Pope Francis: many young people in the Church have fallen into the ‘temptation of rigidity’

[Don_Ruggero]

I can certainly see enough examples of this on CAF itself. Posters stating outright that they are so disgusted by “liturgical abuses” (though such abuses are not sinful, or at least not mortally sinful), that they proclaim they are justified from staying home from Mass (though this is a mortal sin). I can also think of a topic about recent converts being harassed by other parishioners for clapping at a time the priest himself asked them to.

I can also think of the “if you’re not destitute or deathly ill you’re probably using NFP in a contraceptive fashion” posts. Or the “if a book is anti-Catholic in anyway we should burn them” posts. Or the “there’s no way a marriage that lasted 30 years and produced 7 kids could ever be invalid” posts. Or the “anyone who identifies as gay is going to hell because the Bible says sodomites are deprived of the Kingdom of Heaven” posts.

Most of the people making such comments are NOT the posters who have displayed scrupulosity in other comments. Indeed, many are just as judgmental of such scrupulous people, haranguing them for wasting everyone’s time.

Indeed.

Our beloved Holy Father, in his powerful declarations against this sort of lamentable Catholic, reminds me of Jesus’ own words in the 23rd chapter of Matthew’s Gospel…which is exactly what those who are the rigid and who are the legalistic are indeed in need of hearing from the visible head of the Church:

*16 “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘If one swears by the temple, it means nothing, but if one swears by the gold of the temple, one is obligated.’

17 Blind fools, which is greater, the gold, or the temple that made the gold sacred?

18 And you say, ‘If one swears by the altar, it means nothing, but if one swears by the gift on the altar, one is obligated.’

19 You blind ones, which is greater, the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred?

20 One who swears by the altar swears by it and all that is upon it;

21 one who swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it;

22 one who swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who is seated on it.

23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier things of the law: judgment and mercy and fidelity. [But] these you should have done, without neglecting the others.

24 Blind guides, who strain out the gnat and swallow the camel!

25 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You cleanse the outside of cup and dish, but inside they are full of plunder and self-indulgence.

26 Blind Pharisee, cleanse first the inside of the cup, so that the outside also may be clean.

27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You are like whitewashed tombs, which appear beautiful on the outside, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and every kind of filth.

28 Even so, on the outside you appear righteous, but inside you are filled with hypocrisy and evildoing.*

 

[abucs]

For centuries these words were rigidly and faithfully copied and taken to the ends of the earth where they were rigidly honoured and read from the pulpit so that we all today can hear the words of the incarnated Christ to the Pharisee’s and hypocrites and consider their importance for our own lives.

When Christ criticised people who needed to change in some way He provided the context.

Calling people rigid as a pejorative is clearly wrong and unbecoming.

It was never the rigidity in itself that was a failing.

let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. *Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to spur one another on to love and good deeds.…

Hebrews 22-24.

 

[JPUSC]

Portuguese journalist: I’m going to ask a question about the case Portugal, but I think that it can be applied to many of the Western societies. In Portugal, almost all of the Portuguese say they identify themselves as Catholics. But the way the society is organized, the decisions that we make, often are contrary to the indications of the Church. I refer to marriage between homosexuals, the legalization of abortion, now we’re going to begin discussing euthanasia. How do you see this?

Pope Francis: I think it’s a political problem. And that also the Catholic conscience isn’t a catholic one of total belonging to the Church and that behind that there isn’t a nuanced catechesis, a human catechesis. That is, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is an example of what is a serious and nuanced thing. I think that there is a lack of formation and also of culture. Because it’s curious, in some other regions, I think of the south of Italy, some in Latin America, they are very Catholic but they are anti-clerical and ‘priest-eaters’, that … there is a phenomenon that exists. It concerns me. That’s why I tell priests, you will have read it, to flee from clericalism because clericalism distances people. May they flee from clericalism and I add: it’s a plague in the Church. But here there is a work also of catechesis, of raising awareness, of dialogue, also of human values.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/full-text-of-may-13-in-flight-interview-with-pope-francis-12886

 

[Randolph]

My, how things have changed in five years.

