The Pope's big interview

[CB_Catholic]

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

Excellent post!

 

[MarkInOregon]

My problem is as follows. Mercy is a wonderful thing and it is truly one of Gods greatest gifts. The murder of the unborn is a horrific sin that I, in my human state cannot condone or excuse. Sorry I just can’t do it. In this regard I don’t understand exactly what the Holy Father is trying to say. Is it that yes these are grave sins, but we should not judge them as such and focus solely on forgiveness and mercy after the fact? Somehow that doesn’t seem to be right at all. What it seems like to me is that he is saying that the Church needs to accomodate herself to the sensibilities and morality of modern man, and I cannot agree with that at all.

I hope that I am wrong, but that is what it seems like to me.

Where does the Holy Father ask you to condone or excuse abortion? Why would you think he is saying we should not judge these as grave sins? You certainly shouldn’t judge the person–that is for God alone. Where do you get that he is saying the Church needs to accomodate herself to the sensibilities and morality of modern man? It would be helpful to have quotes from the Holy Father because I just can’t figure out where these ideas come from. So I need help in understanding how those of you who see this see it–so please provide quotes.

I have a questions. What would be the best way to stop abortion? Through legislation or through the conversion of peoples hearts? (and please don’t accuse me of suggesting we shouldn’t work to outlaw abortion–I am not suggesting that–it needs to be stopped–I am asking about the best way to stop it.) As a follow-up what’s the best way to covert peoples hearts? Through calling them murderers and beating them into submission or through showing and extending the Gospel message to them? The Gospel will lead them to salvation, to conversion heart and to a sincere repentance and to a true seeking to live a holy life. I think that is the Holy Fathers point.

The Peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[MarkInOregon]

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.

Then perhaps we should not let anyone read the Bible either as there are a plethora of ideas out there about what it says.

Look at all the threads on these forums regarding various paragraphs in the catechism.

Look at the endless debates about what is grave matter, what consistutes a moral sin, about what is permitted between married persons, etc., etc., etc.

The only solution to your concern is for no one to say or write anytning.

I am sure if the Holy Father said, “Look Dick, Look. See Spot run.” that some reporter would twist those words into a criticism of the Church and I would come here and find posters concerned that the Holy Father was undermining Church teaching and saying that Spot shouldn’t run anymore.

The Peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[L_Reynolds]

The problem is the liberal have no education. Period, and its very clear in the writing.

Prayer begins with examination of conscience, where are these words?

The grace of the Holy Spirit, Gods Blessing, state of the soul, where are these crucial, rudimentary and fundamental words which only can, speak on the Divine?

Reparation, how God can send his kind mercy, where are those words and the rational?

Translation and a rejection of a very simple question, arranging the world word endorsement.

Leaving out, the state of grace approving a blanket given, with no incentive for the state of grace achieved at the immediate moment of reconciliation.

There is no reconciliation potential remaining, in Gods blanket endorsement and this is the why, the words are used for the humble faithful. Thats religion and philosophy of Christianity not what an individual independently would like to see.

Dis-unity.

 

[Brendan]

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

That is interesting. I have yet to meet a Catholic who was solely focused on a single issue, even abortion. Even the most staunch pro-life advocates I know will have a primary focus, on the Eucharist, the Rosary, Daily Mass or some other expression of Catholic piety

The pro-life work, as I have seen, tends to flow out of Catholic faith expressions, and not be a single issue at all.

I have yet to meet a Catholic who simply views the Church as a anti-abortion club.

 

[trickster]

wow…this is the most energetic posting and discussion that I have seen on Catholic Answers since I have been involved. I read the whole string and a few thoughts came to mind.

1. Really, Francis is saying the same thing as Benedict and other popes to a great degree, it is a matter of emphasis, the audiences both popes were trying to address when they said or did what they did… the situation in which both popes were trying to honour the Spirit’s direction. Benedict I think developed that academic basis of a lot of things that JP or Francis are not as good at… (it wasn’t their primary calling)… Benedict to me created in a non-charismatic way the sober foundation to a) explain and reflect JP I and II and b) to provide ground for future popes to exercise their Petrine Ministry.
2. In terms of overtalking issues of abortion, gay marriage etc., I think that it is important to connect with people, not to be critical of them. When we develop trust with people, we can begin to share in a humble manner what we believe and why…and let the Holy Spirit do the conversion work… and the Holy Spirit does not need our assistance or the assistance of state law…to do His work.
3. Cardinal Dolan is such an impressive person when he said that the Pope is shaking things up (which Dolan believes is needed) and the he himself has been called to examine his own conscience on the matter and has been humble enough to honour the pope even though it may contradict what Dolan has done in good conscience in the past…finally…
4. The Holy Spirit is in charge and he is working in different ways with each of the Popes and our next pope will also surprise us when he comes…and the pope after that… that “chaos”, “creativity” and new understanding - is that not part of progressive revelation? Is that not the workings of the Holy Spirit when we are challenged to disown the pride in which we hold our dogma? Dogma not being what the church teaches but what we think that church teaching means and our strategy to implement our black and white understanding of that church teaching; is that not the sin of pride?

