The Pope's big interview

[JustPink]

I think from reading these posts and others on other websites that the Pope’s comments have caused a great deal of confusion among the faithful, something we did NOT need. God is not the author of confusion. We are caught up in some kind of guessing game about what he was “really” trying to say. Most of the laity probably do not read the Catechism and some may being interpreting his comments to fit their own beliefs.

I don’t think there’s really any confusion going on at all. He’s been quite clear in what he’s said, and nothing he’s said has been against Church teaching. I think some people just don’t like that he’s been focusing more on mercy and love rather than on the rules. He hasn’t negated the rules, he hasn’t changed the rules, he hasn’t argued the rules, he hasn’t said the rules aren’t important. He’s just not keeping them as his #1 most focused and most talked about thing.

 

[JustPink]

So, they are STILL (and always will be) grave sins. All Francis seems to be doing is asking for a different emphasis for the time being.

^Yes. Not that hard to understand, people.

 

[JustPink]

Since you mentioned abortion, I’ll try to explain it this way. Suppose you had a teenage daughter and she becomes pregnant. As a parent, how would you approach the situation?
I would hope that instead of condemning your daughter for premarital sex (by calling her a slut, etc.), you would tell her how much you loved her and encourage her to keep the baby. By not focusing on the negative (the fact that she sinned), but on the positive (that new life inside of her is a precious gift), said daughter is more likely not to go through a secret abortion out of fear and pressure.

Pope Francis is leading sinners to the door of mercy that the sinners themselves have dismissed about being either unworthy or too proud to approach. Pope Francis is laying the foundation for their eventual return, should they freely choose to do so with the help of God’s grace.

Apparently some people here prefer the slut approach.

Good post.

 

[JustPink]

Originally Posted by Thomas Casey (Moderator)

following will not be tolerated:

1. Bashing the Holy Father

1. Passing judgment on him and his actions, because they don’t meet your approval or your preferences

1. Attempting to impose the model of previous popes on the new pope

1. Labeling the new pope

1. Speaking about his papacy in a negative way, without giving the man a chance

1. Or any other behavior that the moderators find unacceptable on a Catholic forum

Such posts will be removed and infractions given.

Please keep in mind that Catholic Answers is truly Catholic, faithful to the Holy See and respectful of the Holy Father.

See here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=766224

 

[janeway529]

I had a feeling Pope Francis is a mystic, and I’m glad he affirmed that in the interview.
I’m surprised that the Pope’s breviary is in Latin. Very hardcore!

 

[dans0622]

Apparently some people here prefer the slut approach.

Good post.

Hello,

Since the other question didn’t lead anywhere (I’ll take the blame for that–it must be my lack of intelligence. It seems I am too dumb to understand what you are saying and what the Pope said.), I’ll ask another that is basically the same: who here prefers that approach? I see no one who “apparently” prefers it.

Dan

 

[TerryOfromCA]

We need to clear up an important point here. America Magazine did not conduct the interview. They printed the full text of an interview that the Pope gave to Antonio Spadaro, S.J., editor in chief of La Civiltà Cattolica, the Italian Jesuit journal.

The article is an accurate reporting of that interview, at least as far as is possible as it was translated from Italian.

Is it totally complete? No editing? If so, then that’s great, I’m glad to hear it.

Still, generally speaking I still think that magazine is a rag. But as Scott Hahn said once, even a blind hog can find an acorn once in a while.

 

[JustPink]

Hello,

Since the other question didn’t lead anywhere (I’ll take the blame for that–it must be my lack of intelligence. It seems I am too dumb to understand what you are saying and what the Pope said.), I’ll ask another that is basically the same: who here prefers that approach? I see no one who “apparently” prefers it.

Dan

Certainly.

All the people who are complaining about Pope Francis and his person/mercy focused approach seem to “apparently” have a problem with it.

Hope that helps.

