The Pope's big interview

[JReducation]

The same applies in the area of homosexuality, divorce, contraception, etc.

Contraception was addressed in a very detailed encyclical and most people simply know that it says no ABC. The encyclical said more than than that.

Homosexuality was addressed in a pastoral directive by Pope John Paul II, a very long and detailed pastoral directive and it said more than no gay sex. He spoke about the Church, the place of the gay person in the Church, the family. He spoke about tradition, pain, love prejudice, etc. He encouraged the Salesians to start the Courage Ministry for gay Catholics. In 2007, Pope Benedict had an audience with gay Catholic youth who asked for his help. No one ever mentioned that he was very moved by them and their struggle and told them so.

These are the points that Pope Francis is speaking about when he speaks about change. These changes are happening, but we’re not hearing about them. There is a change in how we teach and how we approach these subjects. If we don’t change how we do so, we’re going to alienate rather than draw in.

We also run the risk of looking like the Pharisees. We come across as if we are sinless, because we’re not gay, post abortion, use contraception, living in adultery, etc. But we commit other sins that are probably far more serious. The most serious sin that any Catholic can commit is to believe that another person is a greater sinner than himself.

 

[M-Dent]

I can see how the approach Br J notes is vital to the vocation of those involved in this great activity. I can relate to this. It can have a healing property. When another member of our group and myself make a home visit (some extremely poor and some suffer with very damaged spirits) there is much I must remain silent on. At times this can be very very difficult. Yet my silence and careful listening can do much more than a correction that many times will be seen as a reprimand (or hate) by one whose spirit may not be open to it, at that moment.

Yet, on the flip side I do believe others have a vocation and a duty to be clear on the evils commited and correcting in nature. This can be lay people.

As a parent I rarely remain silent to my children on the same issues as I may have been the same day with different people in different circumstances. A bit of intuition, discernment and knowing one’s place helps to act in good conscience.

For a further example, two people I highly respect had articles generally regarding the topic of this post. Hadley Arkes and Janet E. Smith . Their vocations can require speaking in hard terms about the evils of abortion. The audience they are speaking is different and need to hear things appropriate to them. They both can be moved by the Holy Spirit to do such.

So I do believe it is possible - when attempting to share the hope and belief in God’s Mercy one can run the risk of being too dogmatic in one’s approach – by demanding adherence to their approach which may require silence. That can be a source of undermining others whose approach may require them to be resolute. Thus controversy and arguments.

Of course, the only safe method for us to audit this is from the continued formation and care for our own conscience.

 

[Sirach2]

If we recall Jesus’ parable of The Prodigal Son, for example, the focus of the parable itself is 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.

Thank you, Jane – good point. Many who read this parable fail to realize that the prodigal son was not moved to return to his father because he was sorry for offending him (imperfect contrition). Rather, his dire poverty and hunger moved him to accept any humble position of favor that the father was pleased to grant him in order to escape his unpleasant squalor. Yet that humbling but faint recognition of his sin was enough for the father to open his arms to welcome him home and restore him to a place of honor in his household.

This, I believe, is the thrust of Francis’ message … look not at the sin, but reach out to bring the sinner home. Speak to his heart, give him a clean robe, and a place at the family table.

Doctrinal issues that the Church faces today were never imagined in previous centuries, such as cloning, invitro fertilization, sustaining life with feeding tubes, and the like. Theology must develop and address these new matters with the help of God’s Holy Spirit. It is not theologians or previous saints who have authority to pronounce on them unless “Peter” gives authentic guidance from the magisterial chair. There will always be growth in understanding how God’s truth and light is found in these developments. Our duty is to respond and give religious assent to that guidance, which will never fail the Church.

As these and many other cases demonstrate, doctrinal questions can remain in a not-yet-fully-defined state for years. The Church has never felt the need to define formally what there has been no particular pressure to define. Read more.

 

[GaryTaylor]

That “humbling but faint recognition of his sin” I love the way you put that, so true, recalled from somewhere deep within the shattered membranes of the mind. Thus its confronted, I remember the saying in early school “guilt kills” but only when its ignored.

 

[JReducation]

Yet, on the flip side I do believe others have a vocation and a duty to be clear on the evils commited and correcting in nature. This can be lay people.

This is something about which the Holy Father warned in one of his talks to the bishops. I believe that it was the bishops. He spoke about the clericalization of the laity. Too often, the laity has been given the wrong impression of its place in the Church and some have assumed positions of authority in relation to other laymen going around correcting and teaching as if the layman had the authority to do so. There is a difference between fraternal correction, which everyone has a right and duty to do and quite another thing to assume a sense of authority over a peer. We must be very careful in how we do this.

The best example that I can give is from religious life. I can snap a brother’s head off if he steps out of line. If another brother or a layman attempts to do the same, he’s going to create a fire that the devil himself will find to hot to tolerate. Why? Because the brothers have been trained to be unquestioningly submissive to superiors, bishops and popes, not their peers and laity. People have rights and duties. People can often overstep their authority.

As a parent I rarely remain silent to my children on the same issues as I may have been the same day with different people in different circumstances. A bit of intuition, discernment and knowing one’s place helps to act in good conscience.

This is an excellent example of context. What one says to his children; what a religious superior says to another religious; what religious or clergyman says to a layman; what a spouse says to another spouse should be guided by the context. If a spouse ever spoke to another spouse as a religious superior speaks to his sons or daughters, he deserves to sleep in the doghouse for a week. On the flipside, if a superior speaks to a layman as a parent speaks to a child, he deserves to be blown off.

