Pope Francis: The world needs mystics and saints!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert_Sock said:
aleteia.org/2017/06/21/pope-francis-the-world-needs-mystics-and-saints/

VATICAN CITY — What the world today really needs is mystics and saints, men and women who “believe so deeply in Jesus that they become the image of Christ for the world,” Pope Francis said today…

Great article!
Click to expand...
Oh, Francis Bishop of Rome, if this is what you want then why do you worry about religious orders that are more traditional attracting numerous vocations compared to the modernist ones you hold so dear? why destroy and completely despise traditional religious orders that are bursting at their seams with vocations and mystic like monks and nuns convicted in the depths of the catholic faith? Why promote a pastoral position that undermines and attacks the dogma on marriage defined at the Ecumenical council of Trent ? Why not provide clarity instead of allowing confusion to sow in the church and then proceed to boast about possibly being the pope that splits the catholic church?

Your Holiness, how can you want the color white when all you paint is the color black?
 
As a student of history, these times remind me of nothing so much as the 14th-15th centuries in the west, which was a time of chaos, confusion, and the slow breakdown of the prevailing social order. And it is true that that time was given a plentiful amount of saints and mystics, so I think Pope Francis on to something here.
 
Robert_Sock said:
aleteia.org/2017/06/21/pope-francis-the-world-needs-mystics-and-saints/

VATICAN CITY — What the world today really needs is mystics and saints, men and women who “believe so deeply in Jesus that they become the image of Christ for the world,” Pope Francis said today…

Great article!
Click to expand...
He is right! 👍🙂

We do need mystics and saints as opposed to Modernists and Fundamentalists. Pope Francis has tackled the latter while Modernists are everywhere and therefore are more difficult to deal with.

If the Church requires more saints and mystics then she needs to rely more whole-heartedly on the Holy Mother, instead of all these blasphemies against her holy name, occurring, along with a tragic apathy towards devotions.
 
Very good article.

For anyone interested, please click on the link in the signature line and read about mystic and stigmatic Rhoda Wise. The cause for her canonization just started. Rhoda was quite influential in the early life of Mother Angelica.
 
Pope Francis is right. We need Saints from all walks of life. Great article.
 
DaddyGirl said:
Mystics, too!

.
Click to expand...
Historically mystics have come along, during periods of clear and strong proclamation of doctrine, by the Church as a whole. And when we have been lacking in one, we have also been lacking in the other.
 
I’ve been reading Thomas Merton again, especially his later works. There aren’t many mystics in the world these days, but he certainly was one.
 
commenter said:
Historically mystics have come along, during periods of clear and strong proclamation of doctrine, by the Church as a whole. And when we have been lacking in one, we have also been lacking in the other.
Click to expand...
Dear Commenter,

That is a very good observation. 👍
 
Expatreprocedit said:
As a student of history, these times remind me of nothing so much as the 14th-15th centuries in the west, which was a time of chaos, confusion, and the slow breakdown of the prevailing social order. And it is true that that time was given a plentiful amount of saints and mystics, so I think Pope Francis on to something here.
Click to expand...
👍

I fear that the persecutions of those times are coming back with a vengeance.
 
ComplineSanFran said:
I’ve been reading Thomas Merton again, especially his later works. There aren’t many mystics in the world these days, but he certainly was one.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I’m in the camp that believes we are all mystics to a certain extent, or at the very least we are all called to be mystics (I’m confident Merton would agree with the latter if not the former).

I guess it depends on what is meant my “mystic”. I see a mystic as someone whose faith life is experiential in some way. We don’t believe because we were told, we believe because it was shown to us. I’ve had experiences of God as I’m sure most here have as well. I’m far more Martha these days but we all have at least a little Mary in us and it will change throughout the years. I was far more prayerful when I was discerning marriage. Now that I’m married in a new town with a kid on the way I don’t have time the same time to spend.
 
J_Peterson said:
I disagree. I’m in the camp that believes we are all mystics to a certain extent, or at the very least we are all called to be mystics (I’m confident Merton would agree with the latter if not the former).