Anyways, bottom line… is I really love this Pope!

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[AndyP2010]

The Jesuit Post

Has a series of articles written by young Jesuits about this interview that are worth reading. One of the best that suggest that when the Holy Father issues an interview this wide ranging and with this much depth that after our initial reactions, we spend time in silence and prayer.

Discerning the Papal Interview

Well, the pope gives us a place to start exploring that. Explaining discernment Pope Francis quoted a motto of St. Ignatius: non coerceri a maximo, sed contineri a minimo divinum est (not to be limited by the greatest and yet to be contained in the tiniest – this is divine). He notes that this motto “offers parameters to assume a correct position for discernment, in order to hear the things of God from God’s ‘point of view.’”

When I hit this quote in mid-tweet, I paused. Did he just ask me to step outside of my concerns, my own ideologies and ecclesiologies? Should I abandon my idols? Even if I’m idolizing him? 3 Did he ask me to abandon my own plans and schemes and consider for a moment that there is something so much greater than me? What does the world look like from God’s perspective? This is a powerful salve and perhaps the best way to avoid that pesky swelling associated with too many soundbites.

 

[otjm]

My pastor spent his homily this last Sunday on Pope Francis’ interview, as he (my pastor) was innundated with questions and fears from parishoners, almost all of whom had only heard what the media reported.

One of his points was that the last two popes were didactic in style, both having come from the world of academia. As Father pointed out, Francis is not didactic, but rather hortatory. He is there to light a fire under all of us, to understand that the Church is not about dogma; the Church is about Christ. And Christ is about salvation. That is not to get rid of dogma, or to trivialize it; but as has been pointed out by a number of posters, dogma is not first; morality is not first; salvation is. And salvation at its very root is about relationship; relationship with God, through Christ and as the working of the Holy Spirit. As has been said, the devil knows dogma and can quote Scripture.

One of the issues Christ repeatedly had with the Pharisees is that they knew the moral law; they knew the doctrines of Judaism. And they were not all that bad in following that law. As Christ repeatedly pointed out, one does not attain salvation through the following of the law; it requires more.

Note - I said “more”. Christ told sinners to go “And sin no more”, but what brought them to Christ in the first place was not their sin, nor was it Christ “pounding on the table” and repeating the moral law; it was their relationship with Him and His absolutely clear sense of mercy.

As to the repeated question “who is solely focused on” Abortion, etc. and the repeated comments of those who “Know no one like that”, go open your dictionary and look up the word “hyperbole”. Read the definition a couple of times, then go look in the mirror. I doubt there is any of us (and I include myself) who has not fallen into the trap of focusing narrowly; be it doctrine, rules, moral issues, or any of the other issues that tend to obtain from us too much focus.

Then, again, maybe I have stumbled into a veritable collection of saints. But me thinks there is something which all of us can take to heart from Francis’ interview, should we decide to invite the working of the Holy Spirit.

 

[muffindell]

Pope Francis is a breath of fresh air. He is taking a different view of how things should be interpreted, a new view on how the church views gay people, how the church is run and it’s finances. Hopefully he will embrace a new view of divorce and marriage, contraception etc He is showing true leadership and much love, it appears that he’s trying to reach out to his many lost sheep that are unable to take part in the church for one reason or other.

 

[OraLabora]

My pastor spent his homily this last Sunday on Pope Francis’ interview, as he (my pastor) was innundated with questions and fears from parishoners, almost all of whom had only heard what the media reported.

One of his points was that the last two popes were didactic in style, both having come from the world of academia. As Father pointed out, Francis is not didactic, but rather hortatory. He is there to light a fire under all of us, to understand that the Church is not about dogma; the Church is about Christ. And Christ is about salvation. That is not to get rid of dogma, or to trivialize it; but as has been pointed out by a number of posters, dogma is not first; morality is not first; salvation is. And salvation at its very root is about relationship; relationship with God, through Christ and as the working of the Holy Spirit. As has been said, the devil knows dogma and can quote Scripture.

