Pope Francis' first moves hint at break with past

[Tobias22]

I like the Pope’s emphasis on simplicity. A la St. Francis.

One thing I hope he will impact is the building of physical structure just for the sake of building a physical structure. Specifically in the US several groups of nuns and monks are building monasteries - sometimes huge and out of proportion to a need. I am thinking of a multi-million dollar monastery planned for Wyoming which I get solicitations for.

It disturbs me that, for a handful of monks, this much money is going into a structure rather than going to the poor. Especially when there are many empty moasteries and Catholic schools in the US which these groups could convert to a monastery for a fraction of the cost of a new building.

Hopefully the Pope’s example will get others to focus on the option for the poor rather than building what may be a beautiful structure but a structure really not needed.

 

[jwinch2]

As a Church we need, to a degree, a break with the past. Our Church organisation is not in a healthy state at the moment, and this sin’t helped by what is perceived (often wrongly) to be too much ostentation and self-importance.

Pope Francis is will favour humility and simplicity (he is a Jesuit after all and one who has come from a background of poverty). I think there are a whole lot of things that are far more important for our Church than worrying about what colour of trim the Pope wears on his garments. I wonder did Jesus worry about what he or his Apostles wore?

More humility and less pomposity, Pope Francis is quite right to take this approach.

I think Pope Francis will be a major force for much needed change and reform within our Church.

I posted this quote above, but you may have missed it. Humility is not simply an external thing. In fact, much of the time it should not be external at all. We have, in recent times in the Church, created an understanding of what it means to be truly humble that isn’t always consistent with how it was thought of earlier in the Church. It isn’t about the external trappings, or lack thereof, it is about interior conversion and denial of self. People keep talking about how humble Pope Francis is because he took the bus instead of a limo, cooked for himself, etc. That’s fine, I guess I can see that. Of course, I can also see keeping the driver and the cook so that they could retain their job and just driving a cheaper car and eating simpler food without making a fuss about it. To me, and this is just my opinion, that seems more in line with what the Church has traditionaly taught regarding humility. Perhaps I am wrong.

Saint Laurence Justinian says that nobody knows well what humility is, but he who has received the gift thereof from God; that it is of itself very hard to be known, and that there is nothing in which man deceives himself so much as in the knowing what true humility is.

You think, says he, that it consists in saying, you are a sinner, and a miserable creature. If it consisted in that, nothing in the world would be easier; we should all be humble, for we all speak in that manner, and God grant, we believe what we say, and that our words on the occasion are not mere matter of form.

You think that humility consists also in wearing plain clothes, and in employing yourself in mean and despicable offices; by no means—there may still lurk a great deal of pride at bottom. It may very well happen, that by adopting this mode you wish to distinguish yourself from others, and to pass for a better and more humble man than they, and so all may be but a sort of refined pride. Note that these exterior things, as I shall hereafter shew, contribute much to true humility, when they are made use of as they ought, but, after all, it does not consist therein.

“Many,” says Saint Jerome, “embrace the shadow and appearance of humility, but few embrace humility itself.” It is very easy to look down upon the ground, to speak in a humble tone, to fetch a sigh or two, now and then, and to own one’s self a sinner and a miserable creature at every word; but, if you say any thing to these persons which may hurt their feelings in the least, you will see how far they are from true humility. “Let, therefore,” adds Saint Jerome, “all feigned and affected language be dropped; it is patience that shows a man to be truly humble”; it is that which is the touch-stone of humility.

Saint Bernard explains more particularly in what this virtue consists, and gives this definition of it. “Humility,” says he, “is a virtue whereby a man, from a true knowledge of himself, becomes vile in his own eyes.” Humility consists not therefore in words, nor in the exterior; it consists in the sentiments of the heart, in having a low and mean opinion of ourselves founded on the deep sense we have of our own nothingness; and in desiring to be despised by all the world.
Fr. Alonso Rodriguez, SJ
The Exercise of Perfection and Christian Virtues, 1609

In the book The Screwtape Letters, there is a point at which one demon is trying to help his apprentice understand how to really trap someone with the sin of pride. The key, as he notes, isn’t to make them afraid of pride, but rather to help them become humble, and then make them take pride in their humility. When that happens, they are trapped. They cannot give up the humble appearances and external trappings without feeling that they are becoming ostentatious and they cannot keep them because they take too much pride in them. Catch 22 at its finest.

