What Would You Most Like Pope Francis To Do?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheKingdomOfGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mburn16 said:
So, you never forsee a time for pomp and grandeur in the Church? Did we do less for the poor when the Pope wore a crown and was carried on a throne? No. There are limits to the level of good that we can and do do for the poor. But the fineness of Papal regalia is not one of them.
Click to expand...
I love the way some people can manage to put thoughts and words into a person’s mouth (or post) and extrapolate meanings from words that were never said or written. :rolleyes: Show me where I said what you said, or even implied it. We were talking about the oil poured over Jesus’ head, and I mentioned that this Pope seems to be setting the direction that we are to serve the poor, by his past actions and that when we serve the poor we serve Jesus. What does that have to do with the pomp and grandeur in the Church, or Papal regalia?

And I am not going to answer your question. It seems you should come up with the answer on your own, since you claim to be able to read my mind. :rolleyes:

In any case, If you were a student of mine doing a paper, I would give you an F for making suppositions without documentation or foundation. That is a very bad habit to acquire, esp. in an argument.
 
mburn16 said:
"3 While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table in the home of Simon the Leper, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, made of pure nard. She broke the jar and poured the perfume on his head.

4 Some of those present were saying indignantly to one another, “Why this waste of perfume? 5 It could have been sold for more than a year’s wages[a] and the money given to the poor.” And they rebuked her harshly.

6 “Leave her alone,” said Jesus. “Why are you bothering her? She has done a beautiful thing to me." (Mk 14:3-6)

I say bring back the regal pomp and ceremony. To honor the Church is to honor God. There is a dignity and authority to be found in ceremony and grandeur. That said, I think those of us who want to see such things restored will be left waiting for a future Pope. It does not appear to be the current Holy Father’s mission, if yesterday was any indication.
Click to expand...
Jesus did not expect or asked for this,but of course he appreciated the gesture and didn’t want other to judge the kind devoted woman. We did agree that pomp and ceremony bring honor to the church,if it did the church and many of its priest would not br where they are. Maybe it is time to put the pomp and ceremony aside for a little while and heal the Church.
 
mburn16 said:
So, you never forsee a time for pomp and grandeur in the Church? Did we do less for the poor when the Pope wore a crown and was carried on a throne? No. There are limits to the level of good that we can and do do for the poor. But the fineness of Papal regalia is not one of them.
Click to expand...
Well seeing as it was too far back in the history of the Church to find itself without pomp and ceremony, I guess we cannot answer that question. We may however have the chance to see about that with this new pope.

Maybe all the pomp and ceremony blinded many of our priest on what was truly going on in the Church, things that had NO honor.
 
ringil said:
You have an odd way of writing.
Click to expand...
Portrait’s posts (as far as I have ever seen) are consistently thoughtful, respectful, and charitable. If this is “odd” … well, I’d say we could use a lot more “oddness” around here! 😉
 
HansTrappist said:
What would I most like Pope Francis to do?

Solemnly define the Fifth Marian Dogma.
Click to expand...
I agree. A strong clarification on this IS needed. To define it not only for ourselves, but for Protestants who have all kinds of wacky notions; "you pray to the Holy Trinity! The Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and Mary!!! (yes… this HAS been said…)
 
The fact that people can call the teachings of the Holy Roman Church “stubborn” is beyond me. Is the truth stubborn? Of course it is! It’s the truth.

I was trying to explain papal infallibility, especially on the issue of contraception, to my atheist friends today, after one of them said Francis was pro-contraception. They didn’t understand that it’s not like some political law you can just repeal if you want, it is dogma which means that it is the truth.

You cannot change the truth. I mean, we’re not protestants after all. 😃
 
FlaviusGratian said:
The fact that people can call the teachings of the Holy Roman Church “stubborn” is beyond me. Is the truth stubborn? Of course it is! It’s the truth
Click to expand...
Salve, Flavius Gratian. Well said. Those who think that Catholic teachings should change to reflect the vain and vapid values of the secular world have an incredibly poor understanding of what the Church stands for (truth), and the eternal and immutable nature of this truth. These folks are moral relativists, and if they call themselves Catholic, they are a cancer eating away at the Church from within- a real fifth column and a grave danger.
 
FlaviusGratian said:
The fact that people can call the teachings of the Holy Roman Church “stubborn” is beyond me. Is the truth stubborn? Of course it is! It’s the truth.

I was trying to explain papal infallibility, especially on the issue of contraception, to my atheist friends today, after one of them said Francis was pro-contraception. They didn’t understand that it’s not like some political law you can just repeal if you want, it is dogma which means that it is the truth.

You cannot change the truth. I mean, we’re not protestants after all. 😃
Click to expand...
You can’t prove it’s the truth. That is why Catholicism is perceived as stubborn.
 
shelby_sun said:
Maybe all the pomp and ceremony blinded many of our priest on what was truly going on in the Church, things that had NO honor.
Click to expand...
Where is your evidence of that? What a shameful statement to make with no evidence.

