The nearly ubiquitous John Allen, the solitary boast of the National Schismatic Reporter, has notes from a wide-ranging interview Pope Francis gave to reporters while on the airplane heading back to Rome.
I have been musing to myself for a while now about what is going on in Francis’ mind when he does something odd. Were I able to ask directly, I would show him how, say, The New York Times (aka Hell’s Bible) covers him, and ask “Holy Father, is this what you want?”
Come to think of it, I would also show him the NSR and ask the same question. NSR’s editors choose to highlight the Pope’s answer about homosexuals, as if that where the most important thing their constituency needed to know about. Note, for example, that they did not lead with Francis’ strong statement that the door is closed on the matter of ordination of women as priests. They did not lead with the issue of curial reform, which is far more important, and more interesting, than a pretty standard response about homosexuals.
Just watch. The MSM and homosexuals will now have a conga line because of what Francis said about one issue and the rest will get lost.
Loading ...
As usual, some of the comments on Allen’s article make me wonder if those people were reading a different article…
Let’s be honest. Pope Francis has got to be making you nervous. A lot of spin going on in this blog. Things should only get more interesting.
And how do you spin this?
Divorced and remarried Catholics
“This theme always comes up … I believe this is a time of mercy, a change of epoch. It’s a kairos moment for mercy … In terms of Communion for those who have divorced and remarried, it has to be seen within the larger pastoral context of marriage. When the council of eight cardinals meets Oct. 1-3, one of the things they’ll consider is how to move forward with the pastoral care of marriage. Also, just 15 days ago or so, I met the secretary of the Synod of Bishops, and maybe it will also focus on the pastoral care of marriage. It’s complicated.”
[What’s to spin? What did he actually say? Did he say that the divorced and remarried should receive Communion?]
The Pope made several controversial remarks on the flight back to Rome regarding homosexual priests, the divorced and remarried, women’s position in the Church, etc. They will no doubt keep Fr. Lombardi very busy in the next few days!
As Pope, he should not be talking about theology in process or in sound bites. I do find that we are constantly putting out little fires after his talks. Why? He should be speaking as a leader of the One, True Church and not as if he is at a dinner party with friends. He seems to lack boundaries, or a professionalism which would help to stop the misunderstandings, which are natural from many of his off the cuff remarks.
In public, leaders cannot afford to indulge in thinking out loud, as being simplistic about very serious matters. I wish he would act more like a Jesuit.
How is what he said any different from what Catholics believe anyway? being homosexual isnt the sin.. the act is. (am I wrong?)
Now its a thing to report how different (refreshing is the word they are using) it is to have a pro gay Pope rather than that mean Pope Benedict.. ugh..
Agenda driven news is all we have now.
There are so many things I would like to say, but almost all of them are impertinent so I will, as best as possible, attempt to hold my tongue. Suffice it to say, I am unhappy about what I have read today, I am disturbed by what I saw in Rio last week, and I am fearful as to what Rome has in store for the future. I won’t lie. There are moments, increasing in number almost daily, when I wonder if Pope Francis is even worried about the conservative and traditional part of the Church.
And Andrew Sullivan writes…
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/07/29/francis-sunlight/
WYD is brutal and the Catholic Church just signed up to do another in Poland in 2016.
http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-francis-next-wyd-in-krakow-poland-2016
Won’t this thing die already?
The humility of Pope Francis has given me much opportunity to practice humility myself…
“I am disturbed by what I saw in Rio last week” could you be specific?
Be careful about the MSM. Pope Francis did not say he was reversing Pope Emeritus Benedict’s ban.Not even remotely hinted at it. What he did say is that there is a place for people with same sex attraction in the Church. I know 2 things: 1. they are called to chastity 2. if they sin they may be forgiven.
The MSM has its own agenda. I read their garbage from time to time to see what the enemy is up to. That’s it.
MSN.com:
“Pope Francis: ‘If someone is gay … who am I to judge?'”
dot.dot.dot:
“and he searches for the Lord and has good will”
They hear what they want to hear so they can do what they want to do.
boxerpaws1952 says:
29 July 2013 at 10:52 am
“I am disturbed by what I saw in Rio last week” could you be specific?
Here you go…
http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/b67d9d84bcbc15f836c295195c8f5025-129.html
[This entry is about the Pope’s comments on the plane to Rome.]
Through the accounts relate that Pope Francis quoted the Catechism, so I don’t see how this is any change whatsoever. It reminds me of those who laud the “open-mindedness” of John XXIII, who taught what the Church has always taught on issues such as abortion, birth control and any a host of other issues.
am following comments on one of these “news” stories and here is one that i thought worth sharing,
PLS when you read some of the garbage the MSM puts out read it with a grain of salt and be very suspicious.
I might point out that the ‘gay’ comment is on page one of the Catholic Herald.co.uk
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/
Here is just a sampling of the headlines on this:
“No More Excuses, Guys: The Pope Himself Is Okay with Gays!”
“Pope Francis says he won’t judge gay priests, a much different stance than his predecessor.”
“Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?”
I have many comments in my head about what the Holy Father said on the plane and how he said it and who he said it to and why he would say what he said to whom he said it, but I think it would be better to keep my mouth shut now. I do want to agree with onosurf however: World Youth Day needs to die, as does any part of the ministry of the Church that treats young people as if their spiritual needs are different than everybody else’s needs.
Oh and coming up on CNN..
“will talk about Pope Francis challenging the Vatican’s tradition”
FR Z., I am sorry, but there has to be much more responsilibity from the Vatican and the Pope on all information, either old or new. Too many people ONLY watch main-line television, do not read blogs and do not tweet. Those of us who want the real deal look until we find it, but most people do not.
