However, Pope Francis continued, having the pledge of Heaven itself for eternity does not stop Christians from slipping on at least a few temptations. First, he notes, "when we want to, not necessarily cancel out this identity, but dull it down”:
"This is the lukewarm Christian. It is a Christian who, yes, goes to Mass on Sundays, but whose identity is not visible in his way of life. He may even live like a pagan, but he is a Christian. Being lukewarm. Dulling down our identity. And the other sin, of which Jesus spoke to his disciples, and which we heard:
'Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.' 'Pretending': I pretend to be a Christian, but am not. I am not transparent, I say one thing - 'yes, yes I am a Christian' - but I do another, something that is not Christian"
My comment: Cardinal Mueller and the vast majority of bishops who stood up yesterday and demanded transparency at the Synod and got what they demanded as a slap in the face to Cardinal Baldiserri and those who manipulated Monday's Relatio, proves that these orthodox cardinals and archbishops like Pell, Dolan and Burke are not the Pharisees! The ones manipulating the synod and trying to keep things secret are! Who is the pope siding with here?????? Those who manipulated the first text released on Monday demanding secrecy did something that is not Christian! They are the Pharisees!
23 comments:
Pope Francis: "God's laws are meant to lead all people to Christ and His glory. If they do not, them they are obsolete."
So much for the everlastingness of God's law and His truth. We know what a statement like this is code for. This Pope wants to make "better" laws. Luther is certainly being vindicated by the events going on in the Church.
Well Father, I don't know who Pope Francis agrees with, but let me take a guess. This is only a guess because I have no clue. But here I go.
Who specially appointed Cardinal Baldiserri? Pope Francis
Who said that the racist, liar, Cardinal Kasper's "theology" which denied the words of Christ and promoted sacrilege, was " theology done on ones knees"? Pope Francis
Who appointed all 6 modernist bishops, out of the blue, to write the piece of filth that was released earlier this week? Pope Francis
Who decided that the media would be kept in the dark and only an approved spokesman would tell what is going on in the synod? Pope Francis
Now Father, this is a guess. I am going out on a limb here. Understand I don't know. But I'll take a chance and say Pope Francis agrees with Cardinal Baldiserri, Cardinal Kasper, Archbishop Forte etc. and I'll make another guess. I bet that Pope Francis doesn't agree with Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Muller, Cardinal Pell, Cardinal Napier etc. This is all guess work because I really don't have anything to base it on, except of course the events of the past year of hell that we have had to endure.
I wonder what happened to that 300 page report that Pope Benedict compiled which said the Vatican was infiltrated by a homosexual group intent on changing the teachings of the Church. Wouldn't it be funny if the head of that group was elected to a very high position? Nah, that's Hollywood movie nonsense, it could never happen. Well I don't think it could.........
There are two types of righteousness for men.
1) measuring yourself against the standards of God's will for humanity as revealed to humanity in Jesus or
2) measuring yourself according to your own subjective feelings (i.e. "the flesh") and/or compared with whatever group of 'cool kids' you feel are the 'wave of the future' (otherwise known as the 'world').
Now, the 'self-righteous' are those who deem themselves good because they FEEL OK. Not objectively in light of God's will.
Thus it's pretty clear that folk who insist they can't possibly sin, that their ideations, feelings, etc. leading them to all manner of sin are in fact a-OK on account of being popular and convenient are the 'self-righeous'. Not the folk who admit to be sinners and seek God's mercy and give witness to objective standards of behavior.
Can one be intentionally conspicuous in their humility? I would think not.
I have to agree with Anonymous above.
I'm afraid that Anonymous @ 8:22 am has got it just about right. Let us pray for our Holy Father's protection against the Pharisees with whom he's apparently surrounded himself.
Anonymous--slow clap. Slow clap indeed, sir.
I am wondering now, especially with the debacle with Cardinal Kaspar's comments on Africans, and the back room addition of material to the first relatio on Monday if the pope was in the dark about it, or he knew it and thought he didn't need to inform the bishops of it? For him to want frank discussions, which he got, and want collegiality and synodality, and then to have a contrived document produced seems odd to me. Was he behind it or those he surrounded himself with back stabbers?
In other words was what was done to Pope Benedict done to Pope Francis and this synod was an eye-opener to him. How else do you describe this homily this morning about transparency when it is Mueller and Pell who were demanding it and Pell forced the issue and got his way?
Paul above has hit the nail on the head. Our pope is a guy who immediately talked about a great light, rides the bus and commutes in small cars , lives in "modest" dwellings etc., and lets everyone know about it. While at the same time his tummy swells. Maybe he needs to do a little silent fasting and move into the housing arrangements that would actually be less expensive for us sheep who support him. I never heard the stories until after his death about St. John Paul who gave away his clothing and shoes to beggars while he was living in the impoverished communist Poland. If Francis would perform a fraction of those acts trumpets would blare. There is no question who this pope views as hypocrites. We have enough history with him to know how his Jesuit mind works. I pray that NO version of any document is approved from the circus synod. The body of work it's produced needs to thrown in the trash and cancel all future meetings.