I could just as easily say “Those who tolerated or ignored the infamia were anti-Traditionalist and Modernist in character.” But that would not be fair either because I don’t have any proof of that. It may be my suspicion or gut reaction, but that doesn’t really belong on this site, when we’re talking about matters so sensitive and involving members of the clergy.

In fact, I will respectfully say that tying a reformist agenda to a pedophilia smear is actually rather low. If you want to change the practice of the Church then I think you should defend that on its own merits, and not launch innuendos at clerics who dutifully followed the traditions of the Church passed down through the ages.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburn16
I will never understand the obsession with receiving on the tongue only. Jesus told his apostles to TAKE and eat.He broke the bread, and gave it to his disciples saying “take this, all of you, and eat of it”. Is the hand any less dirty than the mouth? If we are so undeserving even to hold the Lord in our hands, how can we be deserving enough to actually consume the host?

Actually, that’s due to the translation into English. Watch Fr. Pacwa’s interview of Bishop Athanasius Schneider and he’ll speak about that.

Reverent reception in the hand was good enough for St. Cyril of Jerusalem in the 5th century, whose orthodoxy is unquestioned. It should be good enough for anybody.
 
Schism_hater said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburn16
I will never understand the obsession with receiving on the tongue only. Jesus told his apostles to TAKE and eat.He broke the bread, and gave it to his disciples saying “take this, all of you, and eat of it”. Is the hand any less dirty than the mouth? If we are so undeserving even to hold the Lord in our hands, how can we be deserving enough to actually consume the host?

Actually, that’s due to the translation into English. Watch Fr. Pacwa’s interview of Bishop Athanasius Schneider and he’ll speak about that.

Reverent reception in the hand was good enough for St. Cyril of Jerusalem in the 5th century, whose orthodoxy is unquestioned. It should be good enough for anybody.
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point. Accipite is the Latin and unfortunately capite, recipite could all translate to the same English word. There are real differences in the Latin which are lost in the English and create confusion. (There are many places in the Mass where this happens.)

St. Cyril didn’t speak English, by the way, so I don’t know where you’re going with that argument.
 
Excuse me, but it’s it’s irrelevant what the Latin is here. The Latin was translated from the Greek. We have the Greek, from multiple gospels.

The verb is lambano, the unmarked (i.e., vanilla) word for “taking.” That normal “taking” is meant would be obvious to anyone reading the passage without some later liturgical axe to grind. But it’s made doubly clear from the fact that the verb is also used immediately after of Jesus “taking the cup.” I’m pretty sure he wasn’t engaged in oral acrobatics with a cup.
 
StudentMI said:
I hope **Pope Francis I **.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen Pope Francis referred to as Pope Francis I several times now on here.

Is he not just Pope Francis :confused:

If there’s another Pope Francis in the future, then we would refer to Pope Francis I and Pope Francis II, but until then, shouldn’t he just be referred to as Pope Francis :confused:

Or have I got the naming convention all wrong 😊

Sarah x 🙂
 
DexUK said:
And this was the occasion:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/544275_10151552595765948_1008693597_n.jpg

Words cannot do justice to the sense of admiration I feel for him at this moment.
Click to expand...
I looked at that picture for a few moments just taking in everything that was going on in it and found the beginnings of a tear welling up inside me.

Again I’m reminded of what Saint Francis is supposed to have said: In all things preach the Gospel, and where necessary, use words.

Of course, I’m one of those people he would see as a threat to the very foundations and fabric of humanity - me being a homosexual marriage supporting atheist an’ all, but still, I like the guy, and I have a feeling, and a hope, he’s going to do good things for the Church, and it’s relations with all people.

I think my feelings about this Pope might be right 😃

I heard he took a bus today :D:D:D

Sarah x 🙂
 
TimSpalding said:
Excuse me, but it’s it’s irrelevant what the Latin is here. The Latin was translated from the Greek. We have the Greek, from multiple gospels.
Click to expand...
Call it acrobatics if you want but doesn’t Greek have different words which have different meanings that translate into the same English word, “love” for example? Same principle applies.
 
TheKingdomOfGod said:
Whilst the priorities of certain tasks will undoubtedly vary throughout the time Pope Francis resides in the Vatican, as Catholics what would you most like to see Pope Francis do? This could be anything from I’d like to see him engage with this issue to, I’d like to see him try out some dance moves in St. Peter’s square.

As an Anglican I’d like to see Pope Francis engage more with different branches of Christianity and consider the varied views on a number of subjects the Catholic church, in my opinion, has been sometimes quite stubborn about.
Click to expand...
Following St. Alphonsus de Liguori, the will of God alone, as this should always be the goal of all our strives and errands.

Uniformity with God’s Will:
Uniformity means more—it means that we make one will of God’s will and ours, so that we will only what God wills; that God’s will alone, is our will. This is the summit of perfection and to it we should always aspire; this should be the goal of all our works, desires, meditations and prayers. To this end we should always invoke the aid of our holy patrons, our guardian angels, and above all, of our mother Mary, the most perfect of all the saints because she most perfectly embraced the divine will.
Click to expand...
 
Publicly condemn usury. We need a brave pope to stand up to the international banking cartel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top