Because that’s not the way that Ignatian pedagogy works. The subject was good works, not the difference between redemption and salvation. That’s another subject for another talk. In the Ignatian method, you don’t blend subjects. That’s why I said that each sermon must be thought of as a chapter of a larger book. If one goes to another chapter, one will find a sermon on salvation.

I get this. I do. However, he could have focused on the main topic and still clarified as to not confuse. All it would have taken was “Although not saved, atheists are redeemed.” or something to that effect. He wouldn’t have had to get into the difference between redemption and salvation right then and there. But it definitely would have sent a clear message that atheists are not on the same footing as Catholics wrt salvation. This homily made it seem that they are…absolutely no doubt in my mind about that. It makes me wonder whether he wanted it to come off that way.

 

[McCall1981]

Can you provide a link to one of the other threads in question or to blog article, thanks?

Now there’s another thread in this forum

 

[Lucky7]

Now there’s another thread in this forum

And someone (yet another person) specifically thought he was talking about salvation for all.

 

[McCall1981]

And someone (yet another person) specifically thought he was talking about salvation for all.

Yes,and the problem is most people don’t have a message board/Br. JR/Priest etc they can go to, to ask about this.

 

[McCall1981]

Pope Francis leads the Italian Bishops in Profession of Faith:

en.radiovaticana.va/m_articolo.asp?c=695043

"As it was for Peter, the insistent and heartfelt question of Jesus can leave us saddened and may leave us more aware of the weakness of our freedom, beset as it is by a thousand internal and external constraints, which often cause confusion, frustration, even disbelief.

These are certainly not the feelings and attitudes that the Lord intends to arouse; rather, the Enemy, the Devil, takes advantage of them to isolate us in bitterness, in complaints, and in discouragement.

Jesus, the Good Shepherd, does not humiliate us or abandon us to remorse: in Him, the tenderness of the Father speaks, He who comforts and raises up; He who makes us pass from the disintegration of shame – because shame surely causes us to disintegrate – to the fabric of trust; who restores courage, recommits responsibility, and consigns us to the mission."

…

"Mother of the silence that preserves the mystery of God, deliver us from the idolatry of the present, to which those who forget are condemned. Purify the eyes of pastors with the balm of memory:
that we might return to the freshness of the beginning, for a praying and penitent Church.

Mother of the beauty that blossoms from fidelity to daily work, remove us from the torpor of laziness, of pettiness, and defeatism. Cloak Pastors with that compassion that unifies and integrates: that we might discover the joy of a humble and fraternal servant Church.

Mother of the tenderness which enfolds in patience and mercy, help us burn away the sadness, impatience, and rigidity of those who have not known what it means to belong.
Intercede with your Son that our hands, our feet and our hearts may be swift: that we may build the Church with the truth in charity.

Mother, we will be the People of God, on pilgrimage towards the Kingdom."

 

[AndyP2010]

Homily 5/24/13

Reading Sirach 6 : 5-17
Gospel Mark 10:1-12

**“There are many ways to win, but the grace that we request today is the grace of victory with love, through love. And this is not easy. When we have external enemies that make us suffer so much: it is not easy, to win with love. There is the desire to take revenge, to turn another against him … Love: the meekness that Jesus taught us. And that is the victory! The Apostle John tells us in the first Reading: ‘This is our victory, our faith.’ Our faith is precisely this: believing in Jesus who taught us love and taught us to love everyone. And the proof that we are in love is when we pray for our enemies.”
**
To pray for enemies, for those who make us suffer, the Pope continued, “is not easy.” But we are “defeated Christians” if we do not forgive enemies, and if we do not pray for them. And “we find so many sad, discouraged Christians,” he exclaimed, because “they did not have this grace of enduring with patience and overcoming with love”:

“Therefore, we ask Our Lady to give us the grace to endure with patience and overcome with love. How many people – so many old men and women - have taken this path! And it is beautiful to see them: they have that beautiful countenance, that serene happiness. They do not say much, but have a patient heart, a heart filled with love. They know what forgiveness of enemies is, they know what it is to pray for enemies. So many Christians are like that!”