One of the issues Christ repeatedly had with the Pharisees is that they knew the moral law; they knew the doctrines of Judaism. And they were not all that bad in following that law. As Christ repeatedly pointed out, one does not attain salvation through the following of the law; it requires more.

Note - I said “more”. Christ told sinners to go “And sin no more”, but what brought them to Christ in the first place was not their sin, nor was it Christ “pounding on the table” and repeating the moral law; it was their relationship with Him and His absolutely clear sense of mercy.

As to the repeated question “who is solely focused on” Abortion, etc. and the repeated comments of those who “Know no one like that”, go open your dictionary and look up the word “hyperbole”. Read the definition a couple of times, then go look in the mirror. I doubt there is any of us (and I include myself) who has not fallen into the trap of focusing narrowly; be it doctrine, rules, moral issues, or any of the other issues that tend to obtain from us too much focus.

Then, again, maybe I have stumbled into a veritable collection of saints. But me thinks there is something which all of us can take to heart from Francis’ interview, should we decide to invite the working of the Holy Spirit.

Very lucid. Thanks for this!

 

[dans0622]

…
As to the repeated question “who is solely focused on” Abortion, etc. and the repeated comments of those who “Know no one like that”, go open your dictionary and look up the word “hyperbole”. Read the definition a couple of times, then go look in the mirror. I doubt there is any of us (and I include myself) who has not fallen into the trap of focusing narrowly; be it doctrine, rules, moral issues, or any of the other issues that tend to obtain from us too much focus.
…

Hello,

That is rather condescening but maybe you’re right. However, your latter comment makes it seem that hyperbole might not be operative after all.

Dan

 

[The_Maestro]

I am puzzled by some of Pope Francis’ comments. For example, he cites St. Vincent of Lerins as defense for the idea that the Church’s understanding of the truth itself might change:

The pope comments: “St. Vincent of Lerins makes a comparison between the biological development of man and the transmission from one era to another of the deposit of faith, which grows and is strengthened with time. Here, human self-understanding changes with time and so also human consciousness deepens. Let us think of when slavery was accepted or the death penalty was allowed without any problem. So we grow in the understanding of the truth. Exegetes and theologians help the church to mature in her own judgment. Even the other sciences and their development help the church in its growth in understanding. There are ecclesiastical rules and precepts that were once effective, but now they have lost value or meaning. The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong.

But St. Vincent doesn’t say that the Church may have a different understanding of the same doctrine. On the contrary, he puts enormous stress on the fact that Catholics must always believe the same doctrine, in the same sense, with the same meaning! St. Vincent is one of the strongest defenders of the concept of tradition! I can quote him all over the place from the Commonitorium which Pope Francis quotes:

“Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense Catholic, which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors.” – St. Vincent of Lerins

"True piety admits no other rule than that whatsoever things have been faithfully received from our fathers the same are to be faithfully consigned to our children; and that it is our duty, not to lead religion whither we would, but rather to follow religion whither it leads; and that it is the part of Christian modesty and gravity not to hand down our own beliefs or observances to those who come after us, but to preserve and keep what we have received from those who went before us." – St. Vincent of Lerins

“But some one will say, perhaps, Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ’s Church? Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged in itself, alteration, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind; **that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning.” **-- St. Vincent of Lerins

The First Vatican Council quotes St. Vincent, proclaiming:

"For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence, but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated. Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by Holy mother Church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding. May understanding, knowledge and wisdom increase as ages and centuries roll along, and greatly and vigorously flourish, in each and all, in the individual and the whole Church: but this only in its own proper kind, that is to say, in the same doctrine, the same sense, and the same understanding…"
"…If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the Church which is different from that which the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema."

Pope Pius X wrote, in the Oath Against Modernism, the following words:

I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that** dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously…**

So I am truly troubled by Pope Francis’ statements - all due respect to him. But his idea that the Church may take on a different understanding of her doctrines seems to me to have no basis at all in the text of St. Vincent which he quotes, nor in the infallible teaching of the Church, as expressed at Vatican I. St. Vincent does allow for a kind of progress and development, but not one that admits of a different understanding. That is not progress, he says, but alteration. It seems almost as if Pope Francis has misread Vincent here.

