Friday, January 10, 2014

POPE FRANCIS ENDORSES THE NEW ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE CREED THAT MOVES IT AWAY FROM ALL THE "WE'S" TO ALL THE "I'S"


Oh, and by the way, His Holiness, the Bishop of Rome, Pope Francis I, also endorse the entire Faith Tradition of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church!

This is an excerpt of his Friday's homily in the chapel of his place of residence at the Vatican Motel 6:

“Faith,” Said Pope Francis, “means confessing God – the God who revealed Himself to us, from the time of our fathers down to the present: the God of history. This we recite each day in the Creed – but it is one thing to recite the Creed heartily, and another [merely] to parrot it, no? I believe, I believe in God, I believe in Jesus Christ, I believe – but do I believe what I am saying? Is this a true confession of faith or is it something I say somehow by rote, because it is [the thing to say]? Do I believe only halfway? Confess the Faith! All of it, not part of it! Safeguard this faith, as it came to us, by way of tradition: the whole Faith! And how may I know that I confess the Faith well? There is a sign: he, who confesses the faith well – the whole Faith – has the capacity to worship God.”

(By the way, this part of his Friday's homily sounds a great deal like the last part of the inaugural homily the bishop Pope Francis I appointed to Rochester which you can hear in the previous post to this one by way of video!)
Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/01/10/pope_francis:_friday_mass_at_casa_marta/en1-762743
of the Vatican Radio website

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well good. It's about time he started speaking like a Catholic. Remember Father that the reason Francis I, the Holy Roman Pontiff, made so many Catholics who actually believe what the Church teaches in it's entirety, made so many nervous wasn't because he was teaching the Faith as it has always been taught. I have no problem with Francis I, the Holy a Roman Pontiff, teaching the Faith. But when he says things like maybe the BVM felt betrayed at the foot of the cross. I get, let's describe it as concerned. Has he ever heard of the Immaculate Conception? She, preserved from original sin, was also preserved from it's effects. Effects like disordered passions and depraved emotions. So it's a laudable thing that Francis I, the Holy Roman Pontiff, is sounding like a Catholic. Thank you for making us aware that Francis I, the Holy Roman Pontiff, said something in accord with Catholic teaching. It's edifying to hear it.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

It doesn't seem to me that what you describe Francis I, the Holy Roman Pontiff, Bishop of Rome, actually said, or you are not reporting it accurately. The Holy Roman Pontiff, Francis I, is in fact the most Marian Pope we've had and even more so than Pope John Paul II or even Pope Pius XII! This is what he actually said:

“Mary is the mother of hope, the most expressive icon of Christian hope," Francis said during the celebration of the Vespers. “Her life is an amalgamation of feelings of hope. When Mary said “yes” at the Annunciation, she did not know how she was going to become a mother but she placed her trust entirely in the mystery that was about to unfold and she became a woman of expectation and hope.

The Pope underlined that the Virgin Mary’s hope never wavers, even in the face of difficulties and obstacles and this tells us that hope is nourished by listening and patience.” Even at the foot of the Cross, “when everything appeared to be over and all hope extinguished,” when Mary thought back to the promises made to her at the Annunciation, she could have felt “betrayed”, but instead she continues “to believe in her faith and sees a new future which awaits God’s tomorrow with hope.”

“I often think to myself: We aren’t able to wait for tomorrow, we always think about today, today, today,” the Pope said.

"The only lamp burning on the tomb is the mother's lamp," Francis noted. "I wonder if this lamp is still burning in monasteries; if people are still waiting for God's tomorrow in monasteries."

"We owe much to this mother of hope, someone who "sustains us in times of darkness, difficulty, seeming setback, and human defeat." He then prayed: “help us to make our lives acceptable in the eyes of our Heavenly Father, a joyous gift to our brothers, always looking towards the future.”

“To be saints is not a privilege for the few, but a vocation for everyone,”

Anonymous said...

