When a pope makes mistakes ...

[Jo_Benedict]

WH–

Please see my note in this thread. Thank you.

 

[Walking_Home]

WH–

Please see my note in this thread. Thank you.

---

I was in the process of writing a response to bear06 when you posted --resulting in my post following yours. My post was not meant to over-ride your note. I will not continue with the discussion on JPII and the Koran.

 

[bear06]

So, back to Tabby’s questions:

Do we grumble privately but refrain from airing our concerns publicly to avoid making the Church look bad to non-Catholics and non-Christians? Do we try to understand why the pope did what he did, hoping that there is some logical reason for the action that is presently not on our own radar? Do we publicly challenge such actions with articles and books that may make us feel better but don’t really change anything and may cause scandal?

What do you think?

 

[Jo_Benedict]

I was in the process of writing a response to bear06 when you posted --resulting in my post following yours. My post was not meant to over-ride your note. I will not continue with the discussion on JPII and the Koran.

Thanks!

 

[joanofarc3]

1. I do.
2. No one passed it off as nothing, we gave the explanation for WHY he did it. No one has said it was a great idea.
3. We wouldn’t have to defend the pope if others would stop saying that the action was something that it was patently NOT.

1. good, keep it up
2. some pass it off as nothing, or okay simply because it was the Pope who said/did it. Explanations as to why or why he might have done certain things are appreciated; gives reason to hope
3. the end doesn’t justify the means.

 

[catharina]

… How do you think Catholics should respond? For example, I very much love and admire John Paul II, but I think it is possible he made prudential errors. I won’t go into specific actions that concerned me because that is outside of the focus of this thread, and I would appreciate it if those who respond to this thread also refrain from rehashing litanies of alleged papal mistakes.

Do we grumble privately but refrain from airing our concerns publicly to avoid making the Church look bad to non-Catholics and non-Christians? Do we try to understand why the pope did what he did, hoping that there is some logical reason for the action that is presently not on our own radar? Do we publicly challenge such actions with articles and books that may make us feel better but don’t really change anything and may cause scandal?

What do you think?

If I truly believed a Pope made a mistake
then I would write to him as a matter of conscience.

Then I would forget about it and continuing praying for him.

I would not indulge myself with a public campaign
of censure and ridicule against him regarding his
action/word since in all likelihood, his conscience
is far better formed than my own could ever be.

 

[Tabby]

Thanks to everyone for their (name removed by moderator)ut so far.

I do hope it’s clear that I was asking these questions to stimulate a discussion of what is the proper response to mistakes we think a pope may have made. (Whether or not the pope has actually made a mistake is an entirely different question.) The questions were based on responses I’ve seen in the Catholic community to actions of a pope that are perplexing. I wondered what people thought was most fruitful in such a situation.

Here’s my own :twocents::

I’ve seen some take the position on “papal mistakes” that since Paul confronted Peter, then Catholics have the right to tell off the Pope too (example). My thought on that is that Paul knew Peter personally, was himself a bishop (and so a “colleague” of Peter’s), and had direct knowledge of and experience with the situation for which he was chastising Peter. How many lay Catholics can claim the same about each and every situation for which they take exception with a pope’s actions?

I do think though that Catholics can privately disagree with something a pope has done. Infallibility is very limited, after all. And, as I said initially, I’ve had concerns of my own. But the real test comes in how we deal with disagreement. Perhaps one way would be to model our response on how we would handle mistakes made by our own natural parents.

 

[Walking_Home]

If I truly believed a Pope made a mistake
then I would write to him as a matter of conscience.

Then I would forget about it and continuing praying for him.

I would not indulge myself with a public campaign
of censure and ridicule against him regarding his
action/word since in all likelihood, his conscience is far better formed than my own could ever be.

---

Talk about stepping in popalotry. Have you ever heard of Pope Alexander VI. He shoots your theory that a Pope’s conscience (because he is Pope) is far better formed. Pope Alexander VI apparently put out contracts on the lives of those who he considered his enemies and had children by various women.

Makes one wonder — if you had lived in his time—what type of contortions --you would have come up with–to cover up Pope Alexander VI’s actions.

 

[catharina]

---

Talk about stepping in popalotry. Have you ever heard of Pope Alexander VI. He shoots your theory that a Pope’s conscience (because he is Pope) is far better formed. Pope Alexander VI apparently put out contracts on the lives of those who he considered his enemies and had children by various women.

Makes one wonder — if you had lived in his time—what type of contortions --you would have come up with–to cover up Pope Alexander VI’s actions.

Your opinion holds no weight with me. Concern yourself with Alexander and his ilk as much as you like; I’m quite clear that I’m living in the here-and-now. You wonder about me and what I might have done if I lived when and are sure you could predict my actions. I’m sure you’re about an inch away from soothsaying.

As horrified as I was by the actions of Theresa Kane (RSM) who was assigned to welcome the Holy Father in a visit to WASH DC, yet instead she insulted him to his face and claimed to do it for all religious women - I’m more horrified by the words of those who pretend that they are capable of praising, thanking and adoring God while slamming one of the Servants of the Servants of God.

