Pope's speech to US Congress [full text] [CC]

[Thomas_White]

Seriously?
Have you forgotten about all of the disagreement about the changes wrought
by Vatican II ?
…and much complaining about John XXIII because of it !

There are *still *complaints about Vatican II !

Yes, seriously. What I have not forgotten is that Dei Verbum is a Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope Pius VI.

I will be frank and honest. Perhaps as a result of growing up and coming of age prior to Vatican II and then experiencing its implementation, I have a certain perspective. The Church prior to Vatican II was a unified Church. Following Vatican II and its implementation, differences emerged and in time those difference were reinforced by partisan politics. For some so-called ‘conservative’ Catholics, this was a reaction to what was the process of an implementation out of control, but to the extent it remains political it limits a true understanding of Catholic teaching, IMHO, and is only divisive. Certainly, Joseph Ratzinger vigorously sought to control the damage to the Church and continued to do so during his papacy as Pope Benedict XVI. I trust his teaching concerning the conscience.

I am not at all persuaded by the views of some so-called ‘conservative’ Catholics, nor do those views deter me from Catholic belief. Again IMHO, those views have only contributed to a division among U.S. Catholics where neither side is correct.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

Yes, seriously. What I have not forgotten is that Dei Verbum is a Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope Pius VI.

I will be frank and honest. Perhaps as a result of growing up and coming of age prior to Vatican II and then experiencing its implementation, I have a certain perspective. The Church prior to Vatican II was a unified Church. Following Vatican II and its implementation, differences emerged and in time those difference were reinforced by partisan politics. For some so-called ‘conservative’ Catholics, this was a reaction to what was the process of an implementation out of control, but to the extent it remains political it limits a true understanding of Catholic teaching, IMHO, and is only divisive. Certainly, Joseph Ratzinger vigorously sought to control the damage to the Church and continued to do so during his papacy as Pope Benedict XVI. I trust his teaching concerning the conscience.

I am not at all persuaded by the views of some so-called ‘conservative’ Catholics, nor do those views deter me from Catholic belief. Again IMHO, those views have only contributed to a division among U.S. Catholics where neither side is correct.

Hard to rail against division on the Church when you specifically cite “conservative Catholics”, whoever they are, as the problem. Ummm, that’s pretty much dividing the Church in a way you seem to complain about.

I don’t think it was CCs who enouraged nuns to abandon their habits, shake their hips during Mass to the tunes of Marty Haugen, or pushed for more progressive attitudes towards catechisis, contraception, the sanctity of marriage, or abortion. Either way, I am not complaining about a lack of unity, so I can call out factions without seeming hypocritical. But you can’t really do that, can you?

 

[Melvin]

Rest assured I come with no desire to burn anyone. But when people fear losing their nation and I’ve heard that a lot from Americans over the course of the past several yrs. I never quite know what to make of it. Because I don’t understand what nation it is they fear losing. The fear certainly can not be because of new faces. Because the Pope spoke of those faces, including those faces coming north, and said not to fear them. They come for better opportunity. And he said is that not what all of us want for our children? He didn’t say have them go to Spain. He said to not fear the foreigner. That most of us descend from foreigners. To not repeat the same sins when a stranger is within our midst. To not be taken aback by the numbers. To not turn our backs on our neighbors. But to see their faces. Hear their stories. And to respond humanely, justly and fraternally. He instructed us to avoid the temptation to discard even whatever may prove troublesome. To live by the Golden Rule. So it seems to me if we would only strive to heed the Pope’s message on this, the US is not being lost. But rather it remains and in this way merely grows closer to the spirit of Christ. God bless America.

If you cannot understand what “nation” Americans fear losing, then I can’t help you, because we live in two totally different worlds.

Another poster suggests that maybe this whole issue is above our pay grade. How convenient it would be for those who don’t understand what “nation” Americans fear losing if the rest of us just said, “Well, it’s too much for me. Why should I worry about it? Who am I? I’m sure it will all work out.”

As for those who speak of Texas, my family on my Father’s side has lived in Texas since the mid 1800’s. We once owned most of the land in downtown Paris before its development. Texas is a special case…once its own nation, made up of Mexicans and Whites who worked together (not without difficulty at times), a solidly Christian population, with a common goal and a common future…really, a common people. That argument does not apply to what is happening now: the Hispanic racial desire for the “reconquista,” and to establish “La Republica del Norte,” often modeled on a socialist worldview that is antithetical to the founding principles of both the Texas Republic and the United States…

But, why worry? “It will all work out…”

 

[Thomas_White]

Either way, I am not complaining about a lack of unity, so I can call out factions without seeming hypocritical.

sigh…why bother with it, one wonders, when it seems futile to do so.

 

[pnewton]

Hard to rail against division on the Church when you specifically cite “conservative Catholics”, whoever they are, as the problem. Ummm, that’s pretty much dividing the Church in a way you seem to complain about.

