S
saveusfromhell
Guest
thanks Abyssinia, some people may be" personally wearied" by helping others understand but obviously your not:thumbsup:
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
I don’t think that we’re learning from the pope, which is unfortunate. If we observe carefully, he is not concerned about translations and interpretations. He is concerned with the Church and with answering questions succinctly, thoughtfully, respectfully and in a provocative way that leaves the audience thinking.
This is not a naive man. He knows that there is going to be a problem with translations. Today, translations suffer more than they did 100 years ago. One hundred years ago, translations were done by linguists. Today, in order to beat the clock, translations are done by language software. The human element is absent in the translation, allowing for mistranslations. The pope knows this. But he does not let that deter him from preaching.
The Holy Father also knows that very often the reporters to whom he’s speaking are not understanding what he’s saying. They’re not theologians and they’re certainly not Jesuits. He definitely speaks like a Jesuit theologian. But he takes them seriously. He does not dismiss them as some corrupt collection of people with an agenda. We seem to do this whenever the word “journalist” is said. We forget that these men and women are our brothers and sisters, not spawns of Satan. We forget hat they are not always Catholic. Many who are Catholic are not educated in higher Catholic thought or may be non practicing Catholics. This does not take away from their dignity, integrity and their desire to understand. These weaknesses only interfere with their actual understanding and how they report what they understand. The pope is aware that these weaknesses exist. But he’s not about to dismiss these folks as if they have no value and he’s not about to sit them down for theology lecture either. They’re there to do a job and he tries very hard to help them do it. We’re not observing this sense of service that he brings to these interviews and the sense of brotherhood that he projects toward the journalists.
Pope Francis also knows greed. He speaks about it often enough. He knows that there are people in journalism, just like in the Church, who are self-serving. They’re interested in promoting themselves, not the truth. They will spin, distort, misrepresent and ignore. However, again he approaches them as Christ approached the tax collectors and prostitutes of his time. He does not deny them the opportunity to sit down with him, even though he knows that there are some listening for that one sentence that will nail him. In his mind, why should he be any different from Christ?
To come to these articles with the same mindset at the Holy Father, we have to let go of our tendency to be defensive, over protective, suspicious, over analytical. In a sense, we must be like St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Francis of Assisi. These were men who came to the table with no expectations, no agendas of their own, no intent to defend, justify or apologize for their faith. They came with one simple idea in mind. They wanted to hear the Church speak. They would store what they heard, knowing that it was often incomplete, because of the circumstances. In other words, they knew that what they were hearing was part of the whole, because popes, councils, cardinals, theologians and other could not address the whole in the amount of time that they had.
Ignatius and Francis were very wise. They took what they heard, used what they could, stored the rest in their hearts and minds and waited for the Holy Spirit to shed light. That light came through someone else who continued the discussion later. Sometimes it came through prayer. Sometimes it came through memory. They remembered something that they heard before and they connected the dots. Sometimes they were left with a mental file that they could not understand, but they lived and died believing that if they did not understand it, maybe it was not necessary for them. It might be necessary for someone else, but not for Ignatius or Francis. They left it alone. They never felt the need to connect all the dots or to have popes connect all the dots. They never felt the need to protect themselves from agendas. Trust me, there were plenty of agendas in those days.
It was a good thing for the people of the time that they didn’t have Internet. Just listen to the pope, keeping in mind that he is an intelligent man and entering the situation with the same mindset that he does. If we do this, we can get much out of what he says. For me, it’s enriching, because I’m not a Jesuit. Although we studied a great many Jesuit theologians in the seminary, we were not exposed to that many in real life. To hear one speak and speak from the Chair of Peter, is an experience that may not happen again for centuries. I’m not about to waste it in over analysis. I’m sitting back thinking, “Ahhh, now I understand why Jesuits say [insert idea].” Sometimes, the pope will say something and I will think about it and say, “Hmmm, interesting. He’s paraphrasing St. Francis of Assisi, but he’s using Jesuit language and it’s not working. But I know what he’s talking about. Fascinating” as Mr. Spock would say. More often than not, I just read these things and say, “This is good spirituality. I need to work on this myself.”