I’m quite certain that Pope who has been under discussion in this thread, had a far more keenly developed conscience than mine.

Apparently you believe yours is better formed than his was.

Suit yourself.

 

[joanofarc3]

If I truly believed a Pope made a mistake
then I would write to him as a matter of conscience.

Then I would forget about it and continuing praying for him.

I would not indulge myself with a public campaign
of censure and ridicule against him regarding his
action/word since in all likelihood, his conscience
is far better formed than my own could ever be.

I don’t think any “traditionalists” would disagree with what you said; very well put.

I think I speak for all non-sedevacantist trads when I say that we speak up only when the pope’s mistakes/sins are justified on the basis that “his conscience is far better formed than my own could ever be” (fellow trads, correct me if you disagree). He knows more than many, but that only makes him more accountable for the goof-ups, and increases his obligations to correct them. In some respects, other bishops, priests, even lay people, know more than the pope. Should we throw this up in his face? Absolutely not, but we can’t just brush scandal under the rug either. My conscience is better formed than my sister’s but I still fail at times where she wouldn’t. Does she call me on my hypocrisy? Yes. Publicly? When my fall is public, as she should. Just thought I’d throw out a similar example. God Bless.

 

[Walking_Home]

Your opinion holds no weight with me. Concern yourself with Alexander and his ilk as much as you like; I’m quite clear that I’m living in the here-and-now. You wonder about me and what I might have done if I lived when and are sure you could predict my actions. I’m sure you’re about an inch away from soothsaying.

As horrified as I was by the actions of Theresa Kane (RSM) who was assigned to welcome the Holy Father in a visit to WASH DC, yet instead she insulted him to his face and claimed to do it for all religious women - I’m more horrified by the words of those who pretend that they are capable of praising, thanking and adoring God while slamming one of the Servants of the Servants of God.

I’m quite certain that Pope who has been under discussion in this thread, had a far more keenly developed conscience than mine.

Apparently you believe yours is better formed than his was.

Suit yourself.

Quote=catherina
I would not indulge myself with a public campaign
of censure and ridicule against him regarding his
action/word since in all likelihood,** his conscience is far better formed than my own could ever be**.​

Come now catherina. The above is your statement. Pope Alexander VI --disputes your statement. It really doesn’t matter when–back at his time—or now—it is he that proves you wrong.
Now --you can go on about how horrified you are to deflect the truth–but when push comes to shove —our Popes can go wrong.

 

[bear06]

I don’t think any “traditionalists” would disagree with what you said; very well put.

I think I speak for all non-sedevacantist trads when I say that we speak up only when the pope’s mistakes/sins are justified on the basis that “his conscience is far better formed than my own could ever be” (fellow trads, correct me if you disagree). He knows more than many, but that only makes him more accountable for the goof-ups, and increases his obligations to correct them. In some respects, other bishops, priests, even lay people, know more than the pope. Should we throw this up in his face? Absolutely not, but we can’t just brush scandal under the rug either. My conscience is better formed than my sister’s but I still fail at times where she wouldn’t. Does she call me on my hypocrisy? Yes. Publicly? When my fall is public, as she should. Just thought I’d throw out a similar example. God Bless.

What good is gained by spreading a supposed sin far and wide? Some want to call it sweeping it under the rug. I call it prudent. Like I said, none too many of us are in a position to resist the Holy Father to his face. To spread it around to make a point is spitting in the wind and only speads the supposed scandal.

I’d appreciate hearing answers to Tabby’s questions. Not too many have actually made suggestions on how to handle the situation.

Do we grumble privately but refrain from airing our concerns publicly to avoid making the Church look bad to non-Catholics and non-Christians? Do we try to understand why the pope did what he did, hoping that there is some logical reason for the action that is presently not on our own radar? Do we publicly challenge such actions with articles and books that may make us feel better but don’t really change anything and may cause scandal?

What do you think?

 

[joanofarc3]

What good is gained by spreading a supposed sin far and wide? Some want to call it sweeping it under the rug. I call it prudent. Like I said, none too many of us are in a position to resist the Holy Father to his face. To spread it around to make a point is spitting in the wind and only speads the supposed scandal.

But this can’t be blamed on the trads, everything is publicized these days. When the issue comes up, the only way scandal will be caused is if the person does nothing but bash the pope. All I mean is explaining what was wrong, why it was wrong, but to try to avoid bashing. Like I, as well as others, said before, his intentions were good; but that only mitigates his guilt, it doesn’t justify the act. This, of course, would apply to everyone.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

---

As I said prior—it is the act itself. I did not doctor up the picture of the Pope kissing the Koran—so their goes your accusation of false witness and the sin of calumny . What ever the reason—a false anti-Christ gospel is still that. You accuse others of going on and on–yet the same can be said of you – and your “reasons”. There is no false motive in acknowledging that our Popes are not infallible in each and every aspect of what they say and do and some of their actions can be erroneous.

But you keep raising suspisicion about his motive, in the face of the explanation.

And let’s see if I can clarify this one more time: NO ONE IS SAYING the popes are “infallible in each and every aspect of what they say and do.” NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON.