JPUSC… Thank you for posting the articles. How the Church misses the service and contribution of Pope Benedict XVI? The Tridentine Mass, as is with the Novus Ordo, has its rightful place and its own dignity in the Church.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I personally feel that somehow there must be a group of people who are advising the Holy Father and who, for whatever reason, and perhaps they are honestly convinced of their own ‘rectitude’, are ‘down’ on the EF and are using their own biases to try to convince Pope Francis that ‘these people’ are a danger to the faith. Pope Francis, in virtually every other aspect of Catholicism, is courteous, gentle, patient, mild, loving, and understanding. . .it just doesn’t seem possible that such a shepherd could suddenly turn into a thundering judgmentalist regarding how Catholics worship. Heck, he doesn’t mind the NeoCatechumenal Way, evangelicals, Protestants, Muslims, atheists. . .but somehow a small group of Catholics who are worshipping in a way that is perfectly acceptable and valid are the only bad people on the planet in their rigidity?

No, this does not sound like Pope Francis at all. My comfort is the more he actually gets to know the ‘young people’ and others --and he will, because he is caring and concerned and likes to go to ‘the peripheries’–the more he’ll come to see beyond what he’s being, um, ‘guided’ to see.

This is like the talk of a conspiracy theorist.
*

there must be a group of people who are advising the Holy Father

The Holy Father has been a bishop for 25 years. A priest for just shy of 45 years.

He well understands, from his own experiences, what these people are…he is not being led nor has he been.

Those of us of that generation do not need anyone to “advise” us on these matters. We have our own lived experiences. I know what I need to know about the vetus ordo adherents from years of experience…since the catastrophe of Lefebvre from the moment his mandate as superior general of his congregation was brought to an end after the Council – and all that ensued after that and were the most despicable affronts against two Saints of God who were among God’s most exceptional gifts to the Church…and the matter has simply continued. Those who have followed it through the decades down to the present moment well know.
*

the more he actually gets to know the ‘young people’ and others --and he will, because he is caring and concerned and likes to go to ‘the peripheries’–the more he’ll come to see beyond what he’s being, um, ‘guided’ to see

He is 80 years old…can you possibly think that in his decades of priesthood, he has not worked with young people, in Argentina and in Latin America, but instead now is going to learn something he did not apprehend in all these decades? His pastoral work was unmediated by advisers…his experiences are first hand

Actually, we have a Pope today who has more hands-on pastoral experience than any Pope in 100 years.

Heck, he doesn’t mind the NeoCatechumenal Way

The Neo-Catechumenal are rightly welcomed for they are a wonderful new ecclesial movement. They are a wonderful resource for the young people, they are a delight to work with as a priest and a gift to the laity…and they have always been welcomed wherever I had occasion to receive them. But movements associated with the vetus ordo? Most assuredly not.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

For centuries these words were rigidly and faithfully copied and taken to the ends of the earth where they were rigidly honoured and read from the pulpit so that we all today can hear the words of the incarnated Christ to the Pharisee’s and hypocrites and consider their importance for our own lives.

When Christ criticised people who needed to change in some way He provided the context.

Calling people rigid as a pejorative is clearly wrong and unbecoming.

It was never the rigidity in itself that was a failing.

The Pope is exactly correct…in both his terms and in his concepts.

Indeed, I can see exactly what he is talking about with regard to such rigid people. It is they themselves who well and perfectly illustrate it…just as those in the 23rd chapter of Matthew were made clear for what they were to those who following Jesus and who heard the Lord’s words…even as those about whom He was speaking became even harder of heart and made themselves to be even more blind.

In that time, they were the tragic rigid people.

