Why are there mutterings of discontent within the Catholic clergy towards our Pope?

  • Thread starter Thread starter englands123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joseph159 said:
The deal made with the atheist, anti-Christian govt. of China is the worst thing Pope Francis has done. Why would we allow atheist govt. to help choose bishops?
Click to expand...
I can answer this, as could most Catholics if they thought of it. First, eliminate the loaded rhetoric and “what if’s.” Then the question is what is to be gained by allowing a controlling regime some say in clergy. The answer is, the Mass, the Summit and Source of the Catholic faith, the presence of Jesus in a place where he is needed, and a Sacrament of grace for all who receive. Jesus is more important than politics. He is more important than temporal power. The Mass is not a sham. The Church is not a sham, regardless of politics.
Do not assume malice when ignorance is just as likely.
Click to expand...
Maybe this should be the lead to every thread here.
 
Last edited:
From someone on the outside, it strikes me that attacking Francis for trying his best to protect Chinese Catholics is not only off base, but deeply uncharitable. As I said, it’s hardly the first time the Church has accepted the realities that one of its national churches faced. In the East, during the Islamic Conquests, Patriarchs and bishops were in a situation where taking a position that would have lead to open conflict with the Muslim rulers would not only have lead to their own deaths or imprisonment, but likely to the conquerors attempting to extinguish Christianity. There is still a patriarch in Constantinople, still a Syriac Church and still a Coptic Church (as beset as the latter are these days) because the Orthodox leaders accepted that resistance would have been catastrophic.

Catholics in Mainland China have been persecuted for decades precisely because they were viewed as people whose first loyalty was to Rome. The Church is well aquainted with how the narrative of divided loyalty has caused Catholics in some countries great suffering, so Francis and his diplomats found a solution that gave China some of what it wanted, a degree of secular legitimacy in China, while still allowing the Pope some power over the appointing of bishops. It isn’t a perfect solution, any more than a new Patriarch of Constantinople having to pass muster with the Sultan was. But it is a solution that at least to some measure protects Christians.
 
As a person who politically, and theologically disagrees with much of what Pope Francis says and struggles with it, I really appreciate your post. It reminds me that I need to be charitable even when it is hard to do so.
But by the same token, I think we owe the same charity to the good clergy who may be confused by the Church, the Pope, or the media or not even confused but find themselves intellectually opposed to some of it. Many of these priests are good men, in the trenches of pastoral work or theology and they are being asked to explain some pretty confusing things in a time of division and confusion.
The last two popes have given us a level of instability that many who are youngish have never experienced. JPII was a long serving stable and constant Pope. I think we are in a very polarizing time. And it isn’t just the Church. It is the entire world.
 
X
“IdaCatholic said:
I think we are in a very polarizing time. And it isn’t just the Church. It is the entire world.
Click to expand...
Good time for prayer then . We have a whole battery of brothers and sisters in Heaven eager to help us. And it’s amazing . Our Church is amazing .
 
Last edited:
For me, the most troublesome comments the Pope has made were those last year, after Archbishop Vigano released his letter implicating Card. McCarrick and several other clergy in abuse and cover-ups. The Pope seemed to dismiss these accusations flippantly, and furthermore seemed to imply that any faithful Catholic seeking the truth about the sexual corruption scandal was working for the “father of lies.” His recent comment about being “honored” that Americans criticize him also came off as uncharitable. To be quite honest, America as a country has been doing more to fight against abortion than anything the Vatican has done over the last few years, from what I can tell. And actually, what should be more embarrassing for the Church, is that high-Catholic population states like NY, NJ, and IL continue to pass pro-abortion laws while the more Protestant states have enacted laws to protect the unborn.
I think he has a problem with the way we handle immigration, but quite honestly we have accepted millions and millions of immigrants over the years; he seems to have the impression that the US is full of well-off white folks standing at the border with pitchforks to ward off the migrants. He is either unaware of or perhaps just ignores the implications of allowing thousands of people flooding into the country every day with loose restrictions.
 
I haven’t heard any clergy near me expressing any discontent with the Pope.

I’m sure that priests have preferences for Popes and policies just like any other employee would take an interest in what their CEO was doing, but the vast majority of priests have the common sense to not be badmouthing their superiors to the laypeople in the pews. I imagine if you worked closely with the priest as a deacon, parish admin, or other staff then he might share some of his personal thoughts about the Pope. It’s also entirely possible that priests who are up to their necks in just dealing with the challenges of serving their parish don’t have much time or brain space to sit around and critique the Pope.
 
You will always find someone who is unhappy. Tomorrow the Pope could speak on the theme “God is good.” and you will find someone who is complaining about the “heretical pope.”
 
I believe humans are imperfect.
On the other hand, I pray that the Pope is correct.
 
babochka said:
I don’t know. Maybe God should send snakes to bite them.

