I don’t think anyone was trying to force a type of choice on the Cardinals. It seemed to be more of a respectful recognition of what is transpiring. At least that was my personal view.
EXACTLY.
Huge and salaried positions in a parish which could be eliminated by people ‘saying the black and doing the red’ and not changing things every year and buying new this, new that, all kinds of ‘material bells and whistles’ for teaching the young, etc. . . that was wasteful and extravagant. Scrapping altar rails and neglecting organs and installing all kinds of amps etc. for the guitars and big screens for the P&W songs. . .that was wasteful and extravagant.The imitations of Christ are relevant to everything the men of the Church do.
Well if they do then they are decieving themselves. His message, on all areas, was plainly spoken, clear and simple to understand. No ‘wriggle room’ for those on either ‘side’.
Is Christ a King?
How anyone can say that the simplicity in which Christ lived his life has got nothing to do with how our Cardinals (and indeed us all) should strive to live their lives is quite bizarre really. Are the Cardinals simply Princes of a materialistic Earthly dynasty, with all the trappings that go with it?
It is disingenuous and dismissive. It is like some are gleefully rubbing their hands together and saying finally we have a Pope who gets it. They are so very wrong. This Pope loves and accepts the last two Popes. There may be excesses in the Curia that need corrected. His style may be different for the very reasons you mentioned. But, what the “left” are reading into his pontificate is wishful thinking. Morality cannot be changed.EXACTLY.
And it’s hurtful and dismissive of the previous Popes to say (and boy, is it being said) that Pope Francis is going for the ‘humble’ approach as if the previous Popes were glory hounds.
They weren’t.
Pope Francis’ personal style as both a Jesuit priest (who has taken a VOW of poverty, I believe, as opposed to say a diocesean priest who does not make a solemn vow) and his own call to ‘simplicity’ does NOT mean that previous Popes personal styles which were more geared to the use of ceremonial to demonstrate the sacred and sacrificial by use of SIGNs were ‘wrong’, or that Pope Francis is somehow taking us back to more "Jesus like’ simplicity after we’d had ‘man-made’ grandeur.
BOTH ‘simplicity’ and ‘sign’ are necessary and both are part of who Jesus is.
I have NO problem whatsoever in simplicity, TRUE simplicity. I think that Pope Francis’ own style will hopefully remove excess that is NOT part of a Christly role. The ‘excess’ for example of people throwing out gold chalices for glass ones, or exchanging linen altar hanging for felt and burlap. . .that was wasteful and extravagant!
Ah for the simplicity of the old linens that could be carefully washed and cleaned and lasted for decadesm, instead of having ‘new’ burlap in the tie-dye colors of each new year,. . .
ah for the simplicity of an organ (and indeed, nothing but the human voice during Lent) instead of amped up, ramped up, we need bigger and better SOUND and LIGHTS etc.
The simplicity of children learning the catechism without having to have movies, ‘activities’ etc. to make them more exciting. . .
yep, I’m all for simplicity, thank you Pope Francis!!
I have read several veiled insults towards the last two Popes from people self identifying as Catholic. It is wrong.
This is also what Brother JR is saying in Traditional Catholicism, regarding the continuity aspect.
I’m not talking about robes, I’m talking about cars etc. I never knew that expensive cars are also signs and symbols and symbols of Christ’s authority on Earth. What next? Rolex watches as symbols of Divine authority?
It is a superficial understating for a superficial people.An example from today’s Reuter’s story about the Inaugural Mass:
Excuse me?!?!? Pope Benedict didn’t place emphasis on the poor? It’s as if the Church is all of a sudden going to start caring for the poor which she has never done before.
I agree, morality cannot be changed, but Pope Francis has made it clear that our morality also includes the need to focus on caring for those in poverty, caring for the environment, and for those with economic and political power to use this power primarily as a means to care for the less fortunate. He is directing the Church (and us as part of the Church) to focus on areas of our morality that have been overlooked in recent years (perhaps because these areas of morality directly impact upon our rather wealthy pockets?)
Then you haven’t read this whole thread. Look around page 6/7 and you will see posters opining that Cardinals driving Fiats or taking taxis is what “should” be done. :sad_yes:
But, I do not think that is a new emphasis. The new Pope’s style seems different and that is fine. But, for example, Pope Benedict took heat for his encyclical CARITAS IN VERITATE.
I was peeved reading this “news” story also. What about Pope Benedict’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate?An example from today’s Reuter’s story about the Inaugural Mass:
Excuse me?!?!? Pope Benedict didn’t place emphasis on the poor? It’s as if the Church is all of a sudden going to start caring for the poor which she has never done before.