The many, many problems with communication seem to have come to a head today. We should not be hearing major news about talks in process or about orders being restricted from blogs and comments.
If you have any influence in the Vatican media office, it is time to use it.
And, this comment on the Pope not wanting to live alone so he is not moving in to the Vatican Apts. Come on. Millions of us do not want to live alone and must for many reasons. I am sorry, that does not sound humble to me, and as I have heard on the ground in Rome, a nightmare for security.
Too many things and the liberal media hounds have to be treated like the idiots they are and given small bits of truth clearly and succinctly, over and over and over again.
Too late, Father. Friends of mine on both “sides” are having as you say, a nutty. Rad-trads will look for any article that says Pope Francis is contradicting Church Teaching while the poorly catechized will say, “Finally, a Pope who will love me for who I am and embrace my lifestyle choices.” The sad thing is, neither of them will look at what the Church really says, what Christ really said and follow it. Forgive, but go and sin no more! A hard thing to do. What these articles and words that Pope Francis are saying SHOULD be doing is creating conversations between Catholics. Forget ecumenical talks for a while. Our own people are divided.
It must be very hard for our Bishops who now have to go back and explain to their people what the Holy Father really meant. Since the media will continue to make a mess of his words, the Bishops now must be very, very, crystal clear.
At home, we must teach our children. Maybe in a generation this will be sorted out and there will be no more “sides”. Let’s not lose our heads. It is easy to get caught up in media. We all have the same enemy. Our Lady of Victory, pray for us!
“What Does the Pope Really Say?”
Of course, the Pope’s statement wasn’t made in a vacuum–this is coming on the heels of his comments about the “gay lobby.” If you put blood in the water, the sharks are going to appear.
Perhaps it’s past time to speak frankly about the fact that a significant number (dare I even say most?) priests in the Western Church are homosexuals. I think it was hoped that this would be corrected over time via attrition, but seminary oversight still seems quite weak–at least in this neck of the woods. Will this really change unless something a little more drastic is proposed?
And even then, what is to be done about the powerful “gay lobby” in the meantime? Maybe the Church should institute the disciple of having only married (in the traditional sense) priests for a couple of hundred years? ;)
The media’s gonna midiot, but if there’s anything to take from this is that ‘pastoral’ language doesn’t work. It’s too open ended. it can be interpreted in an evil manner, and you’ve got to be joking if you think anyone is going to bother trying to read Pope Francis through Benedict through Vatican II through Councils no.I-X of the past 2000 years. When Pope Francis speaks, people shouldn’t need footnotes to get what he’s really saying. Speak clearly and at length, whatever it takes to clarify completely what the Church teaches. No niceties. Sin isn’t a pleasant stroll through the woods. Witholding the full truth is neither nice nor merciful. It’s inconsiderate, deceiving and evil. The Pope ought to do his job. Preaching and preaching clearly and for however long it takes to make the position of the Church clear. If he doesn’t like it, maybe he should also abdicate and let someone more qualified be chosen. There are no excuses for this nonsense. There is no place for naievite.
http://flospetra.blogspot.com/2013/07/these-are-crazy-times.html
i doubt there is much anyone can do to stop the MSM. It is,what it is.
SuperTrad, “Those of us who want the real deal look until we find it, but most people do not.” unfortunately VERY true and either we find a way to counteract it or Pray- and not get too excited. Or BOTH. Those are the options.
I loved Francis’ comments about women.
As far as I can see, this opens fabulous possibilities for women. At times, the discussion may turn messy, but as we know already, Francis told the youth in Brazil not to be afraid of creating messes :-)
I’ve tried really hard to be open-minded about Pope Francis but I am very nervous. I know I need to trust how the Holy Spirit works through conclaves, but is it possible the Cardinals were mistaken??
I will offer one other comment on this topic. Pope Francis knew how his comments would be received by the press. He knew what he was doing. Similarly, I had hope Father Zuhlsdorf was correct that we needed to give Francis time to learn how to be Pope, but I think it’s clear he knew what he was doing from day one. Rather than attempt to explain away some of the things he says, it’s probably better for conservatives and traditionalists to accept that his priorities aren’t theirs, disappointing as that may be.
Fr Z, you are so right. As well as the homosexuals forming their conga line Stonewall in England will be rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of being ushered into all those lovely Catholic Schools.
Didn’t Benedict men offering themselves for the priesthood should not have homosexual tendencies? Francis seems to be saying it’s no big deal.
Elizabeth M.:
“Forget ecumenical talks for a while. Our own people are divided.”
You are so right. Ecumenism is important, but we should be putting much more effort into solving our inner Church battles. Isn’t that what Pope Benedict was trying to do with Summorum Pontificum and his talks with the SSPX?
As regards divorced and remarried Catholics, yes, I honestly believe that much is needed in regards to Catholics both young and old regarding the vocation of marriage and what the Church teaches in regards to marriage-how much are we catechized in regards to the sanctity of marriage and the charity of chastity in a world that diminishes both? My mom is in her 70’s, and I can’t tell you how many of her friends no longer go to Mass or confession because their husbands divorced them and remarried. At the other end of the spectrum, are many people who are middle-aged who have divorced and remarried civilly and who have not bothered with seeking reconciliation or correction prior to receiving the sacraments. As well, there is not a shortage of confused counsel in this regard. The Church has two sacraments of vocation, Holy Orders and Holy Matrimony. One of the things about vocational direction within the Catholic school system is that we are given too little direction regarding sacramental vocations, and have substituted the vocation with a career path. In such a manner, careerism is not simply a problem among clerics, but with the laity as well. Both family members and the flock are often neglected at the expense of careers.