This is what Francis I, the Holy Roman Pontiff and bishop of Rome said, father. To quote him.

"The Mother of Jesus was the perfect icon of silence,” the Pope said. “From the proclamation of her exceptional maternity at Calvary.” The Pope said he thinks about “how many times she remained quiet and how many times she did not say that which she felt in order to guard the mystery of her relationship with her Son,” up until the most raw silence “at the foot of the cross. The Gospel does not tell us anything: if she spoke a word or not… She was silent, but in her heart, how many things told the Lord! ‘You, that day, this and the other that we read, you had told me that he would be great, you had told me that you would have given him the throne of David, his forefather, that he would have reigned forever and now I see him there!’ Our Lady was human! And perhaps she even had the desire to say: ‘Lies! I was deceived!’"

To even suggest that Our Lady thought for one moment "I was deceived" is an unbelievable statement for a Catholic priest let alone a Pope to make. No Catholic who in his soul is a Catholic thinks like this. It' s foreign to. Catholic mentality. My 82 year old aunt who prays the rosary all days, goes through 2 prayer books, and prayers for everyone whose holy card she has, would never in a million years have a thought like that come into her head. He said that the BVM may have thought "lies, I was deceived". So I ask again Father, has he ever heard of the de fide dogma of the Immaculate Conception. Let him teach officially that the BVM doubted like that and it will be time for a new conclave. It is not a laudable thing to try and justify some of the things he is stating. Benedict did things that were wrong also, like when he invited pagans including satanist to pray with him at Assisi, he was wrong. Just like Francis I is wrong for making that statement. And to defend that is also wrong and you will stand alone before God and will have to make an account of that. What he said was wrong.

Anonymous said...

Pope Francis is not styled "Francis I" unless and until there is a Francis II.

A man is not styled John Q. Public, Sr., unless and until there is a John Q. Public, Jr.

Being Immaculately Conceived does not preclude doubt.

Gene said...

It may not preclude doubt theologically, but it was a careless and inappropriate statement. Joe on the assembly line and Janie the cashier do not do theology. They do not understand such statements and it makes them anxious when the Pope or some Priest says things like that. It is poor pastoring and terrible homiletics. Hell, it makes me anxious and I have two graduate degrees in theology.

John Nolan said...

The Creed at Mass has always been in the first person singular in Italian (credo), Spanish (creo) and French (je crois). Until the mid-1970s it was 'I believe' in English but was changed to 'we believe' when the 'ecumenical' ICET version was imposed. At the same time the German changed from 'ich glaube' to 'wir glauben'.

There is some historical justification for the first person plural, and indeed old Spanish liturgies had 'credimus in unum Deum'. But it's not a translation of the Latin, which is why it was rectified in the 2011 version.

Italian still mistranslates 'pro multis' as 'per tutti' rather than 'per molti', as does Spanish and German (despite B XVI asking the German bishops to use 'viele' rather than 'alle'). The French got it right with 'pour la multitude'. The first authorized English translation of the Roman Canon, which came into use in 1967 had 'for all men'. Apart from that, it was the same banal paraphrase we had to endure until recently; it was criticized at the time but to no avail.

Anonymous said...

I know Francis is not addressed as Francis I. It's called sarcasm. But since I have to explain that to you it's ruined.

FrJBS said...

Is Anonymous the new Gran Inquisidor? Even Torquemada did not dare put the pope on trial for heresy. May God have mercy on your anonymous soul.

Christ Himself was tempted, so how could discussion of a potential temptation of the BVM counter Revelation?

George said...

The Holy Father sees the Petrine office as a teaching one and he does so in a different style than his predecessors .

About that "and PERHAPS she even had the desire to say: ‘Lies! I was deceived!’".

This is what I believe he was conveying:
To those in the audience and whoever would hear or read his words he was saying in effect:
[Because that is what many of you would have said or thought or wanted to say. Some of you are
thinking that since Mary was human and in this respect like you she would react in such a way. No,she would not do so-her faith was such that she would not react that way.]