This is not a naive man. He knows that there is going to be a problem with translations. Today, translations suffer more than they did 100 years ago. One hundred years ago, translations were done by linguists. Today, in order to beat the clock, translations are done by language software. The human element is absent in the translation, allowing for mistranslations. The pope knows this. But he does not let that deter him from preaching.
The Holy Father also knows that very often the reporters to whom he’s speaking are not understanding what he’s saying. They’re not theologians and they’re certainly not Jesuits. He definitely speaks like a Jesuit theologian. But he takes them seriously. He does not dismiss them as some corrupt collection of people with an agenda. We seem to do this whenever the word “journalist” is said. We forget that these men and women are our brothers and sisters, not spawns of Satan. We forget hat they are not always Catholic. Many who are Catholic are not educated in higher Catholic thought or may be non practicing Catholics. This does not take away from their dignity, integrity and their desire to understand. These weaknesses only interfere with their actual understanding and how they report what they understand. The pope is aware that these weaknesses exist. But he’s not about to dismiss these folks as if they have no value and he’s not about to sit them down for theology lecture either. They’re there to do a job and he tries very hard to help them do it. We’re not observing this sense of service that he brings to these interviews and the sense of brotherhood that he projects toward the journalists.
Pope Francis also knows greed. He speaks about it often enough. He knows that there are people in journalism, just like in the Church, who are self-serving. They’re interested in promoting themselves, not the truth. They will spin, distort, misrepresent and ignore. However, again he approaches them as Christ approached the tax collectors and prostitutes of his time. He does not deny them the opportunity to sit down with him, even though he knows that there are some listening for that one sentence that will nail him. In his mind, why should he be any different from Christ?
To come to these articles with the same mindset at the Holy Father, we have to let go of our tendency to be defensive, over protective, suspicious, over analytical. In a sense, we must be like St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Francis of Assisi. These were men who came to the table with no expectations, no agendas of their own, no intent to defend, justify or apologize for their faith. They came with one simple idea in mind. They wanted to hear the Church speak. They would store what they heard, knowing that it was often incomplete, because of the circumstances. In other words, they knew that what they were hearing was part of the whole, because popes, councils, cardinals, theologians and other could not address the whole in the amount of time that they had.
Ignatius and Francis were very wise. They took what they heard, used what they could, stored the rest in their hearts and minds and waited for the Holy Spirit to shed light. That light came through someone else who continued the discussion later. Sometimes it came through prayer. Sometimes it came through memory. They remembered something that they heard before and they connected the dots. Sometimes they were left with a mental file that they could not understand, but they lived and died believing that if they did not understand it, maybe it was not necessary for them. It might be necessary for someone else, but not for Ignatius or Francis. They left it alone. They never felt the need to connect all the dots or to have popes connect all the dots. They never felt the need to protect themselves from agendas. Trust me, there were plenty of agendas in those days.
It was a good thing for the people of the time that they didn’t have Internet. Just listen to the pope, keeping in mind that he is an intelligent man and entering the situation with the same mindset that he does. If we do this, we can get much out of what he says. For me, it’s enriching, because I’m not a Jesuit. Although we studied a great many Jesuit theologians in the seminary, we were not exposed to that many in real life. To hear one speak and speak from the Chair of Peter, is an experience that may not happen again for centuries. I’m not about to waste it in over analysis. I’m sitting back thinking, “Ahhh, now I understand why Jesuits say [insert idea].” Sometimes, the pope will say something and I will think about it and say, “Hmmm, interesting. He’s paraphrasing St. Francis of Assisi, but he’s using Jesuit language and it’s not working. But I know what he’s talking about. Fascinating” as Mr. Spock would say. More often than not, I just read these things and say, “This is good spirituality. I need to work on this myself.”