What really bothers me in the responses at NSR, is the direction to equate “love” of an individual person with “loving” their lifestyle. Sometimes really loving an individual calls one to really hate their lifestyle.
Elizabeth M, I think you’ve said it best. Sorry to offend anyone here, but I am annoyed with both those looking to usher in a CofE style Church and those looking for an excuse to bolt to something more “traditional.”
Do you read what has gone on the last two millenia? Leaders (meaning popes, as well as order & diocesan superiors) have gotten things wrong – and leaders have been misinterpreted, as well. It just seems to be on steroids now, with the 24-hour news cycle.
Relax. Do the best you can to be an educated Catholic, educating as necessary. From Sts. Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross through St. Pio, there is a plethora of Saints and saints who suffered everything from misunderstanding to heresy. Follow their examples. The heretics sometimes gain the upper hand, but it doesn’t last. Those who were reformers WITHIN CHURCH PARAMETERS were vindicated eventually. “Pray, hope and don’t worry”. I’d throw in pray, hope, FAST and don’t worry.
Let’s take a list of what the Pope said in this little speech that contradicted Church teaching. Get ready:
As for his comments about divorce and remarriage, I remember Cardinal Ratzinger saying much the same thing. I’d love to find that document somewhere…perhaps I’ll put my Google skills to use later…
What a crock of a controversy. When asked to speak about the gay lobby, he gave an entirely Catholic answer, one that can be found in the Catechism. Why is this even news?
If the traditionalists are going so nuts over him, join an Eastern Catholic Church! My gosh, every little thing he says is being analyzed…
I don’t blame the Pope a bit. He seems to be perfectly clear and orthodox, when you actually read his words in full. I blame the bad translations and the soundbites, and I blame the deliberate misunderstanding of his words with malice aforethought.
The news media are always saying that they want us to speak simply. But when people do, it’s easier for them to mess around with the quotes they pick; and when they don’t have room to spin, they just make stuff up.
Cathy: One of the best comments I’ve seen on “sacraments of vocation” vs. careerism.
Elodie: I think quite a few of us are deeply concerned about the Lavender Mafia becoming even more entrenched than it is now. There is no “cliquishness/clannishness” quite like that of homosexual males.
Johnno,
Let’s be clear where the ‘nonsense’ is coming from. THE MSM. They can take whatever they like,quote what they like and interpret it as they see fit. I hope we don’t go this route every time the media trie sto pull something’;that we start calling for Pope Francis to abdicate so we can get someone else they will attack just as much as the last Pope. At least until they get the Pope they want.Here’s an article that is far more accurate: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1303260.htm
Pls read ppl. The nonsense is our believing that the MSM consists of objective and honest journalists anymore. Watch the sources. Get better ones.
If i’m wrong will be the first to admit it.
The reaction will be reminiscent of the giddiness of the DLEMM- Dominant Liberal Establishment Mass Media – (nothing is mainstream about the fourth estate) when they crowed that Pope Benedict XVI endorsed the use of prophylactics, which he did not.
I echo your sentiments that the Holy Father exercise more caution when speaking extemporaneously.
Lest anyone forget:
CAREFUL SELECTION AND TRAINING OF CANDIDATES
FOR THE STATES OF PERFECTION AND SACRED ORDERS
PROCLAIMED BY
Sacred Congregation for Religious
February 2, 1961
“Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers.”
when the Pope says abortion is acceptable,that same sex persons can get married,that contraception is fine and homosexuals may become priests,women can be ordained and Jesus is not truly present in the Eucharist let me know.
Cathy says,
My mom is in her 70?s, and I can’t tell you how many of her friends no longer go to Mass or confession because their husbands divorced them and remarried. At the other end of the spectrum, are many people who are middle-aged who have divorced and remarried civilly and who have not bothered with seeking reconciliation or correction prior to receiving the sacraments.
I’m sorry, but you don’t seem to understand the situation.
1. There is no such thing as correction or reconciliation for divorced Catholics who have remarried. Unless they have received an annulment, they are still married to the first person (assuming it was valid). This cannot be corrected or reconciled through Confession
2. Thus there is no reason why your Mom’s friends cannot go to mass and Communion, assuming they have not remarried.
“I echo your sentiments that the Holy Father exercise more caution when speaking extemporaneously.”
IMHO the only way to avoid these problems is to quit speaking to the MSM ENTIRELY
They(the MSM)are notorious.
I’m trying to like Pope Francis. But honestly, deciphering what he “really meant” is like trying to decipher what “Mary really meant” in her long, garbled “messages” at Medjugorje. I make it a practice to avoid the second, and honestly I feel like I am best off avoiding the first.
Ok, look at this nonsense, on two interpretations, one from a Dem Rep and one from a gay Congressman. And, it needs to be said loudly and clearly, and to all the seminary staff and vocations directors in the world-no gay priests.
http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/other-news/314061-rep-speier-commends-pope-on-gay-priests#ixzz2aSE0ak3F
I’ve just looked at the BBC account of this and have been pleasantly surprised at the balanced tone
David Willey
David Willey reported that the Pope “defended gay people from discrimination but also quoted the distinction drawn by Catholic teaching between homosexual orientation – which is not regarded as sinful – and homosexual acts – which are. But he also condemned lobbying by gay people”.
The cynic in me wonders how long it will stay up until being replaced by an account something more in line with the BBC’s policy
I have stayed away from the MSM as much as possible after the first days of the Pope’s election showed me that they were looking for anything and everything to prove that Francis was “on their side”. I try to wait for the commentaries here and on other Catholic blog sites before leaping to any conclusions. I have been supportive of Pope Francis, but so many of these off-the-cuff statements he makes leave me nervous about where our church is headed. Is he guileless, or is it a plan to knock over the tables?
