P
ProVobis
Guest
If it’s of any consolation, know that we will all have to answer to God, including the Pope whom God has entrusted to lead the Church for a short time.
Pope Francis: Obstinate Christians are Rebels and Idolaters
- Status
P
Pulvis
Guest
Perhaps if His “But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no:”(Matthew 5:37) we would not have so many people trying to leverage His comments to their own agenda. In the modern era, Popes Paul VI, St. John Paul II, and Benedict XVI were much clearer in their statements and writing. There was not this level of interpretation and pretzel logic needed to understand the message they intended to convey. Now whether this is intentional, or just bad translation is open to discussion. But the Holy Father could easily correct this by simply being more careful as to His words knowing the effect they will have, and the possibility of accidental or intentionally mistranslated versions.
I enjoy reading Papal Bulls and Encyclicals. Going back as far as are recorded. And I must say that I have found very few that are as difficult to follow as the writings of Pope Francis. Whether this is due to his pattern of presenting ideas, his ghost writers, His Jesuit roots or just my own lack of grasp I have no idea. What I do know is that the level of confusion is detrimental to the Faithful who are paying attention. And dangerous for those who only read what the different camps present as “What He really said is…”
I enjoy reading Papal Bulls and Encyclicals. Going back as far as are recorded. And I must say that I have found very few that are as difficult to follow as the writings of Pope Francis. Whether this is due to his pattern of presenting ideas, his ghost writers, His Jesuit roots or just my own lack of grasp I have no idea. What I do know is that the level of confusion is detrimental to the Faithful who are paying attention. And dangerous for those who only read what the different camps present as “What He really said is…”
L
LongingSoul
Guest
Why not try and look at it all in a different way? If the Pope is moved by an urgency to break down attitudes that prevent the fullness of Gods mercy being reflected in the Church… wouldn’t you say that was a very good thing albeit uncomfortable? When Our Lord was firing off at the Pharisees as being vipers and what not… they weren’t being persecuted by Him. They were being broken down for rebuilding in a new and better form.
Edit: sadly they did not rise to the challenge.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
Pope St John Paul II was criticised regularly by traditionalists. Not sure if you are just young or remembering selectively.
C
clem456
Guest
We deceive ourselves and others when we refuse to accept that things change.
Things change.
It seems to me the obstinate person Francis speaks about is not one who holds to Tradition of traditions. That’s not what the Pope is saying at all.
An obstinate person is one who insists on his way, and cannot see that change does not violate truth, or Tradition.
An obstinate person is so attached to his own experience of Christ and the Church, that he is fearful of new expressions of the same truth. An obstinate person is fragile and anxious about the durability of the Church, because his faith is centered on him, rather than God and others.
Mea Culpa.
Things change.
It seems to me the obstinate person Francis speaks about is not one who holds to Tradition of traditions. That’s not what the Pope is saying at all.
An obstinate person is one who insists on his way, and cannot see that change does not violate truth, or Tradition.
An obstinate person is so attached to his own experience of Christ and the Church, that he is fearful of new expressions of the same truth. An obstinate person is fragile and anxious about the durability of the Church, because his faith is centered on him, rather than God and others.
Mea Culpa.
P
ProVobis
Guest
But an obstinate person can also be one who refuses to see victims of change, such as those who lose their jobs, of unemployment checks, of their homes, etc. It’s especially painful to know that these changes have been forced upon them. A certain amount of progress/change is healthy, it’s organic as some like to call it, but we have to distinguish between progress and corruption.
C
clem456
Guest
I’m speaking of change within the Church like the Pope is talking about. Not the abuses of this and that. Simply change that necessarily comes about.
I’m having a hard time seeing how the change the Pope is talking about, within the Church, victimizes people.
big
Unless you believe the change he is talking about is disordered to God’s will.
Then you have a larger problem.
A person who is threatened by change within the Church is not a “victim”.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Depends on how you look at it. I remember a question on a child psychology exam I took 50 years that asked if it were a positive thing for a parent to spank a child. Most of the class probably answered no because they hissed when the professor said, “Sure it’s positive…for the adult.” And then we were all thinking, is this the way psychology will be taught going forward? Not saying the Pope thinks like this but just giving an example of the psychology behind change and adjustment. Statistically it’s shown to be unrealistic to think you’ll have full cooperation from everyone on any change. I wouldn’t take it personally that a few resisted the forced changes I imposed on them, especially if it appeared I mocked what they had regarded as customary or sacred.
K
KSU
Guest
What was worth this cost to our unity?
Pope Francis is the person in whom we place our earthly trust, love and hope. If he wanted to teach or explain something, why didn’t he do so with confidence, i.e., openly and clearly? All authentic Catholics would have accepted his lesson, even if it applied to them.
Instead, while nobody learned any new lesson, this thread proves that more mistrust, hurt feelings, accusation, preaching and confusion has resulted. That can’t have been his intention, so why does he persist in speaking ambiguously? Assuming he is not being kept in the dark, which seems preposterous, he knows that a big problem has resulted from mistranslation at the Vatican and media, coupled with his M.O. of ambiguity and off-the-cuff speaking.
What great benefit, then, does he see that is worth this cost to our unity?
Pope Francis is the person in whom we place our earthly trust, love and hope. If he wanted to teach or explain something, why didn’t he do so with confidence, i.e., openly and clearly? All authentic Catholics would have accepted his lesson, even if it applied to them.