 

[sw85]

I don’t really see what the problem with the Pope’s words are. They are theologically sound in themselves and are not even innovative. They are simply ancient Catholic principles applied to the particular question of how to interface with atheists.

Part of the confusion, I think, is over “redemption” and “salvation.” We are all redeemed, and have been since Calvary. The sin of Adam created a debt of justice which man could not, by his own merits, pay; only the death of Christ on the cross could pay (that is, literally, redeem) that debt. The debt being paid, we are all redeemed. But “redeemed” doesn’t mean “saved.” To be saved you have to appropriate that redemption, through faith in Jesus, availing yourself of the sacraments, etc.

It is not really the Pope’s job to anticipate every possible misunderstanding, objection, etc., and to deal with them in advance. Since falsehood is just some sort of deformation of truth, there are a potentially infinite number of ways to misunderstand something. He is not obligated to refrain from speaking just because atheists will misunderstand what he says. They do that almost as a matter of course, after all!

Thank you very much. Please continue. I do feel the effects of your prayers, if not in my body, in my soul. I’m doing a great deal of soul searching: sorting out what I have done and what I have failed to do. I’m realizing more and more that my life has not contributed much to this world. I hope that the small drop that I may contribute will be the best that I can give. Only through prayer can we appreciate what we are, where we’ve been and what we have yet to do for God and the Church. If you were not praying for me, I would probably not be having such grace-filled moments these past few days.

I’m going to rest for now. I’ll try to peak in tomorrow.

Please don’t go to Hell, brother. If even you can’t be saved, there’s no hope for the rest of us!

 

[McCall1981]

**I don’t really see what the problem with the Pope’s words are. They are theologically sound in themselves and are not even innovative. They are simply ancient Catholic principles applied to the particular question of how to interface with atheists.

Part of the confusion, I think, is over “redemption” and “salvation.” We are all redeemed, and have been since Calvary. The sin of Adam created a debt of justice which man could not, by his own merits, pay; only the death of Christ on the cross could pay (that is, literally, redeem**) that debt. The debt being paid, we are all redeemed. But “redeemed” doesn’t mean “saved.” To be saved you have to appropriate that redemption, through faith in Jesus, availing yourself of the sacraments, etc.

It is not really the Pope’s job to anticipate every possible misunderstanding, objection, etc., and to deal with them in advance. Since falsehood is just some sort of deformation of truth, there are a potentially infinite number of ways to misunderstand something. He is not obligated to refrain from speaking just because atheists will misunderstand what he says. They do that almost as a matter of course, after all!

Totally agree with the bold (and what you said about Br. JR for that matter )

But it seems to me (and I could be wrong) that the confusion that arrose over this homily was easy to see coming, and thus could easily have been avoided by clarifying a little.

I think you’re right that it’s not the Pope’s job to anticipate every possible misunderstanding, obviously that would be prohibitive and probably impossible. But on the other hand, if a statement is obviously going to cause confusion, then it should be clarified. I guess the question is, should it have been obvious that this homily would cause confusion/ be manipulated?

 

[sw85]

But it seems to me (and I could be wrong) that the confusion that arrose over this homily was easy to see coming, and thus could easily have been avoided by clarifying a little.

I think you’re right that it’s not the Pope’s job to anticipate every possible misunderstanding, obviously that would be prohibitive and probably impossible. But on the other hand, if a statement is obviously going to cause confusion, then it should be clarified. I guess the question is, should it have been obvious that this homily would cause confusion/ be manipulated?

But I don’t think it’s obvious that it would cause confusion and a lot of what I’m seeing isn’t confusion anyway. On the part of the HuffPo types, it certainly isn’t. They don’t know what “redeemed” means because they don’t know theology. They don’t care what “redeemed” means because they’re typically atheists. They’re not interested in his theology or in the precise use of words, they’re just grasping wildly for blunt objects to use against those who are trying to warn them away from the sinfulness of their lifestyles. “See, I don’t need your Jesus! Even the Pope said so!” That’s not confusion, that’s dishonesty and sophistry, which isn’t the Pope’s problem. At any rate, he wasn’t speaking to atheists but to Catholics.