 

[janeway529]

Hello,

Since the other question didn’t lead anywhere (I’ll take the blame for that–it must be my lack of intelligence. It seems I am too dumb to understand what you are saying and what the Pope said.), I’ll ask another that is basically the same: who here prefers that approach? I see no one who “apparently” prefers it.

Dan

Hi Dan, I hope JustPink doesn’t mind me explaining this one too.

If you have read through this thread, there are people who have taken offense to Pope Francis’ words, perceiving Pope Francis as “too soft” on sin by having more of an emphasis on love and mercy. If you recall Jesus’ parable of The Prodigal Son, for example, the focus of the parable itself less about the sins of the son, but more on the merciful actions of the father. Not once does the father mention the sin of his son because the son already knows the fact that he sinned, and God’s grace moved the son to return. The father in the parable is SO merciful and loving, that even the older son is bitter and complains to his father, “I have been faithful to you for all these years, and not once have you rewarded me. But when this sinful son of yours comes back, you have a giant party for him.” What does the father say in reply? “Everything I own is yours, BUT we must celebrate the return of your brother because he was lost and now is found; he was dead and now has come back to life.”

The parable should really be renamed The Merciful Father, but we all know it as The Prodigal Son. Kind of shows how limited our human mentality really is to the unconditional love and bottomless mercy of God.

 

[JustPink]

Hi Dan, I hope JustPink doesn’t mind me explaining this one too.

If you have read through this thread, there are people who have taken offense to Pope Francis’ words, perceiving Pope Francis as “too soft” on sin by having more of an emphasis on love and mercy. If you recall Jesus’ parable of The Prodigal Son, for example, the focus of the parable itself less about the sins of the son, but more on the merciful actions of the father. Not once does the father mention the sin of his son because the son already knows the fact that he sinned, and God’s grace moved the son to return. The father in the parable is SO merciful and loving, that even the older son is bitter and complains to his father, “I have been faithful to you for all these years, and not once have you rewarded me. But when this sinful son of yours comes back, you have a giant party for him.” What does the father say in reply? “Everything I own is yours, BUT we must celebrate the return of your brother because he was lost and now is found; he was dead and now has come back to life.”

The parable should really be renamed The Merciful Father, but we all know it as The Prodigal Son. Kind of shows how limited our human mentality really is to the unconditional love and bottomless mercy of God.

Thank you for giving the full explanation. You have more patience than I.

 

[OraLabora]

Is it totally complete? No editing? If so, then that’s great, I’m glad to hear it.

Still, generally speaking I still think that magazine is a rag. But as Scott Hahn said once, even a blind hog can find an acorn once in a while.

You could actually try reading the interview.

If you’re not happy with it you can try your luck with the French translation.

newsletter.revue-etudes.com/TU_Septembre_2013/TU10-13.pdf

Being fluent in French I can tell you that the English one is the same as the French one.

 

[TerryOfromCA]

You could actually try reading the interview.

If you’re not happy with it you can try your luck with the French translation.

newsletter.revue-etudes.com/TU_Septembre_2013/TU10-13.pdf

Being fluent in French I can tell you that the English one is the same as the French one.

Okay.

 

[janeway529]

Okay.

Keep calm and read on.
catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=997

 

[JustPink]

Keep calm and read on.
catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=997

From the link above:

So why are so many faithful Catholics upset by what the Pope has said? Because he has abandoned Church teaching? No. Because he has said something very new? No. Many of my friends, I fear, are disturbed because the Pope’s approach—his cajoling tone, his irenic line of thought—might give aid and comfort to the enemy. Yet that’s dangerous for a Christian, isn’t it—to think of people as enemies?

By now we all know people—friends, neighbors, relatives, colleagues—who have procured abortions, or who are active homosexuals, or live in irregular marital situations. How do we treat these people? Too often, I fear, we try to ignore them, or at least ignore their problems. We could do better.