I know there are those who will say that I'm giving an overly charitable interpretation to what
Pope Francis said but this is what I took from his words.

George said...

From the book of Maccabees (a pre-figurement of Mary)

It happened also that seven brothers and their mother were arrested and were being compelled by the king [Antiochus], under torture with whips and cords, to partake of unlawful swine’s flesh.

Since they would not do so, they would be put to death.

Their mother encouraged each of them in the language of their fathers:

“I do not know how you came into
being in my womb. It was not I
who gave you life and breath, nor
I who set in order the elements
within each of you. Therefore the
Creator of the world, who shaped
the beginning of man and devised
the origin of all things, will in his mercy give life and breath back
to you again, since you now forget
yourselves for the sake of his
laws.”

Six sons were tortured and put to death for refusing to obey the king's command.

king called the mother to him
and urged her to advise the [final son] to save himself.
Leaning close to him, she spoke in their native tongue as follows, deriding the cruel tyrant:

“My son, have pity on me. I carried
you nine months in my womb,
and nursed you for three years,
and have reared you and brought
you up to this point in your life,
and have taken care of you. I beseech you, my child, to look at
the heaven and the earth and see
everything that is in them, and
recognize that God did not make
them out of things that existed.
Thus also mankind comes into being.
Do not fear this butcher, but
prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God’s mercy I may get you back again with
your brothers.”

Anonymous 2 said...

We have been over this ground already (see “All Souls Are female, etc.” on December 23). Also, it may make a difference what translation is being used. The one I had access to at that time translated Pope Francis’s words as follows (I cannot find the source again now, however):

"The Gospel tells us nothing: if she said a word or not ... She was quiet, but in her heart - how much she said to the Lord! 'You told me then - that's what we have read - that He will be great. You told me that You would give him the throne of his father David, that he will reign over the house of Jacob forever. And now I see Him there!' The Blessed Mother was human! And perhaps she would have wanted to say, 'lies! I have been cheated!'. John Paul II said this when he spoke of the Mother of God at one point. But she was overshadowed with the silence of the mystery that she did not understand, and with this silence, she has accepted that this mystery can grow and flourish in the hope ".

Having worked for several years in my youth in Europe as a part-time free-lance legal translator (from French and German into English) in addition to my full time work, I want to pick up John Nolan’s theme about mistranslations because I am well aware of the perils of translation and how painstakingly careful one needs to be. Moreover, even if Pope Francis did not use the subjunctive “would” in the original Italian, FrJBS’s point about temptation is a good one.

As for Anonymous being the new inquisitor, we should perhaps cut him (I’m pretty sure it’s a he) some slack, while at the same time firmly resisting his excesses. There has to be an explanation for his attacks, although I have no idea what it might be.

Gene said...

I think Anonymous is fed up and po'd about the lack of concern regarding the terrible state the Church is in…like a lot of us.

Gene said...

On the other hand, Anon 2, I am no longer the bad boy on the blog...

FrJBS said...

Gene,
As far as troublemakers go, you'll always be our favorite!

George said...

Anonymous2

Right. Certainly the problem can be in the translation. Anyone who has ever studied any language their than their own can appreciate that.

Also, the Holy father tends to speak in (and form his thoughts) in a more colloquial and idiomatic way which is more characteristic of Spanish and Italian. With Pope Benedict there was the precision of language characteristic of the Germans, the British and other Northern Europeans.
Although one can find exceptions to this.

Parts of scripture itself is written in a poetic an allegorical style. There are differences in translation.
There are differences in how passages in scripture are interpreted.

There are those who can lapse into a kind of philosophical,legalistic and theological fundamentalism at times when that should not be the approach.

One can imagine someone such as this being around when St Patrick was using the shamrock to teach
the Celtic pagans the doctrine of the Trinity.

"Patrick, you can't do that. Why that's heresy!"