Please understand, I am not accusing Pope Francis of being in this situation. But I am suggesting that our common understanding of some things may not be accurate. And, when I say “our” I am definitely including myself, because much of this was definitely news to me when I first came across it.

 

[Brendan_64]

I posted this quote above, but you may have missed it. Humility is not simply an external thing. In fact, much of the time it should not be external at all. We have, in recent times in the Church, created an understanding of what it means to be truly humble that isn’t always consistent with how it was thought of earlier in the Church. It isn’t about the external trappings, or lack thereof, it is about interior conversion and denial of self. People keep talking about how humble Pope Francis is because he took the bus instead of a limo, cooked for himself, etc. That’s fine, I guess I can see that. Of course, I can also see keeping the driver and the cook so that they could retain their job and just driving a cheaper car and eating simpler food without making a fuss about it. To me, and this is just my opinion, that seems more in line with what the Church has traditionaly taught regarding humility. Perhaps I am wrong.

I have not missed the point. As to your statement that Pope Francis would have been acting more in line with Church teachings on humility if he had, as Archbishop, kept a cook, a driver etc. What Church teaching is that exactly? You claim it to be part of the teachings of our Church, so what is your source for that claim?

Humility includes not setting yourself above others. Is employing servants to cater for your daily needs, when this is not actually necessary, demonstrating humility? Having others carry out routine and menial tasks, tasks that you are quite capable of carrying out yourself, indeed tasks that the vast majority of your fellow men carry out for themselves, is not acting humbly, It might be creating employment (which you could argue may be a good thing) but that does not make it an act of humility.

Would St Francis of Assisi have employed someone to cook for him?

Most Catholics in the world live in poverty. Pope Francis has experienced this first hand, both through his own upbringing and through his ministry as priest and bishop in the slums of Buenos Aires. You reach people by meeting them, as much as you possibly can, on their level. A Pope who not only says that he is just one of his fellow men, but also, where possible, lives as much like one of the people, is better placed to reach out and connect with and give comfort and support to those who feel alienated in society, and those the feel distanced from the Church.

I think in Pope Benedict we will have a great healer, one who will reach out to those in despair, and those who are alienated (morally, spiritually, materially) and comfort them with the loving embrace of the Church.

 

[jwinch2]

I have not missed the point. As to your statement that Pope Francis would have been acting more in line with Church teachings on humility if he had, as Archbishop, kept a cook, a driver etc. What Church teaching is that exactly? You claim it to be part of the teachings of our Church, so what is your source for that claim?

I have provided sources from the tradition of the Church. There are many more. Thomas Aquinas noted the tendencies towards externalization of humility rather than it becoming a process of internal conversion and denial of self.

Would St Francis of Assisi have employed someone to cook for him?

It it is certainly hard to say since Francis was a mendicant friar who’s charism was rooted in poverty. However, I think some equally valid questions are whether or not he have fired someone from that job who needed it for their employment, particularly in a poor country where people are struggling to get by? If he would have, would he have made an external sign of doing so, or would he have allowed the man to keep his job, and simply ate far simpler food giving the difference in the money spent on fine food and simple to the poor in a quiet way which no one knew about but him and God?

I think in Pope Benedict we will have a great healer, one who will reach out to those in despair, and those who are alienated (morally, spiritually, materially) and comfort them with the loving embrace of the Church.

I think Pope Benedict was exactly that, and through his writings and the reforms he put in place, he will continue to be. He had the reputation of being a hard liner coming into his pontificate, and some tried to paint him in that light throughout his reign. However, in only writing three encyclicals and making one about Love, the other about Hope, and his last on Charity. He wisely recognized that the most charitable thing which can be done for someone is to teach them the Gospel truth. He also recognized temporal needs along side of that, ans his teachings on authentic charity grounded in truth, which echoed the teachings of so many previous popes and saints, will be with us forever.

I am hopeful that Pope Francis will teach in such a wonderful way also. I am certainly praying for him, and will continue to do so.

 

[DlandFan06]

He called the Second Vatican Council–how strong do people want him to be? Some people, however, don’t like Vatican II, and that will reflect their opinion of the Pope.

And yes, I know the difference between not liking Vatican II and not liking the interpretation of Vatican II.

I have no problem with Vatican II. I guess i’m basing my judgment of Pope John XXlll off of what my parents thought of him. I know there were some problems in interpreting Vatican II that Pope John Paul II took care of.

What I’m trying to get at is I don’t want Pope Francis to be a weak pope. I’d like him to stick with the teachings of the Church and not deviate from them.