 

[abucs]

Indeed, I can see exactly what he is talking about with regard to such rigid people. It is they themselves who well and perfectly illustrate it…just as those in the 23rd chapter of Matthew were made clear for what they were to those who following Jesus and who heard the Lord’s words…even as those about whom He was speaking became even harder of heart and made themselves to be even more blind.

In that time, they were the tragic rigid people.

Well you are obviously extremely rigid in your viewpoint and have failed to even try to engage with any of my examples.

On one thing we can agree. There are some ways in which we can demonstrate rigidity which are obviously a negative.

 

[graciew]

Well you are obviously extremely rigid in your viewpoint and have failed to even try to engage with any of my examples.

Monsignor is explaining.
When Monsignor explains,we listen.
Any such comment out here in the real ,would send a person flying out the room.

Sorry,but to those reading, this isn’t just real life out in the open.
I may not know the words, but we have boundaries down here.

 

[friardchips]

**Only if you start from the position of 'rigid; being a negative or pejorative.

Rigid with respect to what?**

‘Rigid’ (in bold) in the way the Pope obviously meant rigid.

 

[abucs]

Monsignor is explaining.
When Monsignor explains,we listen.
Any such comment out here in the real ,would send a person flying out the room.

Sorry,but to those reading, this isn’t just real life out in the open.

In a forum, we discuss issues. If someone is being rigid and yet criticising rigidity at the same time then it is obvious to point this out in order to convey understanding to those we are in discussion with.

This is the real world and discussion is an important part of that which is why people come to forums such as this one.

I may not know the words, …

After more than 3000 posts I am sure you are more than capable in your knowledge of words…

 

[friardchips]

Devotion is a word you have introduced but we are considering the word rigid.

You introduced the word ‘devotion’:

…it was not the parenting that was called static or rigid but the devotion to the family that was called rigid.

Selfless love is not rigid. Rigid means to not let go of one’s own ‘personal’ interests, objectives, criteria, motives, preconceptions i.e:- putting one’s own personal expectations on someone or something.

That is not to say that one who is rigid does not love generally but rather specifically in the way/s that one is being rigid: rigid = not open; stuck.

True love is free. One can bring up one’s family with solid beliefs, ethics, principles, without being rigid i.e:- able to ask questions, while open to being moved the the Spirit, whilst also remaining on solid rock.

 

[graciew]

In a forum, we discuss issues. If someone is being rigid and yet criticising rigidity at the same time then it is obvious to point this out in order to convey understanding to those we are discussing with.

This is the real world.

In the real world zipping it up is an option.For the sake of freedom of speech,Don Ruggero has been swept over like a rug sometimes.
And this is wrong. Here and everywhere.
And sorry again,he could be my grandfather. It is unfathomable that we address even our grandparents like this.
It makes one blush.Blush of shame.

 

[abucs]

In the real world zipping it up us an option.For the sake of freedom of speech,Don Ruggero has been swept over like a rug sometimes.
And this is wrong. Here and everywhere.
And sorry again,he could be my grandfather. It is unfathomable that we address even our grandparents like this.
It makes one blush.Blush of shame.

Yes, an option, not a command.

No one wants to sweep anyone like a rug and that is not what is happening here.

It is not unfathomable, he is not your grandfather and there is clearly no reason for you to be ashamed.

Suggesting someone should ‘zip it up’ on a forum which is here to discuss issues is closer to unfathomable.

Now if I were to suggest someone here should 'zip it up. that would be wrong and this would be contrary to the principles of free speech that you have supported in your post.

Please consider this.

 

[graciew]

Yes, an option, not a command.

No one wants to sweep anyone like a rug and that is not what is happening here.

It is not unfathomable and he is not your grandfather.

Suggesting someone should ‘zip up’ on a forum which is here to discuss issues is closer to unfathomable. Now if I were to suggest someone here should 'zip up. that would be wrong.

Please consider this.

   This is asking to move a lot from my comfort zone.

