"Pope Francis Digs at Vatican's Narcissistic Nature.."

  • Thread starter Thread starter relstudent
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I said I will minimize it. I obviously cannot completely avoid stating it, can I? As long as there are wrong statements in the world, sometimes it has to be said that “It is wrong”.
But perhaps those with humility pause before claiming that those around him are routinely incorrect while he himself is not.
 
This question wasn’t answered but I think it’s a good one – people are fearful but are they fearful with good reason?

:confused: Nothing he has said contradicts Church teaching. Why are you disheartened by him?
My faith is in the Church moreso than any Pope, since no man himself is perfect. But your question could also be asked of those who felt disheartened under JPII or B16. Why? Nothing they said contradicts Church teachings.

I submit that in many cases, at its core, people are more and more rejecting the teachings. If a person truly is seeking the truth, the messenger will matter less and less. I don’t mind making people feel welcome, but I question how long it will last when they are inevitably confronted with the same basic teachings we heard from 2005-2013. People who believe to their core the Church is wrong about its teachings on homosexual beahvior and traditional marriage may be ushered in the door, but that is going to be an impediment until they (we all have to) swallow the ego and pride and submit to the Church’s authority.

The thing is not everyone faithful to the Church “gets” all her teachings, but they don’t have to. They have to listen and obey, and pray that their hearts and minds will conform over time to what they don’t currently “get.” Few theologians grasp and fully understand the mystery of the Trinity, yet most of swear believe it to our core.
 
I submit that in many cases, at its core, people are more and more rejecting the teachings. If a person truly is seeking the truth, the messenger will matter less and less. I don’t mind making people feel welcome, but I question how long it will last when they are inevitably confronted with the same basic teachings we heard from 2005-2013.
With all due respect, isn’t this beyond your purview?
 
So best just not to waste our time bothering with them? Just accept that these souls are damned to Hell and waste no more time on them? Just give them up as lost causes?
Why would you even ask that, when I said getting them in the door is a good thing? I am asking logically what is going to keep them there when a “meaner” Pope is elected? If you don;t love the Church and her teachings, you are going to be left disheartened. Popes come and go. The Church and her truths do not.
 
With all due respect, isn’t this beyond your purview?
No more than any opinion on the topic is beyond anyone’s purview. I’d say anyone who cares about the Church and those who may have left should be asking these same questions. If the goal is to help more people see the beauty of Chirst’s teachings, as we are called to do, I’d say it is directly within our purview.
 
But perhaps those with humility pause before claiming that those around him are routinely incorrect while he himself is not.
Did you humbly consider that I might have already done that in my humility before I replied to those individuals? Do you also realize that you are trying invoke guilt in me as if it is an actual argument?

May I strongly suggest that you discuss the topic at hand rather than discuss ME? If and when I feel comfortable, I can assure you I will make a thread in the back fence area of CAF so that you can discuss me in detail.
 
I think admitting that it’s not a word for word transcript is a pretty big deal considering this is the Pope we’re talking about.
He is not “admitting” that it is not a word for word transcript. I understand him as merely saying he does not have a word for word transcript, but that the published story is faithful to the content of the interview. It was obviously good enough for the Pope and the Vatican, as they posted it on the official site with the Pope’s other speeches.
 
This is just opinion of James Martin vs. Pope Benedict XVI vs. someone else’s. All that it proves is that you should probably not be making claims based on that particular term because there are multiple interpretations of it.
Have you ever thought that maybe your interpretations on some things are wrong or could possible be wrong?

Like I have said usually the people that are sure they know so much actually know very little.

Working at a Jesuit school I can tell you with all certainty that by this point none of the priest would still be having a conversation with you and they would truly admire Bro. patience.
 
I am afraid you are wrong here. The emotional love business does not exist as much as it does in North America. Yet the North American Church is collapsing while they are thriving.