 

[Brendan_64]

I think in Pope Benedict we will have a great healer, one who will reach out to those in despair, and those who are alienated (morally, spiritually, materially) and comfort them with the loving embrace of the Church.

A typo on my part. I meant to write ‘Pope Francis’.

 

[Tobias22]

One hopeful note I have heard from Catholics I’ve been talking to is that the Pope will move to make celibacy optional for priests, not bishops though. Along the Eastern Rite model which he is very close to. That would be a bold move. I think some of the changes he makes will pleasantly surprise many. Time will tell.

 

[Brendan_64]

What I’m trying to get at is I don’t want Pope Francis to be a weak pope. I’d like him to stick with the teachings of the Church and not deviate from them.

And what makes you think he is in danger of deviating from the Church’s teaching?

He received an overwhelming vote in the Conclave. Just short of 90% of the Cardinals voted for him. I think they’re best placed to decide whether Pope Francis is or is not likely to deviate from the Church’s teachings don’t you?

I do think that sometimes the laity on the more ‘conservative’ end of our Church seem to view the teachings of the Church as automatically coinciding with their own conservative world view.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

I posted this quote above, but you may have missed it. Humility is not simply an external thing. In fact, much of the time it should not be external at all. We have, in recent times in the Church, created an understanding of what it means to be truly humble that isn’t always consistent with how it was thought of earlier in the Church. It isn’t about the external trappings, or lack thereof, it is about interior conversion and denial of self. People keep talking about how humble Pope Francis is because he took the bus instead of a limo, cooked for himself, etc. That’s fine, I guess I can see that. Of course, I can also see keeping the driver and the cook so that they could retain their job and just driving a cheaper car and eating simpler food without making a fuss about it. To me, and this is just my opinion, that seems more in line with what the Church has traditionaly taught regarding humility. Perhaps I am wrong.

I think you also need to consider that he is a Jesuit. He thinks as a Jesuit and sees the world with Jesuit eyes.

My Jesuit friend has talked about how they interpret the vow of poverty. I don’t remember his exact words, but the essence is that they are to live as a modest middle class person lives. While they don’t live as the poorest of the poor, they equally don’t live as the rich do. Middle class people generally don’t have servants, chauffeurs, etc. They cook for themselves, clean for themselves, do their own laundry, drive their own cars, etc. This is the background the Pope comes from.

It will probably turn out over time that he will change due to the practical realities of his position. (And Jesuits are nothing if not practical.) He won’t be able to go places or do things because of security and the probability he would be mobbed by people. So he’ll turn things over to assistants.

But give the guy a break! Don’t expect him to change overnight to meet your expectations.

 

[Marie5890]

What I’m trying to get at is I don’t want Pope Francis to be a weak pope. I’d like him to stick with the teachings of the Church and not deviate from them.

I’m not following your thought pattern. What makes you think there is any credible idea that he would deviate from the teachings of the Church? He hasnt in all his years as priest and bishop. Why start now?

 

[The_Scott]

I must confess my main fear:

All this humility, change in liturgical vestments, informality in greeting people, speaking only to the Diocese of Rome (in only Italian) and not the world. That’s all fine by themselves, and commendable. However, I believe, as humans, we naturally compare how Pope Francis is to his predecessor. We naturally do a “before/after” analysis.

I don’t want people to forget about Benedict, or think of him as a worse pope than Francis. I don’t want people to say “Oh, Francis is great! He’s just like John Paul II! Benedict was just, you know, there for eight years. But Francis is so much different from Benedict!”

We shouldn’t forget about Benedict, and his strengths.

 

[PJD1987]

I must confess my main fear:

All this humility, change in liturgical vestments, informality in greeting people, speaking only to the Diocese of Rome (in only Italian) and not the world. That’s all fine by themselves, and commendable. However, I believe, as humans, we naturally compare how Pope Francis is to his predecessor. We naturally do a “before/after” analysis.

I don’t want people to forget about Benedict, or think of him as a worse pope than Francis. I don’t want people to say “Oh, Francis is great! He’s just like John Paul II! Benedict was just, you know, there for eight years. But Francis is so much different from Benedict!”

We shouldn’t forget about Benedict, and his strengths.

I think history will be very kind to Benedict XVI. The Church in particular thinks in terms of centuries, not years or even decades. Things popes did a century ago or even longer are still being analyzed and working their way through the Universal Church. For instance, Catholic Social Teaching, really jump-started during the reign of Leo XIII is still developing and working itself out. Pope’s personal documents aren’t even released until 75 years after their death.