(Number’s 21:6)
Click to expand...
The Apostles loved Jesus very much even Judas did. But they didn’t always agree on everything.

So I believe your bible verse is incorrect here.
 
Pope Francis was not a conformist by nature.
A Pope who blandly recapitulates the non controversial will proceed barely noticed.
 
A Pope should be a conformist. That should be the number one qualification.
Most of the objections to the Pope are political. I dont really care about the Pope’s politics. He comes from a south American worldview which is vastly different in terms of what the right and left represent. If the Pope is at odds with a government over immigration, or tte death penalty or capitalism, it doesnt affect me, especially if the Pope is handicapped in power. JPII effectively played a part in the defeat of communism in Europe.
My concern and caution is theological in nature not political. When the Pope talks of acceptable use of condoms in Zika areas (what a ball of nothing that turned out to be) or when he backs communion for serial adulterers etc that is when I have a hard time dealing with his off the cuff theological teachings. People attack trump for his tweets, and perhaps rightly so, but that seems to be similarly ineffective to airplane pressers and interviews with atheist reporters who pride themselves in not documenting the conversation. Populism comes in a lot of forms and it is quite fashionable right now.
 
IdaCatholic said:
A Pope should be a conformist. That should be the number one qualification.
Click to expand...
When you become a Cardinal, keep that in mind. Until then, Popes will decide what Popes should be and Cardinals will choose Popes according to their ideas.
 
The Saint who he derived his name from as Pope, was no conformist. Had he been, he would have been an obscure, and the church would have been worse off for it.
I am telling the truth when I say that your entire post represents talking points for one side of American politics. That doesn’t make it right or wrong. But it does make it recognizable.
I think if you look closer, the true picture is more even handed.
Catholic social doctrine, strait out of the catechism, is at odds with widely held beliefs of Capitalism and economics. That’s just a fact. I am not sure if in practice, that section of the catechism is optional. Optional, because much opposition by Catholics to this Pope fails to consider that the Pope’s comments are as orthodox and in conformity with the catechism as you could hope for. On those issues he is a conformist. He also is educated in economics so he is aware of his conformity. Not the ( throat clearing) South American with " their " views. I speculate that if Catholics ever read the catechism on issues like property ownership and economics, their heads might explode.
On the border wall issue, what the Pope said could not have been more in conformity with Church doctrine. Matthew 25, discusses welcoming the stranger in what I think is the only Gospel discussion that expressly talks about Jesus judgement to heaven and HELL. Pretty significant and express. The catechism of course is once again the direct support for his position.
This isn’t obscure. God speaking to the Hebrews admonished them that they must do the same. Something about once being strangers I another place. ( Oh yea, Jesus Mary and Joseph themselves were political refugees seeking asylum)
And of course but for the Egyptians taking in an infant Jew and his family. Letting Jesus reside there, Herod might have had a better shot snuffing the Prince of Peace as an infant.
The CRITICISM is in this Pope not remaining silent in these areas he definitely should be speaking out on.
Which forces me to make a correction. When I used CONFORMIST, I intended to describe silence on matters of faith that ruffle feathers. ( Maybe a stronger statement about Fish on Friday rather than Catholic Doctrine, is closer to what I intended).
Frankly , he apparently enjoys speaking about Catholic ethics and doctrine and doesn’t care about certain Americans that are in conflict.
Sex of individuals is not the only issues a Pope should speak out on.
 
Last edited:
Here is a response to the question of this thread from Victor Codina, S.J. and the Jesuit-run America Magazine. It understandably shows Pope Francis, a Jesuit himself, in a favorable light as a pastor and theologian, and shows his critics to be like so many others in the history of the Church, with some personal dislike or agenda. It seems to cover the major points of contention, at least for me, although those people who are critical of the pope (of which I am not one) might disagree on some points.

www.americamagazine.org

Why do some Catholics oppose Pope Francis?

Pope Francis does not aspire to fulfill his role as a theologian but as a pastor.
www.americamagazine.org www.americamagazine.org
 
Last edited:
I don’t have any great dislike for either Pope Francis or the Jesuits, but wow what a biased article. America magazine is really a fish wrapper lately.

I stopped reading when it got to the point of Francis removing clerics who caused scandals. Bishop Malone doesn’t seem to be going anyplace.
 
Fish wrap for sure. If you took a university communist club, New Ways Ministries, several Greenpeace activists and some new age practitioners, then told them to write a magazine, they’d come up with “America.”
 
I think many would rather have a pope that is seen and not heard.
 
Yeah, the Chinese have by and large routed around that particularly problem. It hasn’t been a meaningfully Communist country since the Gang of Four were taken out and Deng Xiaoping took over. It’s an autocratic technocracy now, and Communism is more a cipher for “Whatever Xi J(name removed by moderator)ing says.” Much of the socialist infrastructure has either been co-opted by capitalists or outright eliminated.

The Chinese watched what happened in Russia and have no intentions of letting that happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top