Emotion does not help anyone or give good foundations. Reason that leads to faith is what does that.
Don’t redirect my words. Emotion isn’t and can’t be the foundation of faith, for sure. We agree there. But emotions are often fundamentally tied up in the sorts of crises in life that precede conversions to faith. It’s terribly often when people come to the very edge of the cliffs of despair that they finally decide to choose faith in Christ instead of self. You can’t relate to that yourself?

My characterization of the African experience comes from a Kenyan (IIRC, maybe Nigerian) priest that preached in a parish I attended for a while. He was here getting an advanced degree. It was really interesting to hear his observations. I’d certainly say he tapdanced less around some issues than most American priests I’ve heard. But the thrust of his preaching suggested to me that African Catholicism has more to do with restoring hope to the hopeless rather than mass conversion via persuasive theology and orthodoxy. That comes later, AFTER conversion. So to give fair disclosure, I’m a suburban white boy here. All I can do it take locals’ word for it!
 
Have you ever thought that maybe your interpretations on some things are wrong or could possible be wrong?

Like I have said usually the people that are sure they know so much actually know very little.

Working at a Jesuit school I can tell you with all certainty that by this point none of the priest would still be having a conversation with you and they would truly admire Bro. patience.
Isn’t that the opposite of the message Pope Francis is preaching? We are to embrace with open arms people who may have willfully chosen to reject the Church for in some cases, their entire lives, which is a good thing.

Yet, we are to cut of dialogue with people who posted back and forth on a message board for a few minutes or hours? I don’t think the Pope is saying that AT ALL. The opposite in fact. You can’t have the message both ways.

Not saying this is the case, but people who felt alienated by the Church before francis are no more or less worthy of dialogue and an embrace than those who feel alienated by Pope Francis (not that Jaberwocky does…).
 
Don’t redirect my words. Emotion isn’t and can’t be the foundation of faith, for sure. We agree there. But emotions are often fundamentally tied up in the sorts of crises in life that precede conversions to faith. It’s terribly often when people come to the very edge of the cliffs of despair that they finally decide to choose faith in Christ instead of self. You can’t relate to that yourself?

My characterization of the African experience comes from a Kenyan (IIRC, maybe Nigerian) priest that preached in a parish I attended for a while. He was here getting an advanced degree. It was really interesting to hear his observations. I’d certainly say he tapdanced less around some issues than most American priests I’ve heard. But the thrust of his preaching suggested to me that African Catholicism has more to do with restoring hope to the hopeless rather than mass conversion via persuasive theology and orthodoxy. That comes later, AFTER conversion. So to give fair disclosure, I’m a suburban white boy here. All I can do it take locals’ word for it!
I think its unfair to base your conclusion on one homily you heard.

The homilies in Africa tend to be straight to the point and there is no hesitation to call out sins. Sinful behavior is chastised publicly at times. A sin that is becoming an issue will be mentioned in the homily and people will be told why we should not fall in to it and how to defend against it.

The message is persevere for the gate is wide to hell. You have been redeemed and now run the good race. That is the hope that is given. People live with that.

In North America, there is a lot more hope up and love but the Church is dwindling.
 
This is just opinion of James Martin vs. Pope Benedict XVI vs. someone else’s. All that it proves is that you should probably not be making claims based on that particular term because there are multiple interpretations of it.
I think she has a right to go with this interpretation, even though you may not agree with it and I can see why, because it may hit too close to home.

There are just too many people like that in the Catholic Church; even some this site!
 
Well now it is your turn. Those of us raised by The Jesuits …
Hehe. Freudian slip? Capitalizing The in The Jesuits sure looks ominous!

We are The Jesuits. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile!

Sorry, couldn’t help it. All in good fun!
 
The homilies in Africa tend to be straight to the point and there is no hesitation to call out sins. Sinful behavior is chastised publicly at times.
My data set is indeed limited (not one homily, one priest.). What’s yours?
 