R
relstudent
Guest
I am sorry for coming off as rude. I certainly meant it sarcastically, but I have no ill will toward your or your post. I was, however frustrated that what you posted was the first thing comment on the thread because
- The material had not been discussed yet and you did not add any of your thoughts about the article itself (you did mention your opinion about the content of the article and about the comments however)
- Addressing your comment to me personally indicates an a priori assumption that I was uncritically reading the article.
- The truth or falseness of any article is up for dicussion in these forum. You seem to only want stories from the faithful catholic sources. Seeing and discussing popular media portayals of the Pope are crucial if we want to dialogue with people who are only modestly interested
V
Veridical16
Guest
Enough of this , the Pope the person has responsibility with how he interacts with the media, I’ve never seen so many interviews by a Pope.
"Blame the Media " card gets old. It’s okay to admit the Pope can make mistakes.
The interview is pretty bad. There are many errors in it. That Register article is bad in itself. *Too bad it can’t blame translation errors. *
- The correct translation is not a relief, because the basis of the statement is THE CONSCIENCE of the individual. The conscience is not the end all be all, because we understand there is a bad conscience. That is what is absent in the interviews. That is what the NCR following these interviews out of a false sense of duty to spin, leave out. I believe Jimmy Akin on radio told a listener last week, that that’s what we are supposed to do. We are all called to follow our conscience. (in a nothing to see here fashion)
There exists A Mal-formed conscience. This is CHURCH teaching. If the person lost his sense of good, no matter how much his conscience tells him to go towards what is “right” because if that person is a slave to sin? Cannot just rely on his conscience anymore. There is no life of grace in him. One with sociopathetic behavior will commit more crimes for instance, because he has bad will to convince himself what he is doing is good. In spite of what’s written in his heart.
2
It’s not that the True Good ever “Fails” to manifest itself. It’s that the WILL can reject Christ knocking on the door. THAT is what is missing. We are not automatons, all eventually moved by and toward grace! The intellect can fail.
ex: How many of us have convinced ourselves even when brought up in the faith that something is NOT even a sin?? How many threads are there on here, that questions if premarital sex or masturbation is a sin. How many baptized Christians tell themselves that there are certain “goods” justified by scripture or one’s own rationalization. (i.e. Slavery)
Take it further. Let us say something perceived as “good” to the man in the 21st century, is interchangeable with something that is not a “sin against others” See how the statement itself is still insufficient??
Without a distinction that ultimately a man led out of the darkness is assisted by GOD himself, is the biggest thing one can leave out when making loaded statements as above with over-emphasis on the individual and HIS conscience when it has no relation to God.
The “good” can be a relative term.
“Brotherhood” is also not encouraging. Because its Man oriented, and not God oriented.
We hear about “good” but what is good, when there is no mention of SIN?
One can rely on one’s CONSCIENCE so much he can construct his relation and image of God, in HIS image, rather than see himself in God’s image.
- The NCR tries to foolishly relive Catholics that Pope Benedict said the same thing (which is a reach! ) by citing another fallible interview specifically his statement about condoms. The mistake where he brought up a remote academically based HYPOTHETICAL which was so specific it is not the same as the general statement said by Pope Francis. That’s what you’re relying upon?!?
Pray for the Pope, for his sake, not for those who are faithful Catholics.
I wouldn’t even bother trying to spin it, the spindoctors and mouthpieces need to just stay silent, or at the very minimum say its erroneous and fallible. Anyone who is part of the SENSUS FIDELIUM, should just be saddened by these interviews, not ready with a quick trigger to draw at the Big Bad Media or the Pope.
Another thing is these private interviews are just problematic because WE know Pope Benedict and JPII have warned against these things
"And I repeat it here. Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them. That would be enough to make the world a better place."
(So those who want to control populations??? They truly believe that is their idea of good, against the evil of humanity. A parasite to Earth. )
Again, this proposes that the individual can rely on his OWN powers. For example if I read this statement. In my mind, I am thinking that we need to question the Pope doing all these interviews, I THINK that is a good, but I can’t rely on what I THINK… But just because Pope Francis suggests that in an interview? I won’t go out and do it brazenly.