But how can we help them? It will not help, in most cases, to keep telling them that their behavior is immoral. They have tuned out that message. But maybe, with patience and prayer, we can help them to recognize the grace of God, to see the power of the Gospel, to accept the message of mercy that Pope Francis emphasizes at every opportunity. A friend may be willing to confront his own sin, as soon as he realizes that a loving God is ready to forgive him.

Every person in this thread needs to read it.

 

[TMC]

You keep trying to put words in my mouth but I won’t let you.

My initial post said this:

I view anything that America magazine prints with skepticism.
I would have felt better if he had interviewed with Raymond Arroyo

That is my preference. I “prefer” to read or hear interviews done by faithful Catholics, not faux Catholics.

The interview was conducted by a Jesuit priest. Not that it matters, but the priest was an Italian and not a reporter for America magazine. The Pope apparently picked (or at least allowed) this particular priest to conduct this significant interview) Can you give us the basis of your suggestion that this priest (who the Pope knows, but you have never met) is a “faux Catholic.”

 

[TerryOfromCA]

The interview was conducted by a Jesuit priest. Not that it matters, but the priest was an Italian and not a reporter for America magazine. The Pope apparently picked (or at least allowed) this particular priest to conduct this significant interview) Can you give us the basis of your suggestion that this priest (who the Pope knows, but you have never met) is a “faux Catholic.”

You are several posts behind the ball. My concern was already addressed in post # 58

 

[TimothyH]

Hello,

The question (not just for you but for any reader) is: who ever talks about the rules all the time?

Who “insists only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods”?

Who is “obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently”?

When, and who was/is responsible for this: “The church sometimes has locked itself up in small things, in small-minded rules.”?

In other words, who is the Pope talking about in these comments? Internet bloggers? Would he bother to address them? If so, why not say so. I have no idea who he is talking about and I doubt anyone here has any idea. So, perhaps these are rhetorical questions.

Dan

I know plenty of single issue Catholics, focused exclusively on one issue, particularly abortion.

I used to be very dogmatic myself. I was interested in Church dogma and doctrine, systematic theology and ecclesiology. I was like an engineer who took everything apart, analyzed it to see how it worked, tried to quantify everything and understand every doctrine logically.

Then I spent some time at a monastery and realized that while all of that is interesting, it is mere straw compared to personally experiencing God’s presence in my life. While I realize that personal experience is not an indication of God’s presence, I have come to see that the interior life is far more important than dogma and doctrine. The monastery is where I learned to pray.

I have been called a heretic for it, and a Protestant. But now I am calm, much more at peace and I have personally experienced that joy in the presence of tribulation that Christians always talk about but never seem able to find.

-Tim-

 

[JustPink]

I know plenty of single issue Catholics, focused exclusively on one issue, particularly abortion.

I used to be very dogmatic myself. I was interested in Church dogma and doctrine, systematic theology and ecclesiology. I was like an engineer who took everything apart, analyzed it to see how it worked, tried to quantify everything and understand every doctrine logically.

Then I spent some time at a monastery and realized that while all of that is interesting, it is mere straw compared to personally experiencing God’s presence in my life. While I realize that personal experience is not an indication of God’s presence, I have come to see that the interior life is far more important than dogma and doctrine. The monastery is where I learned to pray.

I have been called a heretic for it, and a Protestant. But now I am calm, much more at peace and I have personally experienced that joy in the presence of tribulation that Christians always talk about but never seem able to find.

-Tim-

How is that protestant or heretical?? It’s not like you’re denying Church teaching… just changing your approach/focus.

 

[MarkInOregon]

I am very tired of people trying to blame the secular media for the things that Pope Francis has said in interviews. What he has said, he has said. And frankly, I am now at the point where I have to say that I am VERY uncomfortable with the way the Holy Father has been wording some of his answers. Saying that we are too focused on abortion and the sanctity of marraige??? I am not going to rehash some of the other things that he has said. Certainly the man is is intelligent enough to know how the press and the rest if the non Catholic world will take these statements. I hear liberalism and relativism creeping into certain statements. I am a convert who struggled between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. I pray that Pope Francis papacy will be reassuring to me that I have made the right decision.