Consider it too.

 

[abucs]

Selfless love is not rigid. Rigid means to not let go of one’s own ‘personal’ interests, objectives, criteria, motives, preconceptions i.e:- putting one’s own personal expectations on someone or something.

That is not to say that one who is rigid does not love generally but rather specifically in the way/s that one is being rigid: rigid = not open; stuck.

True love is free. One can bring up one’s family with solid beliefs, ethics, principles, without being rigid i.e:- able to ask questions, while open to being moved the the Spirit, whilst also remaining on solid rock.

We’ve discussed this before.

Selfless love can encourage us to be rigid in many ways.

Jesus going to the cross after praying that ‘the cup may be taken from Him’ is THE example of rigidity. Rigid adherence to the will of the Father.

Again I repeat, it is not rigidity that is good or bad but what is rigid. Jesus could have been rigidly attached to his own self interest or rigidly adhering to the will of the Father above His own.

Jesus was the rigid example of self sacrifice for all mankind to follow.

Rigidity in putting aside His own safety and dignity and trusting to walk in the ways of the Father even if that meant suffering insults, degradations, brutality and death.

For Christians, there is no greater selfless love than this.

 

[graciew]

It is not unfathomable and he is not your grandfather.

On second thoughts,the age of my father…
And I know he isn’ t.
This is all for now for me.

 

[abucs]

On second thoughts,the age of my father…
And I know he isn’ t.
This is all for now for me.

God bless you.

 

[friardchips]

We’ve discussed this before.

Hi again. We are moving forward a little…

Selfless love can cause you to be rigid in many ways.

“Selfless love…can…cause…you to be rigid…”

I think you need to analyze your own sentence in greater detail. I have split it up for you.

Look at how it reads. Actually, it makes more sense written like this:

“Selfless love…can…cause…you to become rigid…”

Becoming rigid is not a positive option. Rigid can stem from a desire to do right but by closing in and not remaining open one can become rigid.

Jesus going to the cross after praying that ‘the cup may be take from Him’ is THE example of rigidity. Rigid adherence to the will of the Father.

This context proves the opposite of how you are intending.

Jesus had to overcome these moments or rather rest into them. “Rigid” is the wrong word. As you said, rigid is one of the things one can become. It is not anything more than a result of personal choices, made. Sometimes rigidity can be at play because of one’s past.

I furthermore, suggest that it was the opposite of ‘rigidity’ that brought Jesus to this place of agonizing suffering’; contrastingly, it was His submission to the Father, in the face of adversity, sin, and death, which brought Him thus far.

Again I repeat, it is not rigidity that is good or bad but what is rigid.

You have the incorrect sense in mind of how Pope Francis meant the word expressed.

Jesus was the rigid example of self sacrifice for all mankind to follow.

No, Jesus served Humanity. His willingness to serve humanity and not count His ‘authority as a thing to be grasped’ was precisely what made the application of His service new in comparison to other Kings.

Pope Francis spoke of the ‘rigidity of the Commandments’, but this is a different application to the word ‘rigid’, when used in reference to people. The Commandments could be described as ‘rigid’ because they are ‘written in stone’ - they are timeless. But we are people who must live and learn and grow. And because of this, we cannot be rigid (not in the way that “rigid” means when applied to people and how Pope Francis meant the word to be interpreted).

Rigidity in putting aside His own wants and trusting to walk in the ways of the Father even if that meant suffering insults, degradations, suffering brutality and death.

For Christians, there is no greater selfless love than this.

Again, as explained previously, Jesus’ walking along the true path, does not equal rigidity but being truly free. He freely chose that path because He shared the Will of His Father.

Maybe the word you are looking for, in connection with people’s dispositions and expressions of beliefs, is ‘disciplined’. One can be disciplined so as not to become “rigid” or “lax”. Jesus was never rigid or lax, however; some of those who opposed Him, were.