For charity’s sake, hypocrisy would be saying one should not use labels like conservative Catholic, and then using that label. Saying that a group that uses that label is divisive, is not hypocrisy. There is a thread with multiple news articles that have used this label. I do not see any validity in the ad hominem you posted.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

For charity’s sake, hypocrisy would be saying one should not use labels like conservative Catholic, and then using that label. Saying that a group that uses that label is divisive, is not hypocrisy. There is a thread with multiple news articles that have used this label. I do not see any validity in the ad hominem you posted.

That’s fine if that’s how you see it. But ad hominem? Please cite where I called anyone a name? Unless references to Maurty Haugen offend you?

I just found it odd to essentially complain about a lack of unity in the Church, then go on to cite Conservative catholics as being responsible for the division, which in essence is a statement that would seem to promote division by pointing fingers at one group being at fault.

 

[Thomas_White]

That’s fine if that’s how you see it. But ad hominem? Please cite where I called anyone a name? Unless references to Maurty Haugen offend you?

I just found it odd to essentially complain about a lack of unity in the Church, then go on to cite Conservative catholics as being responsible for the division, which in essence is a statement that would seem to promote division by pointing fingers at one group being at fault.

Perhaps it would be helpful to read the comment again (#390) and pay particular attention to its last sentence:

“Again, IMHO, those views have only contributed to a division among U.S. Catholics where neither side is correct.”

 

[pnewton]

That’s fine if that’s how you see it. But ad hominem? Please cite where I called anyone a name? Unless references to Maurty Haugen offend you?

“Ad hominem” does not mean name-calling, but an argument against a person:

“Either way, I am not complaining about a lack of unity, so I can call out factions without seeming hypocritical. But** you **can’t really do that, can you?”

Since you criticize someone specifically using the term, say* you* can do it and are not hypocritical, but then specifically say another poster can not do the same, then the argument is against the person, not the topic.

Do you think this website is hypocritical for have a forum for Traditional Catholicism? The first term is a modifier of the very word for universality.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

“Ad hominem” does not mean name-calling, but an argument against a person:

“Either way, I am not complaining about a lack of unity, so I can call out factions without seeming hypocritical. But** you **can’t really do that, can you?”

Since you criticize someone specifically using the term, say* you* can do it and are not hypocritical, but then specifically say another poster can not do the same, then the argument is against the person, not the topic.

Do you think this website is hypocritical for have a forum for Traditional Catholicism? The first term is a modifier of the very word for universality.

Get over it. If you think my calling out what I perceived as Thomas’s hypocrisy was done ad hominem, that’s unfortunate, but either way, I don’t much care. It wasn’t intended to be mean, it just seemed odd to me. I suspect there are plenty of other posts to get annoyed by whose actual intent was to be rude, so you should have plenty to express your ansgt about, though.

 

[sarah_j]

It’s my observation that some posters on this forum seem to accuse others of
“ad hominem attacks” and being “uncharitable” or “unChristian” as a
means of censoring posts they don’t like or to control the direction threads are
taking. (i.e. bullying posters they disagree with into shutting up ) .

All in the name of maintaining Christian charity on the forum.

 

[bitterhope]

It’s my observation that some posters on this forum seem to accuse others of
“ad hominem attacks” and being “uncharitable” or “unChristian” as a
means of censoring posts they don’t like or to control the direction threads are
taking. (i.e. bullying posters they disagree with into shutting up ) .

All in the name of maintaining Christian charity on the forum.

Happens a lot actually

 

[pnewton]

Get over it.

Get over it? May I remind you that you asked for a citation. Are you angry because I responded to you? That makes no sense.

It’s my observation that some posters on this forum seem to accuse others of
“ad hominem attacks” and being “uncharitable” or “unChristian” as a
means of censoring posts

“Some posters” actually no poster has the ability to censor, so that really makes no sense. And I would think that charity would not be so despised a concept at a Catholic site. On the other hand, I wonder if we sometimes get caught in the type of speech used by the world. If you “are what you eat” and you feed mainly on the diet of talk shows, pundits, op-eds, etc., then that becomes the way we speak.

This might be part of the reason the Holy Father comes across too soft. St. Paul, who himself was rather straightforward, admonished us to, " Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone." This is still the norm of Church leaders and documents today. The Holy Father in particular is known only read a little news and watch none. It should be expected that his speech would be different.

I would bet that as time goes on, Pope Francis in his “charitable” manner of speaking will actually accomplish more than all the posturing and demagoguery of politicians, left and right, who have largely lost the ability to communicate, listen and dialogue.

 

[rayne89]

Thank you. I appreciate this. I agree there is no where else to go. If the Catholic Church is not full truth then truth does not exist. The problem I have is that this seems on going with Pope Francis. This is just the latest in a long line of things he has said (or failed to say) that confuse me. I’m struggling with two specific teachings as well but that’s off topic so I won’t get into them. I really appreciate your response to me and acknowledging that it isn’t popular to ask questions about the pope. It’s tough when you are struggling to hold on to your faith and people seem to push you out instead of help you hang on.