I am not bound by an interview. I have to seek forming a good conscience and seek what the Magisterium states and look how the Church faithful acted in History.
V
Veridical16
Guest
As an aside, Pope John XXII, had another error as a private theologian. He stated that the saints would not enjoy the Beatific vision until the General Judgment.
The lay people, and the Church responded and said he was wrong. He was rebuked for this, and set up something to test this undestanding.
He was taught a wrong understanding in his life. He later recanted on his death bed. The Pope after him corrected this error.
So, it seems that Pope Francis may have been brought up with errors in his Jesuit Order in South America. I do not see continuity between him and the two previous pontiffs as theologians. "God is not the Catholic God? " His governance is what one expects from the Office of Peter however.
I believe the holy spirit was guiding the Pontiff in reaction to Syria.
I cannot forget what Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II have stated as Pontiffs as TEACHERS against Moral Relativism, I am not bound to follow Pope’s interviews. And I believe if there is anything said that will grow to the level of egregious scandal. God or a future pope will repudiate them.
Let’s be quite honest, these interviews are no different than previous Popes in their humanness. Any amount to spin, is to muddy the waters, rather than to clean them up.
Any attempts to construct apologia rather than teach History and Clarify what Infallibility DOES or Doesn’t do, to lay people, is setting them up for greater scandal down the road. The only reason why a faithful Catholic would not shocked by these interviews is they would already have perspective of past popes mistakes.
Unfortunately Catholics who are unaware that there exists Supernatural Faith, as opposed to the way we come to the understanding of one God through reason alone (the same as the Muslim and the Jew), will sin more within the Church if they take these series interviews to heart. I know, because I know these Catholics.
The lay people, and the Church responded and said he was wrong. He was rebuked for this, and set up something to test this undestanding.
He was taught a wrong understanding in his life. He later recanted on his death bed. The Pope after him corrected this error.
So, it seems that Pope Francis may have been brought up with errors in his Jesuit Order in South America. I do not see continuity between him and the two previous pontiffs as theologians. "God is not the Catholic God?
" His governance is what one expects from the Office of Peter however.I believe the holy spirit was guiding the Pontiff in reaction to Syria.
I cannot forget what Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II have stated as Pontiffs as TEACHERS against Moral Relativism, I am not bound to follow Pope’s interviews. And I believe if there is anything said that will grow to the level of egregious scandal. God or a future pope will repudiate them.
Let’s be quite honest, these interviews are no different than previous Popes in their humanness. Any amount to spin, is to muddy the waters, rather than to clean them up.
Any attempts to construct apologia rather than teach History and Clarify what Infallibility DOES or Doesn’t do, to lay people, is setting them up for greater scandal down the road. The only reason why a faithful Catholic would not shocked by these interviews is they would already have perspective of past popes mistakes.
Unfortunately Catholics who are unaware that there exists Supernatural Faith, as opposed to the way we come to the understanding of one God through reason alone (the same as the Muslim and the Jew), will sin more within the Church if they take these series interviews to heart. I know, because I know these Catholics.
S
saveusfromhell
Guest
thanks Veridical16, this makes sense now to me. I come here primarily to learn about my faith, to form a proper conscience, in fact I knew little of what we as catholics believed till I joined this forum. the last 2 weeks have been confusing your post has added a lot of clarity for me
P
ProdglArchitect
Guest
It’s always good to be upfront about your disclaimers
No assumptions were made, the nature of the source indicated a need to be critical; you made no indication either way, so I said something just in case.
I never made any indication of this, I simply stated a frequently observed fact that secular media isn’t always spot on when it comes to reporting about the Church. Again, I never said not to discuss it, but I believe that anyone seeking to discuss it should be properly advised. This reaction on my part is a result of listening to people’s reactions to misrepresentations of what the Pope says on various Catholic Answers live programs. So many people call in concerned about what the media reports, when what the media reports isn’t even remotely what was said. I’ve seen several threads on these forums to the same affect. Therefore, I deemed it important to make a note of it prior to any discussion taking place.