On the part of Catholics, well, there is no reason for them to be confused or scandalized, since what the Pope said is neither theologically unsound nor particularly difficult to understand. “Redeemed” has a precise meaning, which is different from “saved.” If you don’t know the difference (i.e., because your religious education was subpar), you have no shortage of resources at your disposal to learn the difference: the Catechism, the New Catholic Encyclopedia, etc. etc. By all accounts Catholics have more advantages today than ever before. So what is the reason for Catholics to be confused or scandalized? Intellectual laziness? A schismatic disposition? I don’t know, but these, too, aren’t the Pope’s problems.

 

[McCall1981]

But I don’t think it’s obvious that it would cause confusion and a lot of what I’m seeing isn’t confusion anyway. On the part of the HuffPo types, it certainly isn’t. They don’t know what “redeemed” means because they don’t know theology. They don’t care what “redeemed” means because they’re typically atheists. They’re not interested in his theology or in the precise use of words, they’re just grasping wildly for blunt objects to use against those who are trying to warn them away from the sinfulness of their lifestyles. “See, I don’t need your Jesus! Even the Pope said so!” That’s not confusion, that’s dishonesty and sophistry, which isn’t the Pope’s problem. At any rate, he wasn’t speaking to atheists but to Catholics.

On the part of Catholics, well, there is no reason for them to be confused or scandalized, since what the Pope said is neither theologically unsound nor particularly difficult to understand. “Redeemed” has a precise meaning, which is different from “saved.” If you don’t know the difference (i.e., because your religious education was subpar), you have no shortage of resources at your disposal to learn the difference: the Catechism, the New Catholic Encyclopedia, etc. etc. By all accounts Catholics have more advantages today than ever before. So what is the reason for Catholics to be confused or scandalized? Intellectual laziness? A schismatic disposition? I don’t know, but these, too, aren’t the Pope’s problems.

Well, I use the word confusion to be charitable, but yes, the HuffPo types are not confused, but are deliberately manipulating this homily.

And I agree, that if a Catholic knows their theology terms or has had decent cathechesis they would know there is no issue here. The problem is that many Catholics, and most people, have very little knowledge on these things, and will very easily fall into misunderstandings, especially when things like HuffPo are around. Is that the Pope’s fault? No. But it is his reponsibility to know that and deal with the world as it is.

I think Pope Francis, and any Church authority, needs to be aware of, and sensitive to, the way their words are going to be understood and (mis)construed. It’s not fair or even very reasonable, but it’s reality, and it needs to be taken into account.

 

[Thomas_Casey]

MODERATOR NOTICE

Please reread this sticky, especially rule # 2 and comply.

If you have something helpful to say to the Holy Father, you can write him directly. Do not use our forum to tell the world what you think the Holy Father should and should not say or do. The purpose of the forum is to ask and answer questions about those things that would normally fit under Catholic traditions and customs and for which there is no other appropriate forum.

The purpose of this thread is to reflect on the theme of the Holy Father’s homilies, not to over analyze every word. One can over analyze something to the point that one is setting a very bad example for a non-Catholic looking in. As I always say, "It begs the question. ‘Why should I join your Church, if you yourself don’t trust your leadership?’ "

That’s certainly a message that Catholics do not want to send.

 

[AndyP2010]

Homily 5/25/13
Reading Sirach 17:1 - 15
Gospel Mark 10 : 13 - 16

The day’s Gospel tells us that Jesus rebukes the disciples who seek to remove children that people bring to the Lord to bless. "Jesus embraces them, kisses them, touches them, all of them. It tires Jesus and his disciples "want it to stop”. Jesus is indignant: “Jesus got angry, sometimes.” And he says: “Let them come to me, do not hinder them. For the Kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” “The faith of the People of God – observes the Pope - is a simple faith, a faith that is perhaps without much theology, but it has an inward theology that is not wrong, because the Spirit is behind it.” The Pope mentions Vatican I and Vatican II, where it is said that “the holy people of God … cannot err in matters of belief” (Lumen Gentium). And to explain this theological formulation he adds: "If you want to know who Mary is go to the theologian and he will tell you exactly who Mary is. But if you want to know how to love Mary go to the People of God who teach it better. " The people of God - continued the Pope - "are always asking for something closer to Jesus, they are sometimes a bit 'insistent in this. But it is the insistence of those who believe ":