You quoted the verse that rings in my head several times daily lately. The Holy Spirit at work…

I admit my first reaction to reading his speech to congress was “What!” I hadn’t had time to watch it yet. When I watched it and saw the reactions and heard the commentators I felt somewhat better. He is very different than what we’re used to. Yes many things previous popes have said are exactly what Francis conveys but his style is so different we don’t often recognize it. I have tried to begin reading Laudato Si -I have so far found it extremely technical in scientific language. I know God chose this particular pope at this particular time for a particular reason. I remind myself of that. There are times when I see the fruit of what Pope Francis is doing and other times when I wince because I know what confused reaction he’s going to cause. There are times when I say I love Pope Francis and times when I go ehh, oh no not again. Just keep hanging on. God is stretching us.

 

[Thomas_White]

I admit my first reaction to reading his speech to congress was “What!” I hadn’t had time to watch it yet. When I watched it and saw the reactions and heard the commentators I felt somewhat better. He is very different than what we’re used to. Yes many things previous popes have said are exactly what Francis conveys but his style is so different we don’t often recognize it. I have tried to begin reading Laudato Si -I have so far found it extremely technical in scientific language. I know God chose this particular pope at this particular time for a particular reason. I remind myself of that. There are times when I see the fruit of what Pope Francis is doing and other times when I wince because I know what confused reaction he’s going to cause. There are times when I say I love Pope Francis and times when I go ehh, oh no not again. Just keep hanging on. God is stretching us.

Maybe a bit more faith and confidence in the Holy Father would be a good thing. Remember that he is a Jesuit and underwent fourteen years of Jesuit formation, beginning in the 1950’s, before he was ordained a Catholic priest. He also taugh philosophy to college students before he was ordained. It is my perception that he is perhaps not so easily understood in the context of the U.S. Church, which really is divided along partisan lines. Some don’t care to hear it, but partisan politics surely plays a role in it for an outspoken few.

Laudato Si is very complex but is true to orthodox Catholic teaching. It is apparent that millions of people around the world, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, at least intuitively understand this pope and his message. Some perhaps do not. If Laudato Si is complex, as I believe it is, it would only be more complex to explain how the cultural paradigm described in the encyclical plays a role here as well. It is necessary, I think, to have faith in Pope Francis and trust that he knows very well what it is he is attempting.

 

[pnewton]

Some don’t care to hear it, but partisan politics surely plays a role in it for an outspoken few.

I am beginning to think partisan politics is more of a universal default position in this current generation. The immersion that we get in social media of emotional opinions leads us believe we have to have an opinion on everything, and it has to be a strong opinion on everything. Our political system is polarized as never before. Compromise is now a dirty word. We are so busy talking, we seldom listen.

As Pope Francis has kept away from the media, he thinks and speaks differently. It is refreshing, but perhaps increasingly unfamiliar, especial to Americans.

 

[Thomas_White]

I am beginning to think partisan politics is more of a universal default position in this current generation. The immersion that we get in social media of emotional opinions leads us believe we have to have an opinion on everything, and it has to be a strong opinion on everything. Our political system is polarized as never before. Compromise is now a dirty word. We are so busy talking, we seldom listen.

As Pope Francis has kept away from the media, he thinks and speaks differently. It is refreshing, but perhaps increasingly unfamiliar, especial to Americans.

I think so too, especially when I turn on the car radio and hear yet another partisan political diatribe. Since the release of Laudato Si, I have attended Sunday Mass at three different parish Churches and have not heard a mention of the encyclical–not one single word.

Is there a connection here? Who is it that is preaching to those Catholics?

 

[Suudy]

I think so too, especially when I turn on the car radio and hear yet another partisan political diatribe. Since the release of Laudato Si, I have attended Sunday Mass at three different parish Churches and have not heard a mention of the encyclical–not one single word.

Nor have I. Nor have I ever heard a single mention of Humanae Vitae, Rerum Novarum, or any other encyclical that has even a remote hint of controversy. It’s not specific to Papa Francis.

 

[Thomas_White]

Nor have I. Nor have I ever heard a single mention of Humanae Vitae, Rerum Novarum, or any other encyclical that has even a remote hint of controversy. It’s not specific to Papa Francis.

Perhaps you are not of sufficient age to recall when Humanae Vitae was released. But please tell me who it is that says Laudato Si is controversial?

 

[Suudy]

Perhaps you are not of sufficient age to recall when Humanae Vitae was released. But please tell me who it is that says Laudato Si is controversial?

By controversial, I meant politically controversial. Abortion and contraception are political hot buttons, and so is climate change. I’ve heard nothing on any of these topics ever since I’ve been a convert. Not a single homily. Not a single bulletin message.

 

[Thomas_White]

By controversial, I meant politically controversial. Abortion and contraception are political hot buttons, and so is climate change. I’ve heard nothing on any of these topics ever since I’ve been a convert. Not a single homily. Not a single bulletin message.

I am old enough to recall that even Catholic bishops spoke in open defiance of Humanae Vitae when it was released, and the encyclical was widely discussed at all levels of the Church. But yes, the controversy over the papal encyclical Laudato Si is political, isn’t it? That is my point.

But is that a reason not to mention the a papal encyclical during Mass following its release when Pope Francis specifically requested that bishops see to it that diocesan priests discussed the encyclical in their homilies during Mass?