 

[clem456]

I am puzzled by some of Pope Francis’ comments. For example, he cites St. Vincent of Lerins as defense for the idea that the Church’s understanding of the truth itself might change:

But St. Vincent doesn’t say that the Church may have a different understanding of the same doctrine. On the contrary, he puts enormous stress on the fact that Catholics must always believe the same doctrine, in the same sense, with the same meaning! St. Vincent is one of the strongest defenders of the concept of tradition! I can quote him all over the place from the Commonitorium which Pope Francis quotes:

The First Vatican Council quotes St. Vincent, proclaiming:

Pope Pius X wrote, in the Oath Against Modernism, the following words:

So I am truly troubled by Pope Francis’ statements - all due respect to him. But his idea that the Church may take on a different understanding of her doctrines seems to me to have no basis at all in the text of St. Vincent which he quotes, nor in the infallible teaching of the Church, as expressed at Vatican I. St. Vincent does allow for a kind of progress and development, but not one that admits of a different understanding. That is not progress, he says, but alteration. It seems almost as if Pope Francis has misread Vincent here.

None of St Vincent’s quotes are incompatible with growth in understanding. He is talking about not abandoning the foundation.
Do you understand concepts now in the same fullness as you did at age 6? Of course not. That does not mean you abandoned concepts of right and wrong you learned at age 6. But now you know them more fully.
The Church lives. Doctrine is not made of stone. It is fulfilled in a living person, Jesus Christ. We grow in understanding from the seed that is the source of it all.

 

[janeway529]

I am puzzled by some of Pope Francis’ comments. For example, he cites St. Vincent of Lerins as defense for the idea that the Church’s understanding of the truth itself might change:

But St. Vincent doesn’t say that the Church may have a different understanding of the same doctrine. On the contrary, he puts enormous stress on the fact that Catholics must always believe the same doctrine, in the same sense, with the same meaning! St. Vincent is one of the strongest defenders of the concept of tradition! I can quote him all over the place from the Commonitorium which Pope Francis quotes:

The First Vatican Council quotes St. Vincent, proclaiming:

Pope Pius X wrote, in the Oath Against Modernism, the following words:

So I am truly troubled by Pope Francis’ statements - all due respect to him. But his idea that the Church may take on a different understanding of her doctrines seems to me to have no basis at all in the text of St. Vincent which he quotes, nor in the infallible teaching of the Church, as expressed at Vatican I. St. Vincent does allow for a kind of progress and development, but not one that admits of a different understanding. That is not progress, he says, but alteration. It seems almost as if Pope Francis has misread Vincent here

"The various doctrines of the Church and the formulas of faith that express them are often the result of lengthy theological and doctrinal development. In their current form, they reflect the theological language and expression of the eras in which they were formulated. They are not so much foundational ideas as they are the flowering and development of still more basic truths of Christian faith. Underlying each of them are doctrinal principles and theological ideas that have been consistently present throughout the long history of the Church. It is precisely these underlying principles and ideas of faith that make it possible for us to interpret Christian doctrines correctly by comprehending how the Church, throughout time, has always held to certain basic theological notions.

Catholicism is not a collection of unrelated doctrines discovered by revelation and handed down by magisterial teaching. There are connections among these doctrines like threads in a tapestry, juxtaposed and woven together to create a total design that no one segment can alone can fully express. How these doctrines relate to one another colors and alters and completes the understanding of each one. The work of theology is to discover the connections, sort out the meaning, and attempt to fill in the empty spaces that the Artist has designed but not yet unveiled."
-Bp. Ed Clark (Taken from his book, Five Great Catholic Ideas)

 

[Robyn_p]

Pope Francis is a breath of fresh air. He is taking a different view of how things should be interpreted, a new view on how the church views gay people, how the church is run and it’s finances. Hopefully he will embrace a new view of divorce and marriage, contraception etc He is showing true leadership and much love, it appears that he’s trying to reach out to his many lost sheep that are unable to take part in the church for one reason or other.

I love Pope Francis too, but I think it would be good to point out -in case you are unaware- that this pope really doesn’t have any newer or fresh a view on these issues than what Benedict or any other pope had before. He even practically quotes the Catechism in some of his statements. (like the one on gay people you mentioned) New approach? Yes…but not even that actually because Benedict said this exact same thing a few years ago, and nobody listened. It didn’t fit the stereotype they made and wanted to perpetuate. :sad_yes:

Also, I need to point out, just so there’s no confusion, that Francis made clear in the interview that he believes these issues you mentioned - like contraception and divorce and remarriage and abortion - are settled and decided, and he believes and agrees with them because, quote, “I am a son of the Church”. So contrary to what the papers may have tried to make it seem, he didn’t and doesn’t want to change anything doctrinally wise. All he wants is to teach everything in its proper context, in relation to Jesus and his saving power. If we lose sight of that we lose sight of everything. That’s what his point was. And again, no different than John Paul or Benedict or any other pope. They all taught this, it’s just the first time the world has semi-listened.