Instead, while nobody learned any new lesson, this thread proves that more mistrust, hurt feelings, accusation, preaching and confusion has resulted. That can’t have been his intention, so why does he persist in speaking ambiguously? Assuming he is not being kept in the dark, which seems preposterous, he knows that a big problem has resulted from mistranslation at the Vatican and media, coupled with his M.O. of ambiguity and off-the-cuff speaking.
What great benefit, then, does he see that is worth this cost to our unity?
K
KSU
Guest
Originally Posted by KSU
What was worth this cost to our unity?
Pope Francis is the person in whom we place our earthly trust, love and hope. If he wanted to teach or explain something, why didn’t he do so with confidence, i.e., openly and clearly? All authentic Catholics would have accepted his lesson, even if it applied to them.
Instead, while nobody learned any new lesson, this thread proves that more mistrust, hurt feelings, accusation, preaching and confusion has resulted. That can’t have been his intention, so why does he persist in speaking ambiguously? Assuming he is not being kept in the dark, which seems preposterous, he knows that a big problem has resulted from mistranslation at the Vatican and media, coupled with his M.O. of ambiguity and off-the-cuff speaking.
What great benefit, then, does he see that is worth this cost to our unity?
What was worth this cost to our unity?
Pope Francis is the person in whom we place our earthly trust, love and hope. If he wanted to teach or explain something, why didn’t he do so with confidence, i.e., openly and clearly? All authentic Catholics would have accepted his lesson, even if it applied to them.
Instead, while nobody learned any new lesson, this thread proves that more mistrust, hurt feelings, accusation, preaching and confusion has resulted. That can’t have been his intention, so why does he persist in speaking ambiguously? Assuming he is not being kept in the dark, which seems preposterous, he knows that a big problem has resulted from mistranslation at the Vatican and media, coupled with his M.O. of ambiguity and off-the-cuff speaking.
What great benefit, then, does he see that is worth this cost to our unity?
I rest my case.
P
pnewton
Guest
This thread proves nothing, much less anything universal in the Church. I have reflected on the imagery of our preconceptions and attachment to the status quo as an old wine skin, going back to a reading of the parable and context. Perhaps it may prove useful in the weeks to come, or come to mind the next time I find myself reluctant to change even if I think God is leading elsewhere.
P
pnewton
Guest
A person can also be obstinate in the search for novelty. Or, as some of us have seen, obstinate about changes in one’s own parish to eliminate abuses, or restore some chant, or being in more Latin, even if the priest and bishop is trying to obtain a better balance in the liturgy. A feminist may dig in her heels against what she sees as an oppressive male hierarchy and ride around in buses with like-minded females, undermining the Church.
We can may idols of many things.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
The other scripture reference gives context also. 1 Sam 15…
…22Samuel said, “Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams. 23"For rebellion is as the sin of divination, And insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, He has also rejected you from being king.”
People tend to become possessive of the ‘burnt offerings and sacrifices’ and the old familiar wine skins, when the Lord really wants us to obey His voice.
To me I personally feel it is right that Francis is directing us back to scripture to hear His voice rather than spend our energy defending the sacrifices and wineskins that aren’t serving the Word any longer.
J
JimG
Guest
People tend to become possessive of the deposit of Faith, because it has been handed down to them from Jesus the Christ to the Apostles to the Magisterium to be preserved to the present day. It may be held on to obstinately. But to paraphrase Barry Goldwater, obstinacy in the preservation of the Faith is no vice.
K
KSU
Guest
This thread proves nothing, much less anything universal in the Church.
**I didn’t say this thread proved anything universal in the Church. I said it proves that ambiguity, from the one person on earth from whom we don’t want ambiguity, results in mistrust, hurt feelings, accusation, preaching and confusion. And I don’t mean just this thread. **
Perhaps it may prove useful in the weeks to come, or come to mind the next time I find myself reluctant to change even if I think God is leading elsewhere.
**Well, do you think that remote future possibility (you’re not the reluctant typeif you think God is leading you somewhere) is worth the fact that the Pope’s often-occurring ambiguity results in mistrust, hurt feelings, accusation, preaching and confusion all over the Catholic world, as evidenced by this Forum? CAF, after all, is a pretty representative cross section of that world. **
K
KSU
Guest
A person can also be obstinate… about changes in one’s own parish to…restore some chant, or being in more Latin…
You make that sound like a bad thing
S
sallybutler
Guest
I realize this may not be PC, but I can’t say Our Father in Latin. I learned it in my mother language. During Mass, I want to say it in English ( my mother language) just as I am sure Germans want to say it in their native language, as do Russians as do Italians. After all, Jesus didn’t say it in Latin.
P
ProVobis
Guest
So say it in Aramaic. It would be obstinate if you insist on having everything in English.
Seems like more people are stuck in the 70’s rather than in the 50’s.
You definitely hear more of “it’s always been done that way around here” from liturgical committees and such.
P
pnewton
Guest
It is natural and okay to want something. However, obstinacy is more than wanting something. For example, if you went to a Mass that had the Our Father in Latin, perhaps to accommodate a bi-lingual parish for a single joint Mass, and if you have it in front of you to read, would you refuse to join in the community to “fight” the Latin?
- Status