Please do not read statements into what I wrote which are not present. I never said the Pope couldn’t make mistakes. In fact, I never flipping said there was anything wrong with the blasted article to begin with. Taking it with a grain of salt was meant to express the concept that you shouldn’t assume that the article is true simply because it’s being reported as true. I was simply providing a reminder, you read into it what you wanted (hey, sort of like the secular media), but what you read was not in my post.
9
99th_Monkey
Guest
What is ridiculous about this comment? I don’t see it as such at all.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Thank you
J
Jaberwocky
Guest
Do you think the average reader (let alone the average Catholic) is going to look at the Pope’s interview in any shape or form according to what you have said?
I personally think the answer is no. While the super intelligent in the Church are having epiphanies as to what somethings might have meant, many who hold to errors are going to consider it confirmation that what they were thinking was right all along.
J
Jaberwocky
Guest
There is such a thing as a malformed conscience.
J
janeway529
Guest
If anyone knows Italian, here’s the original version of the interview:
repubblica.it/cultura/2013/10/01/news/papa_francesco_a_scalfari_cos_cambier_la_chiesa-67630792/?ref=HRER3-1
repubblica.it/cultura/2013/10/01/news/papa_francesco_a_scalfari_cos_cambier_la_chiesa-67630792/?ref=HRER3-1
G
gracepoole
Guest
I’m…stunned. Why would I assume – or even want to assume – that a poster on CAF is more knowledgeable about Church teachings than the Holy Father? Why doesn’t that just smack of hubris in and of itself?
D
Do_Good_Then_Go
Guest
I read an English translation of this at La Repubblica.
What a fascinating interview!
What a fascinating interview!
M
McCall1981
Guest
Well said.Enough of this , the Pope the person has responsibility with how he interacts with the media, I’ve never seen so many interviews by a Pope.
"Blame the Media " card gets old. It’s okay to admit the Pope can make mistakes.
The interview is pretty bad. There are many errors in it. That Register article is bad in itself. *Too bad it can’t blame translation errors. *
This is true because Sin darkens the intellect and weakens the will. THAT is Church teaching.
- The correct translation is not a relief, because the basis of the statement is THE CONSCIENCE of the individual. The conscience is not the end all be all, because we understand there is a bad conscience. That is what is absent in the interviews. That is what the NCR following these interviews out of a false sense of duty to spin, leave out. I believe Jimmy Akin on radio told a listener last week, that that’s what we are supposed to do. We are all called to follow our conscience. (in a nothing to see here fashion)
There exists A Mal-formed conscience. This is CHURCH teaching. If the person lost his sense of good, no matter how much his conscience tells him to go towards what is “right” because if that person is a slave to sin? Cannot just rely on his conscience anymore. There is no life of grace in him. One with sociopathetic behavior will commit more crimes for instance, because he has bad will to convince himself what he is doing is good. In spite of what’s written in his heart.
2
It’s not that the True Good ever “Fails” to manifest itself. It’s that the WILL can reject Christ knocking on the door. THAT is what is missing. We are not automatons, all eventually moved by and toward grace! The intellect can fail.
ex: How many of us have convinced ourselves even when brought up in the faith that something is NOT even a sin?? How many threads are there on here, that questions if premarital sex or masturbation is a sin. How many baptized Christians tell themselves that there are certain “goods” justified by scripture or one’s own rationalization. (i.e. Slavery)
Take it further. Let us say something perceived as “good” to the man in the 21st century, is interchangeable with something that is not a “sin against others” See how the statement itself is still insufficient??
Without a distinction that ultimately a man led out of the darkness is assisted by GOD himself, is the biggest thing one can leave out when making loaded statements as above with over-emphasis on the individual and HIS conscience when it has no relation to God.
The “good” can be a relative term.
“Brotherhood” is also not encouraging. Because its Man oriented, and not God oriented.
We hear about “good” but what is good, when there is no mention of SIN?
One can rely on one’s CONSCIENCE so much he can construct his relation and image of God, in HIS image, rather than see himself in God’s image.