My favorite part is that immediately before and after the supposed “money quote” Pope Francis strongly condemns the homosexual lobby!
Literally nothing he said in that quote is controversial. Move on folks, nothing to see here.
Remember Matthew 10:16 advice from Jesus Christ Our Lord? “Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves.” I think our good Pope has forgotten the first part of this warning. And, he needs to be more like the wise serpent and less like the simple dove, for all of our sakes.
I don’t think he committed the sin of commission, but rather of omission. He could’ve easily added: the gay lifestyle is an abomination to God and cannot be lived. If you have homosexual tendencies, you must carry your cross and remain celibate.
Clear language for his sheep, and not open to interpretation. To date, this has not been Pope Francis’ way. As stated before, I think this it is purposeful. He’s not an idiot.
Just musings…. I did try to see the good side of the Circus in Rio. One good thought was that – dancing Bishops and all – there might be at least one person who is supremely jealous of someone other than himself getting all this massive attention on the ground. And that would be our president of course, maybe waxing nostalgic for the days when he drew 100,000 to Missouri (his biggest crowd ever) and a drop in the bucket compared to 3 million in Rio. I am sure that any headline that deflects attention from himself as the One Most Worthy of public worship anywhere on the planet is a thorn in the side to BO and cause for a general loss of sleep.
Of course had this whole shebang happened in Washington DC, the NYT might have revised that 3 million estimate to a busload of tourists from the midwest and a few local whackos.
That said I am left pondering a note that leaped out at me in reading through the Psalms in the Douay Rheims this morning, Pslam 77 to be exact (it’s where my bookmark was placed from the last reading) detailing the punishments of the Jews who doubted and turned away from the Lord even after the miracle of their deliverance from Egypt. There in Rev. George Leo Haydock’s notes at the bottom of the page:
“We are astonished at the infidelities of the Isrealites. But if THREE MILLION (emphasis mine) of Christians were placed in the same circumstances would they have behaved better?”
Wow.
Here is the BBC take on what the Pope said
“Pope Francis says gay people should not be marginalised but integrated into society, in an apparent softening of his predecessor’s line on the issue”
It’s about the number 2 story on their website
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23489702
I loved John Paul II.
Pope Benedict is my hero. I have read Joseph Ratzinger since 1998.
I have read the writings of Pope Francis and I have been reading his talks and homilies etc.
I find him to be enigmatic and not in a good way.
I think Pope Francis talks way too much to be honest. Whether it be the morning homilies or a lengthy interview with journalists.
For those that say move along, I would say a concerned response to your parish priest, bishop or even the Vatican about this press conference is warranted.
As many have said, the MSM loves to take things out of context and that article from andrewsullivan is disturbing to say the least…..there will definitely be more attempts to get Francis to allow those with homosexual tendencies into the priesthood.
I don’t think there is anything amusing about this. I think the Pope’s comments are reckless. It upsets me and leaves me unsettled because I love the church & the pope. We keep trying to find glimpses of hope, and ways of reading this pope…it’ll be ok, we’ll look at it this way. We’ve got at least another decade of this trajectory!
I find it helpful that he speaks in these ways. It is sincere and normal in ways that typical people can understand. What is clear to me is not how different Pope Francis’ stances are, but how very differently the media is filtering him. They are giving visibility to him and the message of the Church. It is good, as many people are very vulnerable to the bias of the media and it certainly must drive some away.
Very sad day. We just never know what the Pope is going to say, and now it looks like he is launching an attack against the TLM and Summorum Pontificum. I’m sorry Father Zuhlsdorf, but the liberals are not turning on Pope Francis, after all they are the ones who vote him Pope. It is those who love the traditions of the Catholic Church that are crying. Brick by brick is coming down. Modernism is in full effect. Confusion reigns. Liturgical abuse abounds. Pope Francis’ attitude towards the TLM and traditionalism will only cause more division and lead to more schisms. I have to say it was probably for the best the SSPX did not sign any agreements. The war against the TLM is here and the SSPX would have had to end up with the protestant mess, ie the Bugnini Mass. And I guess His Holiness fails to understand the devastation the homo priests caused in the Church and the countless lives ruined by them. So does this mean a priest can have his boyfriend in the front pew, but because he has “good will”, no one should dare judge him? We are officially at the point of sheer madness! The Pope obviously favor the ‘anything goes’ mentality that has caused the worldwide loss of faith. The days of darkness are upon us. Domine, miserere nobis. +JMJ+
“One of the things about vocational direction within the Catholic school system is that we are given too little direction regarding sacramental vocations, and have substituted the vocation with a career path.”
I just had a news flash from some wee corner of my brain…
Doot duh doot doot doot…”Now, we bring you news from inside the Chicken’s brain…take it away, Simon Synapse…”
“Thanks, Ed. This is Simon Synapse reporting, live, from Galliform village, where the Masked Chicken has just had a thought…let’s listen in on the news conference…”
“Ah, yes, as I was saying just a few moment, ago, to that dendrite in the back row…’Do you know how long it takes to become a vowed cloistered nun? On average, five years. Five years. Do you know how long it takes to become a vowed housewife? Six months.'”
“Six months?”
“Yes, that’s right. Five years to learn how to accept and deal with poverty, chastity, and obedience and six months to learn how to accept and deal with diapers, disputes, and snoring.”
“Why, that doesn’t seem fair, Chicken.”
“Dear, dear dendrite…Haven’t you heard the latest thinking from the Elite: how are dating people supposed to keep their hands off each other for five years…is this shomer negiah – where the Jewish betrothed never touch until after marriage? What do you want, the scrutinies of the community, the temporary vows, the years of study? Who studies for marriage? Who prepares for marriage?”