Pope Francis is correct. We can’t just be harping on the evil without taking in the relationship between the members of the Body with each other and the members of the Body with Christ.

Thank you, Jane – good point. Many who read this parable fail to realize that the prodigal son was not moved to return to his father because he was sorry for offending him (imperfect contrition). Rather, his dire poverty and hunger moved him to accept any humble position of favor that the father was pleased to grant him in order to escape his unpleasant squalor. Yet that humbling but faint recognition of his sin was enough for the father to open his arms to welcome him home and restore him to a place of honor in his household.

This, I believe, is the thrust of Francis’ message … look not at the sin, but reach out to bring the sinner home. Speak to his heart, give him a clean robe, and a place at the family table.

I think that you and St. Teresa of Avila are on the same page. In the story of the Prodigal Son, the problem was not that the younger son had sinned. That was so obvious that Helen Keller could see it. What often escapes us in that story is the sin of the older son. He looks down on his brother. Remember how he refers to his brother in terms that suggest that he’s a loser.

St. Teresa of Avila, in The Way of Perfection, warns us that no matter how great the sin of another either we have done far worse or we have the potential to do far worse. Therefore, we need to bite our tongues, keep out counsel and dish out a lot of mercy. The older son failed to do this.

There are two parts to the story of the Prodigal Son. Part I: The father who is always willing to meet the sinful son halfway home and Part II: the brother who feels entitled to judge.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Brother Jay, a heartfelt Thank You for you enlightening and hopeful posts.

 

[M-Dent]

This is something about which the Holy Father warned in one of his talks to the bishops. I believe that it was the bishops. He spoke about the clericalization of the laity. Too often, the laity has been given the wrong impression of its place in the Church and some have assumed positions of authority in relation to other laymen going around correcting and teaching as if the layman had the authority to do so. There is a difference between fraternal correction, which everyone has a right and duty to do and quite another thing to assume a sense of authority over a peer. **We must be very careful in how we do **this.

Yes. I agree with your point.

I also heard the Pope’s warning ** “Do not secularize the clergy and clericalize the laity” ** (I share a lot of thoughts and concerns on this topic since our bishop and pastor is warning the lack of clergy will greatly impact our parish life in the not too distant future. But that is for another day… )

I have found being careful and helping reflect on how we are living our vocations and stations in life best served with the Sacrament of Confession and silent prayer. (but that’s me)

Though, as the examples I mention in an earlier post ( two lay people )- they are good examples of people whose vocation can call them to speak authoritatively and in harsh terms, if needed in, yet in proper context. It’s there station in life.

 

[Pulvis]

I have not the theological background, nor the aptitude to decipher His Holiness’ "Big Interview ". One take on the confusion, obfuscation and general handwringing among many, is the fact that His Holiness is the first post Vatican Council II Pope. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and Blessed Pope John Paul II were pereti at Vatican II and were part of the Council. Pope John Paul I was formed in faith prior to the Council. H.H. Pope Francis was ordained after 1965. Perhaps we are seeing a purely V-II focus from a Priest who was greatly influenced by the V-II emphasis on Ecumenism, Evangelization, and “opening the windows to the world” Theology. Along with the Ignation influence many point to. Add to this the differences of the Church in South America, and one may find that His ideas and focus are different not due to a different Faith, but a different culture, time and formation. Time will tell.
I will add, however, the entire focus of the past 50 years since the Council away from how The Church dealt with the World prior to the Council is troubling, and the fruits of this re-focussing are evident in the Body Catholic, especially in the western countries.

 

[JReducation]

Yes. I agree with your point.

I also heard the Pope’s warning ** “Do not secularize the clergy and clericalize the laity**” (I share a lot of thoughts and concerns on this topic since our bishop and pastor is warning the lack of clergy will greatly impact our parish life in the not too distant future. But that is for another day… )

I have found being careful and helping reflect on how we are living our vocations and stations in life best served with the Sacrament of Confession and silent prayer. (but that’s me)

Though, as the examples I mention in an earlier post ( two lay people )- they are good examples of people whose vocation can call them to speak authoritatively and in harsh terms, if needed in, yet in proper context. It’s there station in life.

Thank you for finding the talk. That’s the one that I heard as well.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Re: Prodigal son…

It struck me fairly recently (I am embarrassed to say ) that everyone, including me, identifies with the older son, when we are all really the younger son. With the arrogance of the older son.

I thank you again, brother for the explanation. When I first heard the Holy Father’s remarks, I thought “oh,oh a liberal”. Then, of course, I realized that he was absolutely spot on. Trying to impose our values isn’t working. I would argue that it has never worked. Exampling our values is what works if we witness the Love of Christ to our brothers and sisters. Without Christ we can do nothing-including converting people to the Truth. The details are very important, but not as important as the Main Point, which is Christ.
I hate using the political terms for movements in the Church, but it seems to me that the left concentrate on social work and the right on devotions, both forgetting that these things only mean something in the Light of Christ. We have been given the fullness of the Faith, so more is expected of us. If we “go out and joyful proclaim the Good News” we will reconvert the world and ourselves in the process.

 

[storm123]

Great post! Thank you very much for clarifying this.

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.

 

[storm123]

Great post. Thanks!

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.