"I remember once, coming out of the city of Salta, on the patronal feast, there was a humble lady who asked for a priest’s blessing. The priest said, ‘All right, but you were at the Mass’ and explained the whole theology of blessing in the church. You did well: ‘Ah, thank you father, yes father,’ said the woman. When the priest had gone, the woman turned to another priest: ‘Give me your blessing!’. All these words did not register with her, because she had another necessity: the need to be touched by the Lord. That is the faith that we always look for , this is the faith that brings the Holy Spirit. We must facilitate it, make it grow, help it grow. "

"Think about a single mother who goes to church, in the parish and to the secretary she says: ‘I want my child baptized’. And then this Christian, this Christian says: ‘No, you cannot because you’re not married!’. But look, this girl who had the courage to carry her pregnancy and not to return her son to the sender, what is it? A closed door! This is not zeal! It is far from the Lord! It does not open doors! And so when we are on this street, have this attitude, we do not do good to people, the people, the People of God, but Jesus instituted the seven sacraments with this attitude and we are establishing the eighth: the sacrament of pastoral customs! ".

“Jesus is indignant when he sees these things” - said the Pope - because those who suffer are “his faithful people, the people that he loves so much”

A note on Francis’ homilies. There are no official transcripts of these daily homilies. There is an article about how there is no official process for providing transcripts, like those of the Wednesday audience and homilies for Sunday masses and since there is no process then these summaries like the one above by vatican radio is as good as it gets.
Also if you are concerned that Francis’ statements could lead to confusion you might want to read the following post. In which the following statement is made.

“Mission” he notes, “is key to ministry”. “A Church that does not go out of itself, sooner or later, sickens from the stale air of closed rooms”. Pope Francis went on to concede that at times, like anyone else, in going out the Church risks running into accidents. But he added “I prefer a thousand times over a Church of accidents than a sick Church”.

I would suggest that people read the readings from these masses, it helps a lot.

 

[AndyP2010]

Homily 5/27/13
Reading Sirach 17:20-24
Gospel Mark 10:17-27

“No, no, not more than one child, because otherwise we will not be able to go on holiday, we will not be able to go out, we will not be able to buy a house. It’s all very well to follow the Lord, but only up to a certain point. This is what economic wellbeing does to us: we all know what wellbeing is, but it deprives us of courage, of the courage we need to get close to Jesus. This is the first richness of the culture of today, the culture of economic wellbeing”.

There is also, he added, “another richness in our culture”, another richness that prevents us from getting close to Jesus: it’s our fascination for the temporary”. We, he observed, are “in love with the provisional”. We don’t like Jesus’s “definitive proposals”. Instead we like what is temporary because “we are afraid of God’s time” which is definitive.

“He is the Lord of time; we are the masters of the moment. Why? Because we are in command of the moment: I will follow the Lord up to this point, and then I will see… I heard of a man who wanted to become a priest - but only for ten years, not any longer…” Attraction for the provisional: this is a richness. We want to become masters of time, we live for the moment. These two riches are the ones that, in this moment, prevent us from going forward. I think of so many men and women who have left their land to work throughout their lives as missionaries: that is definitive!”.

And, he said, I also think of so many men and women who “have left their homes to commit to a lifelong marriage”, that is “to follow Jesus closely! It’s the definitive”. The temporary, Pope Francis stressed, “is not following Jesus”, it’s “our territory”.

 

[clem456]

Excerpt:

Pope Francis prayer for the Italian bishops.
en.radiovaticana.va/m_articolo.asp?c=695043

The bolded is especially challenging for me. Tells me that my present concerns do not always have to be expressed, but maybe reflected upon first in that silence he refers to.
Excerpted:

…I sincerely thank each of you for your service, for your love for the Church and the Mother, and here, I place you, and I place myself, too, under the mantle of Mary, Our Mother.