Whether or not people today, tomorrow, next year, in 2030, really understand or appreciate Benedict XVI is not particularly the goal. The goal is to have a lasting impact that may take some time to seep into the “culture” and practice of Catholicism, and may even seem organic in and of itself despite being initiated by this Holy Father or that one (specifically in terms of Benedict’s “ground-up” approach to keeping the TLM alive and well and a continued force within the Church).

So I’m not really concerned about what people or newspapers or different groups are saying right this second about His Holiness Pope Emeritus Benedict or His Holiness Pope Francis.

 

[Theophorus]

I think that this ‘quote’ is simply misquoted… Whether accidental or deliberate i don’t know but from what I can see there is nothing in pope francis’ behaviour thus far which suggests he is so rude, arrogant, or sarcastic so as to say “the carnival is over” and publicly humiliate mgr Marini in this way or to denigrate his predecessor and Benedict’s pontificate on the night of his own election to the see of Peter. Whether he wishes to simplify the papal wardrobe(which seems likely) or not is a separate issue over which he has full authority.

 

[Lucky7]

I’m leaning towards he didn’t make the Carnival statement; however, this is a good conversation nevertheless.

Do I think vestments, etc are as important as Orthodox teaching? No. However, when I think about what happened to orders of nuns who do not wear their habit, it makes me think what our Pope and religious wear, etc is pretty darn important.

 

[Tobias22]

According to an interview with Boff recapped at Rorate Caeli, the new Pope is far more liberal than people realize. I think this is true on economic and social justice issues but not on dogma.

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/leonardo-boff-pope-francis-is-much-more.html

 

[Tampa_Dave]

According to an interview with Boff recapped at Rorate Caeli, the new Pope is far more liberal than people realize. I think this is true on economic and social justice issues but not on dogma.

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/leonardo-boff-pope-francis-is-much-more.html

Dogma is not easily altered in view of our 2,000 year history. But innovations in areas of economic and social justice might benefit the Church and it’s many followers. We will have to see what Pope Francis has in mind.

 

[PJD1987]

According to an interview with Boff recapped at Rorate Caeli, the new Pope is far more liberal than people realize. I think this is true on economic and social justice issues but not on dogma.

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/leonardo-boff-pope-francis-is-much-more.html

To be honest, I was not impressed with this blog’s initial “gut-feeling” reaction to the election on Wednesday and the disparaging comments they made about our new Holy Father.

It seems they are not willing to give the man a chance, and I think I will stay away from this outlet for awhile.

Just my opinion, others are free to have their own of course.

God bless.

 

[mercytruth]

According to an interview with Boff recapped at Rorate Caeli, the new Pope is far more liberal than people realize. I think this is true on economic and social justice issues but not on dogma.

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/leonardo-boff-pope-francis-is-much-more.html

I think this is also a good analysis of Pope Francis and what we may expect:

nationalreview.com/blogs/print/342964

 

[DlandFan06]

And what makes you think he is in danger of deviating from the Church’s teaching?

He received an overwhelming vote in the Conclave. Just short of 90% of the Cardinals voted for him. I think they’re best placed to decide whether Pope Francis is or is not likely to deviate from the Church’s teachings don’t you?

I do think that sometimes the laity on the more ‘conservative’ end of our Church seem to view the teachings of the Church as automatically coinciding with their own conservative world view.

I heard he was a compromise between the conservative and liberal cardinals. That’s what I heard from Fox News and I know news outlets don’t report accurately on things about the Church but it’s something that I heard.

Also, all the talk, especially farther down on this thread, about him being more liberal on social justice issues and economics. It’s just kinda worrisome. It might not be true but I don’t want to see him stray to the left side of issues.

 

[LilyM]

I must confess my main fear:

All this humility, change in liturgical vestments, informality in greeting people, speaking only to the Diocese of Rome (in only Italian) and not the world. That’s all fine by themselves, and commendable. However, I believe, as humans, we naturally compare how Pope Francis is to his predecessor. We naturally do a “before/after” analysis.

I don’t want people to forget about Benedict, or think of him as a worse pope than Francis. I don’t want people to say “Oh, Francis is great! He’s just like John Paul II! Benedict was just, you know, there for eight years. But Francis is so much different from Benedict!”

We shouldn’t forget about Benedict, and his strengths.

I don’t think people have forgotten or dis Paul VI just because he was a quieter personality than John XXIII who came before him or JPII who came later.