 

[The_Maestro]

None of St Vincent’s quotes are incompatible with growth in understanding. He is talking about not abandoning the foundation.
Do you understand concepts now in the same fullness as you did at age 6? Of course not. That does not mean you abandoned concepts of right and wrong you learned at age 6. But now you know them more fully.
The Church lives. Doctrine is not made of stone. It is fulfilled in a living person, Jesus Christ. We grow in understanding from the seed that is the source of it all.

But Pope Francis seems to think that “growth” in understanding means coming to a different understanding, which is certainly not what St. Vincent is saying. In fact, he stresses that yes, there can be a growth of understanding, but not one that results in something else. In one of the quotes I gave, he distinguishes between progress and alteration. Francis seems to equate the two.

 

[Caanan]

Quite so, The Maestro. I have come to the same point of concern. It is remarkable that so much of the language used these days in relation to what a Catholic ought to believe, is almost the antithesis of the clear teachings of the pre-conciliar popes - esp Pius X, Pius XII.

Talk about confusion. Here’s a bit more of the same:

Originally Posted by janeway529

Catholicism is not a collection of unrelated doctrines discovered by revelation and handed down by magisterial teaching. There are connections among these doctrines like threads in a tapestry, juxtaposed and woven together to create a total design that no one segment can alone can fully express. How these doctrines relate to one another colors and alters and completes the understanding of each one. The work of theology is to discover the connections, sort out the meaning, and attempt to fill in the empty spaces that the Artist has designed but not yet unveiled."

Catholicism is not a collection of unrelated doctrines discovered by revelation and handed down by magisterial teaching. ---- Straw man

The work of theology is to discover the connections, sort out the meaning, and attempt to fill in the empty spaces that the Artist has designed but not yet unveiled. ---- all revelation is complete in Jesus Christ.

The Catholic Church has always been certain and secure in faith and teaching. The confusion that exists today is a worrying sign in itself

But the Only-begotten Son of God, when He commanded His representatives to teach all nations, obliged all men to give credence to whatever was made known to them by “witnesses preordained by God,” and also confirmed His command with this sanction: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned.” These two commands of Christ, which must be fulfilled, the one, namely, to teach, and the other to believe, cannot even be understood, unless the Church proposes a complete and easily understood teaching, and is immune when it thus teaches from all danger of erring. In this matter, those also turn aside from the right path, who think that the deposit of truth such laborious trouble, and with such lengthy study and discussion, that a man’s life would hardly suffice to find and take possession of it; as if the most merciful God had spoken through the prophets and His Only-begotten Son merely in order that a few, and those stricken in years, should learn what He had revealed through them, and not that He might inculcate a doctrine of faith and morals, by which man should be guided through the whole course of his moral life. Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos,

 

[otjm]

Quite so, The Maestro. I have come to the same point of concern. It is remarkable that so much of the language used these days in relation to what a Catholic ought to believe, is almost the antithesis of the clear teachings of the pre-conciliar popes - esp Pius X, Pius XII.

If all the various popes’ teachings were all that clear, there would be no need for another pope to teach.

The work of theology is to discover the connections, sort out the meaning, and attempt to fill in the empty spaces that the Artist has designed but not yet unveiled. ---- all revelation is complete in Jesus Christ.

True statement. But it misses the point; our understanding of that revelation is not complete; that is why the various popes have taught. And our understanding can get side-tracked by focusing too much on one area, to the detriment of other areas.

The Catholic Church has always been certain and secure in faith and teaching. The confusion that exists today is a worrying sign in itself

Some of the confusion that is starting to show its head indicates that there are those who think they know all there is to be said about the Faith, and all we have to do is go back before Vatican 2 and we will know all that is necessary. They are among the confused, and their confusion too is a worrying sign.

 

[clem456]

But Pope Francis seems to think that “growth” in understanding means coming to a different understanding, which is certainly not what St. Vincent is saying. In fact, he stresses that yes, there can be a growth of understanding, but not one that results in something else. In one of the quotes I gave, he distinguishes between progress and alteration. Francis seems to equate the two.