 

[Walking_Home]

But you keep raising suspisicion about his motive, in the face of the explanation.

And let’s see if I can clarify this one more time: NO ONE IS SAYING the popes are “infallible in each and every aspect of what they say and do.” NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON.

---

See post #78

 

[catharina]

Quote=catherina
I would not indulge myself with a public campaign
of censure and ridicule against him regarding his
action/word since in all likelihood,** his conscience is far better formed than my own could ever be**.​

Come now catherina. The above is your statement. Pope Alexander VI --disputes your statement. It really doesn’t matter when–back at his time—or now—it is he that proves you wrong.
Now --you can go on about how horrified you are to deflect the truth–but when push comes to shove —our Popes can go wrong.

It seems clear that you, for some unknown reason, are fixated by Alexander VI. My reactions have been to the Popes under whose papacy I have lived my life. You go on back to your fiddling and diddling with Alexander or anyone else whose history concerns you. I couldn’t care less. Suit yourself. If God ever leads me to judge those who serve Him as Pope during my lifetime, then perhaps we’ll have a mutual interest. Otherwise, keep walking.

 

[OneAugustKnight]

---

It would depend on the mistake/error. If my loved one made an error (ex. nothing wrong with using birth control pills) --that would tend to lead another in a wrong way–I would not leave the person going down the wrong road. It would not be charitable of me–to let my loved one deceive another. It is not charitable to the author of the error and to the one that may be influence by the error.

I think I can appreciate what people are attempting to accomplish when they air grievences concerning the Pope now. Thanks!

But this can’t be blamed on the trads, everything is publicized these days. When the issue comes up, the only way scandal will be caused is if the person does nothing but bash the pope. All I mean is explaining what was wrong, why it was wrong, but to try to avoid bashing. Like I, as well as others, said before, his intentions were good; but that only mitigates his guilt, it doesn’t justify the act. This, of course, would apply to everyone.

I think that’s probably the most important part. If you are correcting a mistake the Pope made it is seriously important that you don’t say something critical of the Pope’s character or intelligence. If someone uses terms like “heretic” or “coward” or “enemy of the Church” when they talk about the Pope it’s just going to incite anger and cause problems.

If someone says anything that sounds like an insult to the Pope’s character, any other points they have are overshadowed by the insult. I guess it’s hard not to misspeak sometimes when it is a subject one gets really angry over. I have the same problem when I talk about Islam.

 

[Walking_Home]

It seems clear that you, for some unknown reason, are fixated by Alexander VI. My reactions have been to the Popes under whose papacy I have lived my life. You go on back to your fiddling and diddling with Alexander or anyone else whose history concerns you. I couldn’t care less. Suit yourself. If God ever leads me to judge those who serve Him as Pope during my lifetime, then perhaps we’ll have a mutual interest. Otherwise, keep walking.

---

My, my catharina—the stuff you come up with to cover your tracks. As I stated prior --the time period does not matter—our Popes can err. By the way–saying you couldn’t care less–the fiddling and diddling, etc. still leaves you in the same spot.

 

[catharina]

---

My, my catharina—the stuff you come up with to cover your tracks. As I stated prior --the time period does not matter—our Popes can err. By the way–saying you couldn’t care less–the fiddling and diddling, etc. still leaves you in the same spot.

Since I’ve never thought nor claimed that a pope cannot err, it seems you have a singular problem with comprehension. I ask this: if at the moment of death, you learned that John Paul II was indeed in heaven, would you still wish to continue your argument and chose to go elsewhere for all eternity? (That is, do you imagine you can argue this out with Almighty God?)

 

[catharina]

Thanks to everyone for their (name removed by moderator)ut so far.

I do hope it’s clear that I was asking these questions to stimulate a discussion of what is the proper response to mistakes we think a pope may have made. (Whether or not the pope has actually made a mistake is an entirely different question.) The questions were based on responses I’ve seen in the Catholic community to actions of a pope that are perplexing. I wondered what people thought was most fruitful in such a situation.

Here’s my own :twocents::

I’ve seen some take the position on “papal mistakes” that since Paul confronted Peter, then Catholics have the right to tell off the Pope too (example). My thought on that is that Paul knew Peter personally, was himself a bishop (and so a “colleague” of Peter’s), and had direct knowledge of and experience with the situation for which he was chastising Peter. How many lay Catholics can claim the same about each and every situation for which they take exception with a pope’s actions?

I do think though that Catholics can privately disagree with something a pope has done. Infallibility is very limited, after all. And, as I said initially, I’ve had concerns of my own. But the real test comes in how we deal with disagreement. Perhaps one way would be to model our response on how we would handle mistakes made by our own natural parents.

Tabby, I looked at the example you presented and my opinion is identical to what it would be if someone suggested that I study any current criticisms put forth by Charles Curran or Joan Chittister. That is, thanks but no thanks. I can’t speak for others but for myself, I’m certain that God does not expect me to monitor the thinking or actions of the Holy Father. In a similar way, I’m certain that I would never look into the works of Lefebvre or Matthew Fox.

Why would I choose to muddle my own faith? I wouldn’t.