Have you read the interview? What exactly does he say that you object to? From what I have seen it doesn’t matter who the Pope is or what he says – the media will hear what they want to hear and spin it the way they want to spin it. They ignored much of what Benedict the XVI said emphasising what they thought was negative to attack him and the Church. With Pope Francis they also ignor and misrepresent much of what he says but this time emphasising what they see as “positive” and playing it up as him being critical of the Church. Same old story. To quote a famous person, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear”.

I for one do not see liberalism or relativism is his thought. This is what the secular media sees, hopes for and plays up–we as Catholics should know better and be able to read his words and hear what they actually say and we should not be influenced by secular news reports. I am not sure most reporters reporting on the interview have even read the interview–it sure does not seem as if they have. I see a pastoral emphasis from this Pope. I see a reaching out to the lost sheep. I see a calling home. I see the Father watching for his children to return. I see an emphasis on the love and healing and saving power of Christ. I see an emphasis on proclaiming the Gospel when the Pope says things like, “The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this first proposition that the moral consequences then flow…a genuine sermon must begin with the first proclamation, with the proclamation of salvation. There is nothing more solid, deep and sure than this proclamation. Then you have to do catechesis. Then you can draw even a moral consequence. But the proclamation of the saving love of God comes before the moral and religious imperatives. Today sometimes it seems that the opposite order is prevailing.” Or when he says, “The most important thing is the first proclamation: Jesus Christ has saved you. And the ministers of the Church must be ministers of mercy above all. The confessor, for example, is always in danger of being either too much of a rigorist or too lax. Neither is merciful, because neither of them really takes responsibility for the person. The rigorist washes his hands so that he leaves it to the commandment. The loose minister washes his hands by simply saying, ‘This is not a sin’ or something like that. In pastoral ministry we must accompany people, and we must heal their wounds.”

I see a Pope saying we must heal the sick so that they can live–until that is done we cannot expect them to live let alone live a holy life. It should prompt us to ask questions such as, “Does my life – my actions and my words drive people away from Christ and his Church or draw them to Christ and his Church?” Unless people are attracked to Christ and his mercy through us and the Church and it’s ministers–they cannot experience the healing and saving of Christ–through which they will desire to and learn to live holy lives according to Christ and his Church.

Anyway I do not see what you apparently see in the Holy Fathers words. I do not see a softening of Church teaching but rather a reaching out and extending of Christs mercy and salvation – so that they may embrace Christ teaching through his Church.

The Peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[MarkInOregon]

Humanae Vitae:

“18. It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching. There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication. But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a “sign of contradiction.” (22) She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical.”

“The Church, in fact, cannot act differently toward men than did the Redeemer. She knows their weaknesses, she has compassion on the multitude, she welcomes sinners. But at the same time she cannot do otherwise than teach the law. For it is in fact the law of human life restored to its native truth and guided by the Spirit of God. (24) Observing the Divine Law.”

“28. And now, beloved sons, you who are priests, you who in virtue of your sacred office act as counselors and spiritual leaders both of individual men and women and of families—We turn to you filled with great confidence. For it is your principal duty—We are speaking especially to you who teach moral theology—to spell out clearly and completely the Church’s teaching on marriage.”

“We implore you, to give a lead to your priests who assist you in the sacred ministry, and to the faithful of your dioceses, and to devote yourselves with all zeal and without delay to safeguarding the holiness of marriage, in order to guide married life to its full human and Christian perfection. Consider this mission as one of your most urgent responsibilities at the present time. As you well know, it calls for concerted pastoral action in every field of human diligence, economic, cultural and social.”

…

Pope Francis:

“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.

The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently."

Please explain more fully.

Thank you,
The Peace of Christ,
Mark