So now all of a sudden we’re relying on previous fallible interviews that caused scandal of two years ago, to clarify current fallible interviews two years later???
- The NCR tries to foolishly relive Catholics that Pope Benedict said the same thing (which is a reach! ) by citing another fallible interview specifically his statement about condoms. The mistake where he brought up a remote academically based HYPOTHETICAL which was so specific it is not the same as the general statement said by Pope Francis. That’s what you’re relying upon?!?
Pray for the Pope, for his sake, not for those who are faithful Catholics.
I wouldn’t even bother trying to spin it, the spindoctors and mouthpieces need to just stay silent, or at the very minimum say its erroneous and fallible. Anyone who is part of the SENSUS FIDELIUM, should just be saddened by these interviews, not ready with a quick trigger to draw at the Big Bad Media or the Pope.
Another thing is these private interviews are just problematic because WE know Pope Benedict and JPII have warned against these things
"And I repeat it here. Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them. That would be enough to make the world a better place."
(So those who want to control populations??? They truly believe that is their idea of good, against the evil of humanity. A parasite to Earth. )
Again, this proposes that the individual can rely on his OWN powers. For example if I read this statement. In my mind, I am thinking that we need to question the Pope doing all these interviews, I THINK that is a good, but I can’t rely on what I THINK… But just because Pope Francis suggests that in an interview? I won’t go out and do it brazenly.
I am not bound by an interview. I have to seek forming a good conscience and seek what the Magisterium states and look how the Church faithful acted in History.
Read the comments on these kinds of articles (not MSM ones, I mean good Catholic ones) and youll see that people are confused and are starting to get afraid. I know I am.
C
Country_Gal
Guest
OK, the Holy Spirit is seriously at work here. I need to get back to church!
P
platofan1983
Guest
Thank you so much for this well argued and poignant post about the Pope’s recent interviews. I too am very concerned with the direction he is taking things. It’s not one interview or saying where it’s later “clarified” but rather a pattern of (in my view) a very liberal theology.
What’s with all of the clarification? What’s with all of the translation issues? What’s with all of the media is spinning it incorrectly? I thought to myself today, we never had these issues with Benedict XVI.
Pope Francis is doing good things with actually trying to live like Christ. And if the Catholic Church has to become more humble through him not living in the Papal apartments, doing things for himself, being more accessible to people, that is a good thing.
But at the same time, that service and charity must all be done through and because of Christ. I want him to talk about this more! He doesn’t. And all of this garbage (sorry for the crassness) about reaching out to the world, is too much. Christ said if the world hates you, it’s because it hated me first. We much preach Christ. If the world doesn’t like it, that’s one thing. But let’s not change our message just to a social justice sort of message void of deep issues like sin, Christ, the Incarnation, etc.
I’ve noticed a pattern in the last few months. Francis will say something that catches a lot of people off guard. The media reports it (almost with a certain glee, and yes they might spin it a little) but conservative Catholics and conservative Christians are taken aback by it. Then the next day, the apologists for Francis come out and say, he didn’t change any church doctrine, or say anything different, or something along those lines.
My concern is a troubling pattern is developing.
S
SaintAugustine
Guest
We’re all ready to receive you back with open arms.OK, the Holy Spirit is seriously at work here. I need to get back to church!
J
JReducation
Guest
They may or they may not. That’s for the local Church to deal with, if and when it happens. In the meantime, our vocation is to live in our space and time. We look at these interviews and draw from them what is beneficial in our context. We will not get to heaven on dogma. We will get to heaven on simplicity. Simplicity is to conform to the Crucified Christ. Everything else is rather interesting, but that’s about it.
I have a friend who is a Cistercian monk. I love what his monks at his monastery had to say about these interviews. They weren’t interested in what the Holy Father said or didn’t say. They were more interested in what the Catholic laity is saying, because it entertains them. They think we’re reactive rather than proactive. The Christian vocation is about responding, not defending.
L
LiberalPrincess
Guest
I LOVE POPE FRANCIS! Someone needed to say this…and the fact that it came from the Pope himself sends a strong message.
- Status