“Shouldn’t we prepare for marriage, Chicken?”
“You and I think so and I’d love to see what a five year formation period for marriage would do to divorce statistics (they would flatline – there would be no divorces because no one would last long enough to be married), but, be honest, modern marriage is mostly the result of hormonal instability, whereas modern religious vocation is a result of a sensed calling. The prospective religious has mentors and novice masters and family trying to talk them out of it, to test their vocation. Who tests the vocation to marriage? Six months in Pre-Cana (mumbling and cooing as much as possible to avoid answering any tough questions) and you are all set.”
“I see, Chicken. Those Elite are so smart. Of course, you can always leave the Religious life if things get tough…sign a piece of paper.”
“True, dendrite, but marriage is like God putting your life through a 2048 bit encryption and then destroying the pass key. Once you press the Enter key, thing will never be the same and all for the price of six months of sharing your feelings and listening to a few talks for a few hours a week.”
“The problems of divorce and re-marriage sure are complicated. Why don’t people put more time into discerning marriage?”
“Yes – a hockey season of preparation, a life-time of remorse. Perhaps, the Holy Father wouldn’t have to do, “deferential calculus,” to deal with the divorced and re-married if more marriages were treated like traditional religious vocations from the start…just a thought…”
“…this has been Simon Synapse reporting, live, from the Chicken’s brain. We, now, return you to our regularly scheduled thought patterns…”
The Chicken
Some comments here are so over-the-top it is downright embarrassing.
“Some comments here are so over-the-top it is downright embarrassing.”
Dig a deep hole of humility and your comments will never get over-the-top.
The Yoda-Chicken
Clinton, the liberals are not turning on Pope Francis, after all they are the ones who vote him Pope. the liberals voted Francis? isn’t this the same group that voted our Pope Emeritus?
I love the Traditions (capital T)of the Church. I don’t cry about anything except the enemy making enough inroads to send ppl into an uproar.
Again,schism is a SINagainst charity.
Pope Francis said this? Could you please point out where?
here we can ALMOST agree except it’s the MSM that is that department,not the Pope.
and no one knows this better than Pope Francis.
In Rio, the Pope told the youth at Catholic Woodstock to create commotion in their dioceses and he seems to have taken his owns words to heart because he’s causing quite a commotion himself. He also seems to be causing another “c” word as well, confusion.
So I must ask. Why must we be forced to decipher what the Pope says? Why can’t he speak with clarity? Is it really that difficult? Should every comment he makes require clean up from the Vatican press office?
When the Pope speaks, people listen. His words carry weight and, because of that, each Pope should weight carefully every word he chooses. Otherwise, you get confusion, frustration, and whole bunch of other unpleasant words.
Geoffery says,
Ya think? Nods head,agree.
Why does anyone even give these so called ‘journalists’ cred?
*sigh*
You’re welcome to stop in.We are of the mind pray,hope,don’t worry.PLUS ignore the media. We have some discussions going on and wish we had more ppl to contribute. http://cpandf.wall.fm/index
Here is a take from an ATHEIST on Pope Francis:
I listened as Pope Francis spoke with the bishops right before he left for Rome-his last day- and if he didn’t bring up the devil again.
Anyone have that address? It’s there.
As long as Pope Francis knows who he is doing battle with I’m fine.In fact i’d probably line up the MSM in that ‘other’ corner. I don’t think there’s much we can do about them,until ppl are willing to hold their feet to the fire instead of attacking our own Pope every time THEY print something.
Remember the MSM doctored the Zimmerman tape and covered for Obama. Let’s be cautious.
I think far more interesting are his quotes on divorce (the uproar over his homosexuality quotes, which simply restate the Catechism and condemn the homosexual lobby, is silly in my opinion). I know Cardinal Ratzinger in 1972 expressed, in certain situations, after penance, to allow divorced and remarried Catholics (who are having sex) to receive communion. But in 1998 it seemed as if he had reversed his position.
Pope Francis never said, and I’m willing to wager never will say, that marriage is indissoluble, and as long as that is not changed (as, of course, it can’t be) I am not worried. But I AM interested to see what happens in regards to divorced and remarried couples receiving communion.
The Wall Street Journal is saying that Pope Francis opens the door to accepting gay priests.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324354704578635401320888608.html?mod=trending_now_1
Yoda Chicken,
Great points. Just one small correction. Diocesan marriage prep classes don’t even require 6 months. That would be small step in the right direction. A small improvement even. A marriage encounter weekend, which used to be the longest “toughest” row to hoe in marriage prep, for that, you’re talking one weekend of your life. No 6 months. That’s 1 weekend for the biggie Diocesan class. For the marriage encounter “lite” a couple could do 2, 3-4 hour classes on a Saturday or Sunday and fulfill the requirement. That includes a quickie run-down on NFP. But if all of that is too much, well then the couple could also break it up into 1 hour weekly sessions and be done in a few weeks.
Can’t imagine why we have “catholic” couples who contracept or are otherwise so poorly catechized.
I was all depressed. The IRS wants to levy our wages. The Pope is acting weird. I was feeling my blood pressure rise and then I read the latest “chicken” scratch. Oh Chicken, were I not already married, I would make you a proposal.
My best to your dendrites.
Although I would prefer other forms of dialogue with the press, we catholics should not be surprised when the Pope speaks about what the Church teaches.
What makes me sad is to realize that some catholics whatch the Pope in a vigilant manner, with a stone in his hands.