Then you might want to give him a call and get a personal clarification, so you can be at peace.
Or better yet, spend an hour at adoration giving all this up.

 

[JReducation]

I am puzzled by some of Pope Francis’ comments. For example, he cites St. Vincent of Lerins as defense for the idea that the Church’s understanding of the truth itself might change:

But St. Vincent doesn’t say that the Church may have a different understanding of the same doctrine. On the contrary, he puts enormous stress on the fact that Catholics must always believe the same doctrine, in the same sense, with the same meaning! St. Vincent is one of the strongest defenders of the concept of tradition! I can quote him all over the place from the Commonitorium which Pope Francis quotes:

The First Vatican Council quotes St. Vincent, proclaiming:

Pope Pius X wrote, in the Oath Against Modernism, the following words:

So I am truly troubled by Pope Francis’ statements - all due respect to him. But his idea that the Church may take on a different understanding of her doctrines seems to me to have no basis at all in the text of St. Vincent which he quotes, nor in the infallible teaching of the Church, as expressed at Vatican I. St. Vincent does allow for a kind of progress and development, but not one that admits of a different understanding. That is not progress, he says, but alteration. It seems almost as if Pope Francis has misread Vincent here.

Let’s take this in very small doses. Otherwise, we’re going to give ourselves a spiritual hernia.

The first thing that we have to remember when comparing what a pope is saying to what has been said by a theologian, even the great St. Thomas, is that the pope always trumps any theologian. Only the pope has the authority and power to interpret theology. It’s not fair to the pope or the theologian to place them in juxtaposition. Neither would appreciate the favor, unless it’s an arrogant theologian.

We must also remember that words do change in meaning. While someone like St. Vincent may say that doctrine does not change and that it must be believed as is for all time and someone like St. Pius X comes along and repeats it, then you have men like Bl. John Henry Newman and Pope Benedict XVI who say that there is a development of doctrine. Are they in conflict? Not at all. They are using the same words, but they do not mean the same thing.

Francis is applying Vincent’s statements on disciplines and structures to those things that we refer to as teachings in today’s language. Teachings are not always dogmatic or revealed truth. They are used to understand revealed truth. When they no longer help us understand revealed truth, then the teaching has to be replaced by another. The revealed truth remains constant. The teaching or the mans to understanding it develops as John Henry Newman said.

What the Holy Father is saying is that to repeat the same revealed truth using the same formulas over and over again, when the formula does not bring men to Christ, is futile. At the end of the day, the idea is not to get people to buy into the formula, but to bring people to Christ. Here is where he brings in the whole idea of context.

If we examine what the Church has said about abortion, contraception, same-sex marriage and other issues that plague us today, she has not simply given us formulae. She has given us context. For example, before Bl. John Paul defines and declares that abortion is always evil and can never be justified, he gives you about 50 pages of philosophical, biblical and theological principles that lead him to conclude that abortion is a heinous crime.

What Pope Francis is saying is that we spend too much time repeating over and over again how evil abortion is, but we don’t teach the process that the Church follows to reach this conclusion.

Then, after Bl. John Paul makes his famous statement on abortion, he gives you about another 25 pages on spiritual theology, scripture, philosophy, ecclesiology, and sacramental theology on what happens next and how to bring home the person who has engaged in abortion.

Again, Pope Francis is saying that this is not mentioned in our daily conversation on abortion. We stick to one point. “Abortion is a sin. If you abort a baby, you’re a murderer. An aborted baby may or may not go to heaven. Abortion laws must be repealed.” In all of this, where is the theology? Where is the philosophy? Where is the scripture?

In all of this, where is God’s mercy for the sinner? Where is the Church’s outreach before the sin and her outreach after the fact?

There is no context. We become talking heads. I’ll give you an example. I run a very large network for fathers in crisis pregnancies and am superior of a religious community dedicated to the Gospel of Life. We never use the word murder. We never accuse anyone of being more sinful than ourselves. We never get into confrontations.

During a average year we persuade about 90 fathers to keep their babies. We provide for the material, educational, and spiritual needs of the parents, child and the healthcare providers.

Those who come to us post abortion, we help them walk through the process of healing and reconciliation, be they parents, grandparents, doctors or nurses.

We operate five centers in one of the largest dioceses in the country. Our counterparts, the Sisters of Life in NY do the same type of work. None of us ever use the angry pro-life language.

We speak from the Gospel of Life. The first point that we put on the table is context. What’s happening? Why is this abortion so necessary? If it’s over and done with, where do you want to go with this now? We know where God wants to go with it.