 

[abucs]

No rigid is both an adjective and an adverb, it is not a noun.

It’s use depends very much on the noun or verb it is attached to.

You cannot think of the word in one narrow sense and then insist that others use it only with this narrow meaning to the extreme of almost using it as a noun.

My examples stand.

Jesus rigidly followed the will of the Father.
A father rigidly gets up at the crack of dawn to create wealth for his family.
A priest rigidly adheres to his vows of chastity and poverty.
A husband rigidly respects his wedding vows.
An employer rigidly follows safety protocols for his workers.
A fireman rigidly ensures the fire engine is well maintained and stocked.
A judge rigidly ensures justice is done.
An accountant rigidly calculates the correct tax.
An auditor rigidly checks that the correct tax has been paid.
A blackjack dealer rigidly sticks to the casino’s policy of playing as the house.
A driver rigidly stays on the right (correct) side of the road.

The word here is being used as an adverb. It depends very much on the verb it is describing. It is the verb that can be either good or bad which then can change the morality of the adverb.

You can be rigid in advocating for certain categories of freedom just as you can be free in choosing to be rigid in certain aspects.

Rigidity and freedom are not opposites. They can both be present and complimentary depending on the context of what is being described.

 

[Randolph]

I do appreciate the attempts to clarify what Pope Francis said and to indicate what he actually meant by rigidity. However, in actually reading the articles (and yes, I take into account that they are translations and may not ‘come across’ in English, I would like to know exactly what he bases this charge of rigidity on.

I mean, he seems surprised that ‘many young people’ like to attend the TLM. So it doesn’t sound as though he personally knows that many people who do, right? and if he doesn’t know them, then how does he know that because of their choice of liturgy, these same people are living double lives, are hypocrites, etc. etc.? And how does he know that these people, unlike the billions of us who attend the OF and are hypocrites, live double lives, are ‘rigid’ and unCatholic –because each and every one of us has ‘fallen’, stumbled, and sinned, every day, many times, even if we attend the OF!–are somehow acting that way because their rigidity comes only from their preference of liturgy?

I personally feel that somehow there must be a group of people who are advising the Holy Father and who, for whatever reason, and perhaps they are honestly convinced of their own ‘rectitude’, are ‘down’ on the EF and are using their own biases to try to convince Pope Francis that ‘these people’ are a danger to the faith. Pope Francis, in virtually every other aspect of Catholicism, is courteous, gentle, patient, mild, loving, and understanding. . .it just doesn’t seem possible that such a shepherd could suddenly turn into a thundering judgmentalist regarding how Catholics worship. Heck, he doesn’t mind the NeoCatechumenal Way, evangelicals, Protestants, Muslims, atheists. . .but somehow a small group of Catholics who are worshipping in a way that is perfectly acceptable and valid are the only bad people on the planet in their rigidity?

No, this does not sound like Pope Francis at all. My comfort is the more he actually gets to know the ‘young people’ and others --and he will, because he is caring and concerned and likes to go to ‘the peripheries’–the more he’ll come to see beyond what he’s being, um, ‘guided’ to see.

Indeed, you are correct. The negative and biased assessments toward people who love the Tridentine Mass as group is wrong, unjust and uncharitable. As with any group, there are people in it who are rigid. Personally. I attend both the Tridentine Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass. They are both treasures of the Church, and have their own rightful dignitty and respect. In my own experience, the majority of people who attend the Tridentine Mass, are among the finest, the most sincere, the most charitable and the most faithful people in the Church. It is quite a shame that they are broadly judged so unjustly by some in the hierarchy of the Church.

The Tridentine Mass has been with the Church since its early history, and will continue to march into time and history with the Church. Its greatness and richness speak for themselves. It is also the Mass that most declared saints in the Church knew and experienced. I just ignore the negative and biased assessments about it, and pray for those who instigated and has continued to perpetuate the unjust and wrong assessments. It must stop.