It seems to me that on the gay question Francis was thinking rather narrowly of a particular situation in Rome. If that’s the case, he’s fallen back on the casuistic reasoning historically favoured by the Society. But, oh, I do wish he would stop shooting from the lip.
I am getting so flippin fed up with the hysterics over every little thing that the Pope says or doesn’t say. I’m a bottom line sort of person. As I see it, the bottom line here is that even if all hysterics are justified and Pope Francis is the anti-pope and evil incarnate himself (and I don’t feel that’s the case at all), there’s only so much crap that God will tolerate from the evil one. Period. Exclamation point. Solution to problem. End of story. Can we all get back to trying to live holy, saintly lives now without ripping the pope and each other apart, please?
We now return you to our previously scheduled programming already in progess.
In the mist of all this, did anyone see the great things Pope Francis said about the Eastern Liturgy and our need to recover beauty? Read the whole interview (and watch the excerpts on Rome Reports), it is not nearly as scary as people make it out to be. If I had heard a pastor say it, I wouldn’t have blinked an eye.
Orthodox says,
Amen! I’m hoping at this point some will drop[ to quote DCMA[, the “stone in his hands.”
The media. We KNOW whose side they’re on and if we don’t we’re vigilantly watching the wrong people.
BTW . I am no ‘modernist’ .I am w/ Pope Francis in that the Church cannot turn in on itself even if there are some mistakes made. The bigger mistake would be closing itself in.The apostles and Mother Mary went to the Upper Room and locked themselves in but they eventually walked out. Noah went into the Ark,but with a sign from God,eventually walked out.
Jesus was laid in the tomb but He rose and came out.We can’t afford not to come out and do battle.
@ Steven Surrency
Where can we read the whole interview?
Which language(s) was/were the interview on the plane conducted in? I’ve read some quotes from it in English, Portuguese and Spanish. While I am not fluent in either Portuguese or Spanish, I know them well enough to see areas where they were not the same.
Did reporters ask questions in their own languages? What language did Pope Francis respond in?Were the journalists all Italian? Was the interview in Italian then?
Translations can take on a life of their own.
“I have been musing to myself for a while now about what is going on in Francis’ mind when he does something odd.”
What exactly did he do that you regard as odd? Give a press interview on flight home? Or was it something he said about not judging gays?
Then again, if it was no more “than a pretty standard response about homosexuals”, why [will] “the MSM and homosexuals now have a conga line because of what Francis said”?
Overall I thought the NCR article was well balanced and did not over stress the issue amongst all the other topics of the 1 hour and twenty minutes interview/question time that the Holy Father spontaneously gave.
I know from someone who was in the FI’s that the founder, Fr Stephano Manelli,(who is still alive) spiritual director was Padre Pio. He received first holy communion from him and served for him as a boy. Fr Manelli would have made the FI’s a traditional order if the Summorum Pontificum was in effect when he founded the order. If you enter the order you have a certain understanding of the founder’s wishes…
Sorry! This comment belongs with another article.
Since when have homosexuals been able to even become priests? I’m sorry but this seems to be the issue that is not being addressed. Homosexuals have a disorder that is not in keeping with the position they are in as priests, whether they are celibate or not. All priests who are homosexuals must have their ordinations annulled. Even if they have sinned, and they go to confession and are forgiven, this does not make them suitable for the position that they are in. Yes their individual sins are forgiven and we are called to love them as God loves them, but just as women are not suitable to be priests, neither can homosexuals be, and that is what I believe the Church teaches.
MaryL you are correct.
NOTE:it may have been that the screening process wasn’t as up to speed as it ought to have been and has since been corrected.
“I have a mustard seed, and I’m not afraid to use it.” (Pope Benedict XVI)
I am sticking with the wisdom of Pope Emeritus Benedict, who is still on the field, continuing to pray for us and for Holy Mother Church.
I am praying for Pope Francis, for his intentions, for God to keep him close and guide him, as I am sure Pope Emeritus Benedict is also. Prayer works.
Maybe you all need to see how our local newspaper in Minneapolis is spinning this:
http://www.startribune.com/world/217364211.html
And make sure to congratulate us on being the gay capital of the world in just three days when marriage is legalized.
read it rds and left a comment. it may be a waste of time but these so called journalists need called out. I tried anyway. thanks for posting.
Elizabeth M,
“Since the media will continue to make a mess of his words”
That is the issue. And they always will because they are not working for Christ and so are against Him. We should not be dismayed by this as Jesus warned us about it in the Gospel.
Dave N,
“a significant number (dare I even say most?) priests in the Western Church are homosexuals. I think it was hoped that this would be corrected over time via attrition, but seminary oversight still seems quite weak”
Another important point here. Anecdotes we have heard from those who were in seminary in England and survived to become priests or were hounded out tell of a situation which was never going to be solved “over time by attrition”. Indeed, the attrition was in the wrong direction, in the form of a systematic and continual persecution in the seminary of those who were orthodox candidates by the gay lobby. I am afraid the word persecution is accurate in describing what happened to these poor chaps who are friends of ours. I think the closing of some seminaries has been a very good thing as some of these places were really beyond redemption. However, the fruit of this situation is that many of the gay lobby are now practising priests in the UK (and elsewhere) and doing who knows what. Let’s keep praying for our priest, especially those who sin grievously.
rdschreiner says:
“And make sure to congratulate us on being the gay capital of the world in just three days when marriage is legalized.”
Sorry, the UK has beaten you to that dubious honour. Thanks to some frightening manipulation of Parliament by “Call-Me-Dave” Cameron and his cronies and henchmen. Now he triumphantly wants to “export” “gay marriage” around the world apparently. Another great British export then…….like BSE.
i read another “news” article on the Pope’s interview and caught the response of a priest in the comments.