I think she has a right to go with this interpretation, even though you may not agree with it and I can see why, because it may hit too close to home.

There are just too many people like that in the Catholic Church; even some this site!
Actually I avoided talking more about it because I felt it was pointless.

Even the interpretation by Fr. James does not help her position. Fr. James is speaking of a very real problem. But she was trying to imply that the opposite of Fr. James is a openly welcoming place for everyone. That is not correct.

The Church does not openly welcome unrepentant sinners in to the faith. It is not the Church actually but Christ himself. One cannot become baptized or get a confession and enter in the life of the Church unless they renounce their evil ways and try to amend their lives.

The very insistence on this thread by many that it is not the case leads me to think that most of you do hold the view from the interviews as God’s moral laws and God’s love and mercy as something in contention with each other.
 
Did you humbly consider that I might have already done that in my humility before I replied to those individuals? Do you also realize that you are trying invoke guilt in me as if it is an actual argument?

May I strongly suggest that you discuss the topic at hand rather than discuss ME? If and when I feel comfortable, I can assure you I will make a thread in the back fence area of CAF so that you can discuss me in detail.
It was a gentle nudge, jaberwocky. That’s all. Brother is extremely respected here and with good reason – having been here for a bit, I’d have to think long and hard before claiming he’s incorrect on multiple occasions. I’m not trying to evoke anything in you, and I’m certainly not trying to offer an argument. But perhaps Francis is indeed the right man at the right time, as it seems most of us need more humility in our lives.
No more than any opinion on the topic is beyond anyone’s purview. I’d say anyone who cares about the Church and those who may have left should be asking these same questions. If the goal is to help more people see the beauty of Chirst’s teachings, as we are called to do, I’d say it is directly within our purview.
But none of us can actually demonstrate that people will come to the Church, receive its sacraments, and then either demand changes in its teachings or leave altogether. That’s what’s beyond our purview. I suppose we’re welcome to fret over such a possibility but there’s no way to claim that it’s a reality or will be in the future.
 
Actually I avoided talking more about it because I felt it was pointless.

Even the interpretation by Fr. James does not help her position. Fr. James is speaking of a very real problem. But she was trying to imply that the opposite of Fr. James is a openly welcoming place for everyone. That is not correct.

The Church does not openly welcome unrepentant sinners in to the faith. It is not the Church actually but Christ himself. One cannot become baptized or get a confession and enter in the life of the Church unless they renounce their evil ways and try to amend their lives.

The very insistence on this thread by many that it is not the case leads me to think that most of you do hold the view from the interviews as God’s moral laws and God’s love and mercy as something in contention with each other.
Well I could be wrong, which I am sure you will tell me I am, but I do not believe God would turn away even a unrepentant sinners, but rather have patience and understanding as He tries to show them the light.

You seem to be one of those posters that know everything, but knowing is not faith. Faith is believing in something that cannot be proven and you seem to need to prove something. I am sure you are very knowledgeable in what the Catholic Church teaches, but no one knows what God’s true plan is in the future, not even the Catholic Church. Most priest will even admit that. Just because Pope Francis does not come across as arrogant as to proclaim what exactly God will do, does mean he goes against the church.
 
It was a gentle nudge, jaberwocky. That’s all. Brother is extremely respected here and with good reason – having been here for a bit, I’d have to think long and hard before claiming he’s incorrect on multiple occasions. I’m not trying to evoke anything in you, and I’m certainly not trying to offer an argument. But perhaps Francis is indeed the right man at the right time, as it seems most of us need more humility in our lives.
Thank you for the nudge but you have to admit its better to discuss the matter than discuss the nature of those in attendance.

I meant no disrespect toward the Brother. I was merely suggesting that what he said seems wrong and I am sure he will clarify what he meant in the future. But even if he did not, that is ok because he is not infallible.

As for Pope Francis, to claim if he is the right man or not is beyond my expertise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top