I guess it depends on what is meant my “mystic”. I see a mystic as someone whose faith life is experiential in some way. We don’t believe because we were told, we believe because it was shown to us. I’ve had experiences of God as I’m sure most here have as well. I’m far more Martha these days but we all have at least a little Mary in us and it will change throughout the years. I was far more prayerful when I was discerning marriage. Now that I’m married in a new town with a kid on the way I don’t have time the same time to spend.
Click to expand...
Hope all goes well with the new addition.
 
When the Church loses its sense of mysticism, religion becomes mechanical. Do this, and that, and you get this other result, as long as you follow the formula properly. There is no room for surprises by God, passion, or what may be called “romance”.

When the Church loses its sense of Truth, there can be no growth in the Faith, no spiritual progress because you measure progressing against. You have no idea which surprises are coming from God, and which from some other source. There is no genuine “passion” or “romance” in the relationship because there is no solid doctrine, or accurate communication in the relationship. There is no sharing of Christian mystical experiences, because you have no common ground of doctrine, no way to discern if the person is responding to God, the devil, peer pressure, or some other spirit.

We have gone through maybe 60 or so years of drought in doctrine, so we have had 60 or more years drought in mysticism. There are exceptions - think Poland, for instance, JP II - but even in the exceptions, I think where you find genuine Christian mysticism, you also find emphasis on doctrinal truth. And where one is weak, the other is weak too.

When doctrine is solidly taught and communicated, the mystical charism can roam free. People can share their experiences with others who benefit, because they have a common frame of reference. When genuine mysticism is flourishing, there is a desire to learn more about the Beloved, and to share that love. Both those things require - or rather, cherish, doctrinal consistency.
 
commenter said:
When the Church loses its sense of mysticism, religion becomes mechanical. Do this, and that, and you get this other result, as long as you follow the formula properly. There is no room for surprises by God, passion, or what may be called “romance”.

When the Church loses its sense of Truth, there can be no growth in the Faith, no spiritual progress because you measure progressing against. You have no idea which surprises are coming from God, and which from some other source. There is no genuine “passion” or “romance” in the relationship because there is no solid doctrine, or accurate communication in the relationship. There is no sharing of Christian mystical experiences, because you have no common ground of doctrine, no way to discern if the person is responding to God, the devil, peer pressure, or some other spirit.

We have gone through maybe 60 or so years of drought in doctrine, so we have had 60 or more years drought in mysticism. There are exceptions - think Poland, for instance, JP II - but even in the exceptions, I think where you find genuine Christian mysticism, you also find emphasis on doctrinal truth. And where one is weak, the other is weak too.

When doctrine is solidly taught and communicated, the mystical charism can roam free. People can share their experiences with others who benefit, because they have a common frame of reference. When genuine mysticism is flourishing, there is a desire to learn more about the Beloved, and to share that love. Both those things require - or rather, cherish, doctrinal consistency.
Click to expand...
I see it the other way around. God will lead you to his laws but the law will not lead you to God. Of course this has been my experience so I’m happy to hear stories that go in the other direction.

I agree with the spirit of your post though. I can say that the experiences I’ve had led me deeper into my faith. That’s the test. If an experience changes your life for the better and leads you closer to God and His Church than you can be assured without doubt that it was a real experience. If it leads you towards pride and makes you feel like you are “above” the Church (institutional and the people in the pews), it is coming from another direction and the experience should be considered as nothing. It’s the Church that helps us determine what is real and what is delusion.

I still say that mysticism is alive and well in the Church although it’s popularity waxes and wanes over the generations. In America we have been heavily influenced by Protestant thought and historically those churches were mistrustful of mysticism (groups like the Pentecostals and Quakers are exceptions). I think our mystical tradition could be a big attraction for modern folks since nowadays we tend to put “experience” on a pedestal that other generations didn’t (ETA: One problem with modern people though is that we want things our way; mysticism is wild and can’t be tamed and will blow where She may). We want to see with our own eyes, not someone else’s.

Read Richard Rohr and similar writers. Mysticism will never go away because it’s the human experience of the divine. As long as there are humans seeking God, there will be mystics. I’d bet my next paycheck that many on this site are mystics to some degree and may not even realize it. How can we believe in the Eucharist without a mystical sense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top