Father_________wrote,
“The church, while deeply respecting the people in question, cannot admit to the seminary and the sacred orders those who practice homosexuality, present deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or support so-called gay culture.”
How does this say that men with homosexual tendencies can’t be Priests? It says those who PRACTICE homosexuality, PRESENT deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or SUPPORT so-called gay culture. It says nothing about just having the tendencies.
“How does this say that men with homosexual tendencies can’t be Priests?”
Question: isn’t that what this means?:
Am sure this conversation is going to go on for some time and a few more news articles will be putting out their spin. It may not die for awhile but journalists being the ones looking for a REALLY sensational headline will move onto the next sensational headline.
Meantime a few last words from me(said enough already and ‘hogged’ the thread) re WYD.
http://flospetra.blogspot.com/2013/07/wyd-2013-outsider-take.html
With respect, I don’t think confronting [You misunderstood a fundamental point in the top entry. I didn’t say anything about “confrontation”. I said ask him if what he sees in the paper is what he wants. It be be that, yes, that is what he wants.] Francis with the NYT headlines spun from his comments would be a useful exercise. Popes are not masters of the modern sound bite (remember Pope Benedict’s airborne press conference en route to Africa in March 2009?). Nor should they try to be. The rest of the world is almost guaranteed to misunderstand them. But we Catholics have a sacred obligation to give them a fair, good faith hearing. We should listen to them as pastors, reading them, as the tag line of this blog suggests–in full Petrine context.
Present seems like it’s being used as a verb. It sounds as if he’s saying that a Priest who, even if he does not support gay culture and does not engage in a sinful lifestyle, nevertheless makes it clear to all that he’s a homosexual – “presenting” himself specifically as a homosexual as opposed to a fellow brother in Christ – should not be ordained.
If all he was saying was “Priests with homosexual tendencies should not be ordained”, he should have just said that. But instead he makes three specific points and modifies all three with verbs.
From the Catholic News Agency,
“Addressing the issue of the gay lobby, Pope Francis said it was important to “distinguish between a person who is gay and someone who makes a gay lobby,” he said. “A gay lobby isn’t good.”
“A gay person who is seeking God, who is of good will — well, who am I to judge him?” the pope said. “The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this very well. It says one must not marginalize these persons, they must be integrated into society. The problem isn’t this (homosexual) orientation — we must be like brothers and sisters. The problem is something else, the problem is lobbying either for this orientation or a political lobby or a Masonic lobby.”
He was addressing the ‘gay lobby.’ I read it several times and i don’t get how anyone could take away from it that he meant ordaining priests with homosexual tendencies. I took it to mean he was explaining Church teaching on the forgiveness of sins, how we should treat people with same sex attraction and the question re a ‘gay lobby’ in the Church.A gay lobby being another one of those sensational news stories making the rounds.
Not getting into the immediate question of the prudence of the Holy Father’s remarks, but to reassure a few commenters who seem worried that before long he’ll actually officially launch us into liberalism:
From “Lumen Fidei” (maybe drafted by Pope Emeritus Benedict, but obviously fully endorsed by Pope Francis):
“Since faith is one, it must be professed in all its purity and integrity. Precisely because all the articles of faith are interconnected, to deny one of them, even of those that seem least important, is tantamount to distorting the whole. Each period of history can find this or that point of faith easier or harder to accept: hence the need for vigilance in ensuring that the deposit of faith is passed on in its entirety and that all aspects of the profession of faith are duly emphasized. Indeed, inasmuch as the unity of faith is the unity of the Church, to subtract something from the faith is to subtract something from the veracity of communion…” (48)
“As a service to the unity of faith and its integral transmission, the Lord gave his Church the gift of apostolic succession. Through this means, the continuity of the Church’s memory is ensured and certain access can be had to the wellspring from which faith flows. The assurance of continuity with the origins is thus given by living persons, in a way consonant with the living faith which the Church is called to transmit. She depends on the fidelity of witnesses chosen by the Lord for this task. For this reason, the magisterium always speaks in obedience to the prior word on which faith is based; it is reliable because of its trust in the word which it hears, preserves and expounds.” (49)
Never fear, the Holy Spirit is with the Church, and Pope Francis will uphold the faith.
ok. i really will shut up after this. it just bugged me enough to keep me up for awhile-and when that happens it’s time to put it to rest. Did: http://flospetra.blogspot.com/2013/07/hurricane-francis.html
now i can get some zzzz’s.
OnoSurf; took a time out to look at your link.Couple things. Perhaps ‘grooving’ is in the eye of the beholder but it looked more like Cardinal Dolan was sleeping.I wasn’t there so i can’t really say.
As for the clergy dancing…it was NOT during the liturgy so it could hardly fall under the classification of liturgical abuse. Child abuse? Come on. Silly? Yeah. Abusive? You have to be kidding. It’s called having fun and it hurts no one.
I’m not crazy about praise and worship music ala non Catholic denominations.I do not like drums and guitars during celebration of Mass. We could do way better with music. No doubt. I’m no expert though. It might be in poor taste and not to everyone’s liking but i’m not sure i’d call it liturgical abuse either. Music is something our parishes could work on.
As for the Eucharistic ministers.That may be another matter.”Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion. They may also exercise this function at eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion.”
I have no way of knowing if any of these criteria were true with the photos you posted. If the criteria were not met then they should NOT have had extraordinary ministers. If the criteria were met then there is no abuse.
All for reporting actual abuse but not all for going after every little thing if it’s not related to liturgy.
“Love one another as I Have Loved you.” – Jesus The Christ, The Word of God Made Flesh.