Mother of the silence that preserves the mystery of God, deliver us from the idolatry of the present, to which those who forget are condemned. Purify the eyes of pastors with the balm of memory:
that we might return to the freshness of the beginning, for a praying and penitent Church.

Mother of the beauty that blossoms from fidelity to daily work, remove us from the torpor of laziness, of pettiness, and defeatism. Cloak Pastors with that compassion that unifies and integrates: that we might discover the joy of a humble and fraternal servant Church.

Mother of the tenderness which enfolds in patience and mercy, help us burn away the sadness, impatience, and rigidity of those who have not known what it means to belong.
Intercede with your Son that our hands, our feet and our hearts may be swift: that we may build the Church with the truth in charity.

Mother, we will be the People of God, on pilgrimage towards the Kingdom.
Amen.

 

[Marie5890]

I do understand that, at the surface level, Pope Francis’ homilies give mixed messages and confuses people. And I understand the need for context.

And what makes it even more of a challenge is this. Most people are not going to go and study Ignatiousian or the Jesuit order, or even Franciscan (sp?) spirituality in order to try and understand him, Catholic or otherwise

Most people either 1) dont have that deep of an interest and 2) the time.

Im leaning towards the style of Pope Francis is going to cause confusion, though I expect that certainly is not his intent.

Not sure how helpful, in the long term, his style will be?

 

[AndyP2010]

Homily 5/28/13
Reading Sirach 35 : 1 - 12
Gospel Mark 10 : 28 - 31

"Following** Jesus, yes, but up to a certain point: following Jesus because of culture: I am a Christian, I have this culture … But without the necessity of true discipleship of Jesus, the necessity to travel this His road. If you follow Jesus as a cultural proposal, then you are using this road to get higher up, to have more power. And the history of the Church is full of this, starting with some emperors and then many rulers and many people, no? And even some - I will not say a lot, but some - priests, bishops, no? Some say that there are many … but they are those who think that following Jesus is a career. "**

"Think of Mother Teresa: what does the spirit of the world say of Mother Teresa? ‘Ah, Blessed Teresa is a beautiful woman, she did a lot of good things for others …’. The spirit of the world never says that the Blessed Teresa spent, every day, many hours, in adoration … Never! It reduces Christian activity to doing social good. As if Christian life was a gloss, a veneer of Christianity. The proclamation of Jesus is not a veneer: the proclamation of Jesus goes straight to the bones, heart, goes deep within and change us. And the spirit of the world does not tolerate it, will not tolerate it, and therefore, there is persecution. "

Pope Francis said those who leave their home, their family to follow Jesus, receive a hundred times as much “already now in this age.” A hundred times together with persecution. And this should not be forgotten:

**
“Following Jesus is just that: going with Him out of love, behind Him: on the same journey, the same path. And the spirit of the world will not tolerate this and what will make us suffer, but suffering as Jesus did. Let us ask for this grace: to follow Jesus in the way that He has revealed to us and that He has taught us. This is beautiful, because he never leaves us alone. Never! He is always with us. So be it”.**

Follow the link and read the whole summary. Oh, and personally I don’t know how he can be any more clear, I like his style just fine thank you.

 

[clem456]

I do understand that, at the surface level, Pope Francis’ homilies give mixed messages and confuses people. And I understand the need for context.

And what makes it even more of a challenge is this. Most people are not going to go and study Ignatiousian or the Jesuit order, or even Franciscan (sp?) spirituality in order to try and understand him, Catholic or otherwise

Most people either 1) dont have that deep of an interest and 2) the time.

Im leaning towards the style of Pope Francis is going to cause confusion, though I expect that certainly is not his intent.

Not sure how helpful, in the long term, his style will be?

I have seen nothing of mixed messages or confusion on his part. More accurately, the Pope’s homilies challenge people. Each person is responsible for listening, praying, reflecting, learning, trusting, and accepting his messages for what they are, not what we’d like them to be, or what we understand them to be.