The God of our Salvation, The True God, desires that we overcome our disordered inclinations, whatever they may be, so that we are not led into temptation, but rather, we become transformed through God’s Grace and Mercy. Love is desiring Salvation for one’s beloved. The question is, why would any person who professes to be a follower of The Christ, not desire that their beloved become transformed through God’s Grace and Mercy?
Pingback: Who Am I To Judge? - BigPulpit.com
http://usccb.org/bible/galatians/1
See Galatians 1:9, about those persons who preach a gospel other than The Gospel of Salvation.
This situation (and others with MSM) reminds me of some jokes in The Simpsons, notably “The Call of Simpsons” where Homer is confused as Bigfoot. From snpp.com:
“The campground has turned into a media circus. The ranger notes that Marge
and Lisa were lucky to be found—before Bigfoot got them. He showsMarge
the newspaper headline and photo. Says Marge, “Why, that’s my husband!”
A new headline: “I married Bigfoot.” Marge is surrounded by reporters.
“His name isn’t Bigfoot. His name is Homer.” Another headline:
“Bigfoot’s wife pleads: `Call him Homer!’ ”. “What does it eat?” asks
a reporter. Marge doesn’t understand the commotion, but answers the
question anyway. Next headline: “The Bigfoot Diet: `Pork Chops Aplenty’ ”.
I said something in a way that distracted from what I was saying: I did not mean to suggest you were urging a “confrontation” a la Webster’s definition #1 (“to face especially in challenge”), but simply #2a (to “bring face-to-face “). My main point is that the NYT spin should not be what motivates the Pope’s speech: you colorfully described it as “the Devil’s Bible”–you cannot play the Prince of this world at his game, and think that you’re going to win.
Fr Z got it right though(saw what was coming); The conga line forms to the left. They will quit dancing soon enough.
How can Francis speak of God forgetting? It is impossible for God not to know everything always.
The answer is in Jeremiah 31:34.
?????? ??????????? ????? ?????? ???????????? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ?????????????? ???????? ??????? ????????????? ???????????????? ????????????? ????? ???????? ??????????? ?????????????? ???? ???????????????
First of all, the key word in the Jeremiah verse is ???? ???????? (excuse my rough transliteration) ‘ezkar with negative lo. So “I will not recall”. The verbal etymological root is zakar which means “to mark” or “to record”. Hence, a translation with “remember” (cf. RSV “I will remember their sin no more”), although perfectly natural and justifiable, can be glossed for this discussion as “will not refer back to it in a judgement context”. JB/NJB have (nicely, for a change) “never call their sin to mind”. It is not that God can lose consciousness of a fact, but what he can do is promise not to make/keep a note of it now, nor to reference it in future, nor to bring it up again later.
So, with respect to reconciling the apparently absurd idea of God forgetting with a natural use of the word “forgetting”, Jeremiah 31:34 is the complete solution and vindication!
However, Francis did not use (see paste-in below) non … ricorderà, but dimentica. The Italian translations for Jeremiah (incl. the Vatican) have “non mi ricorderò”. The Vatican Vulgata has “non memorabor”. And the Spanish is “no me acordaré”. None of these is cognate with dimenticare. It seems, even if that Biblical passage in Jeremiah formed his thinking (which no doubt it did), he was not making an allusion to it at that time on that plane. [Furthermore, albeit weak evidence, dimenticare is from Latin dementare, which refers to mental conditions like the cognate “demented”; thus suggesting a mental failure or defect impossible to God.]
Can saying “il Signore dimentica” escape being wrong?
If we grant (as we do) that his overall conception of divine forgetfulness is based on the Jeremiah passage and Tradition, we could say he really meant “non lui ricorderà”. But if we do that, where can we draw the line? What else that he says that does not make sense to us will we explain to ourselves and others by putting into his mouth what we think is right? No, for integrity, Francis’ way of speaking can be saved, only if dimenticare can mean something other than the usual meaning of “forget” in English.
I was recently helping an Italian researcher make English translations of a survey. I recall one of the items was this: “La mancata somministrazione di una terapia farmacologica è semplicemente una “svista”/ “dimenticanza”.” Now this use of dimenticare seems to refer to actual absent-mindedness, forgetfulness, which should be impossible for God. And the item implicitly frames the lapse as understandable “human weakness”.
But I am neither a fluent nor extensive reader of Italian; I cannot and do not presume to-be-unable-to-identify other uses of dimenticare that would fit the meaning of non ricordare.
And, on the other hand, Francis in the same Press meeting uses the phrase “non ricordo quale delle due” — where it is clear he means “not remember” — from which it is arguable that for him, the two verbs are interchangeable. Furthermore, he says in the same passage “non abbiamo il diritto di non dimenticare”. This implies that to dimenticare is an obligation and therefore something within our control. To dimenticare in this sense must mean, therefore, an act of consciously setting something aside. And consciously to set it aside in this sense requires it be in mind, but intentionally not marked for retrieval. Lo! Jeremiah 31:34!
Probably, if you had asked him there: Holy Father, by dimenticare do you mean non ricordare? he would have said: Yes, of course!
Ma se una persona, laica o prete o suora, ha fatto un peccato e poi si è convertito, il Signore perdona, e quando il Signore perdona, il Signore dimentica e questo per la nostra vita è importante. Quando noi andiamo a confessarci e diciamo davvero: “Ho peccato in questo”, il Signore dimentica e noi non abbiamo il diritto di non dimenticare, perché corriamo il rischio che il Signore non si dimentichi dei nostri [peccati]. E’ un pericolo quello. Questo è importante: una teologia del peccato.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/speeches/2013/july/documents/papa-francesco_20130728_gmg-conferenza-stampa_it.html