Mike
as a normal lay Catholic with a traditonal leaning, I am very confused by all of this. On the one hand, it appears the pope and this synod is going to lead the Church by following in the footsteps of the liberal wing of the Anglican church. But on the other hand, Jesus did say about the office of the pope, that he is free to loose and to bind sins, so the pope has the authority to declare something a sin, and the authority to declare that something is no longer a sin. If Pope Francis wants to declare homsexual lifestyles no longer a sin, or pornography no longer a sin, or masturbation no longer a sin.. he has the power to do so whether the more conservative branch of the Church likes it or not.
Another thing, in the Old Testament days, Jesus said because mankind had become so set in thier ways, in His mercy God allowed divorce. Perhaps in this current culture of sex, once again God, in mercy through the pope and this synod, will allow mankind to have homosexual lifestyles, porn, masturbation, etc, because our hearts have become so set.
Maybe the Kasper incident is Pope Francis' "Williamson Affair."
"Was he behind it or those he surrounded himself with back stabbers?"
Surely it is clear that they were doing what they understood to be his will. (Not even able to make an obvious procedural decision without looking over to the pope for the go ahead.)
Let us pray that, instead, His will be done.
"If Pope Francis wants to declare homsexual lifestyles no longer a sin, or pornography no longer a sin, or masturbation no longer a sin.. he has the power to do so whether the more conservative branch of the Church likes it or not."
This is blasphemy. And is just crazy.
Yes, the pope may not defect from the truth in an official capacity. He could then face being deposed. I'm not sure that has ever happened in the history of the Church, but I believe it is possible technically. However, showing mercy to sinners and offering absolution to them is not denying the sinfulness of particular acts or declaring that these are now virtues.
Confused....no, the power of the keys do not cover declarations that sins are not sins.
No Pope could declare that murder is just fine or that idolatry is no longer a sin.
As for the world's sinful structures being such that the Church is constrained to change rules... again, that's not how things work.
The Roman era society was as depraved if not more so than our own, and yet into that utterly pagan world the Church expanded with the same doctrine we hold today - but an even more rigorous disciple.
The Didache, an early 1st century document spelling out Church teaching clearly rejects abortion and contraception (yes, the Romans had chemical contraception) as well as infanticide and other sins.
Despite being an absolute minority the Church bore witness to the truth and so changed the world.
For all the world's huffing and puffing, it's the Church who is the 'winning side of history' not the world.
Anon 8:22, we in this house were conjecting the same "actions trail" last night. For the past year and a half we have very much tried to follow the many exhortations concerning fidelity to the Holy Father printed by Fr. MacD here and on Fr. Longenecker's blog. There comes a time, though, when "the little gray cells" have to trump; however that may appear to others is not my problem, but theirs. Yes, a good catholic must be loyal and faithful, but cannot afford to be stupid. A man's words say a lot about him, but his actions speak louder.
I am really glad Fr. MacD reprinted Fr. L's "Crisis" article, as it gave our family some peace reading it 3 days ago. I think feelings are running high, perhaps rampant right now and we must guard against that. The evil one does his greatest harm in that scenario. We must fast and pray for reason and peace to prevail.
For Francis, the Pharisees are those who take seriously the teachings of the Church, and he is Jesus setting us free with his mercy.
In implicitly comparing himself to Jesus, his pride is overwhelming.
Francis' statement regarding Gods law is just p-poor theology. I wonder if he has ever even read the Apostle Paul.
The God of surprises is an interesting turn of phrase.
In the Gospels, Jesus didn't water down Mosaic teaching in any area with respect to sexuality (and thus marriage) but instead tightened them all.
Whereas before adultery was the external action, Jesus warns that lusting after a woman in one's heart is to commit adultery.
Whereas murder was the external action, Jesus warns us of the internal desire for bloodshed against our brother...
On Divorce, Jesus insisted on great fidelity, not an exit clause and gave as the option to marriage being virgins, not swingers.
So there's nothing in the final revelation to the human race in Jesus, as described in the Gospels or in all subsequent lives of saints, mystics and martyrs to make us suspect that the "God of surprises" is about to do a "pastoral" 180 and suddenly allow for divorce and remarriage or the positive esteem for immoral states of being (internal or external).
But there IS grounds for us to suspect that the surprise of God might come in the other direction - in the form of heroic witness to those in 'irregular' states of the power of God to heal their wounds, cast out their demons and allow them to actually live as Temples of the Holy Spirit rather than as slaves of their passions.
To look at the signs of the times in the ministries like Courage and others, I think we can expect God to surprise us with a call to radical conversion as His disciples rather than some lowering of standards to allow us to be good pagans while claiming to be good Christians.
The power to bind and loose is the power to forgive sins, not define things as sinful or not sinful.
This is, by the way, the justification for allowing divorce in the Orthodox Church. Divorce and remarriage is a sin, and so like other sins, the Church can decide to bind or loose this sin. I'm not sure why the Roman Church has decided that divorce is the only unforgivable sin. But, it doesn't really matter because it had decided that and so to change that teaching now (even if it would be a reversion to an older teaching from early councils) would illustrate a fundamental problem with its historical and ecclesiological claims.
Speaking of hypocrisy, Pope Francis just hates the "idolatry of money," but he is renting out the Sistine Chapel to Porsche for a high dollar corporate event. Now, really, we are supposed to respect and give allegiance to this man? Money changers inn the Temple, anyone? Good grief! The Church is becoming a joke right in front of our very eyes.
Marc, divorce is not an "unforgivable sin", in the Act of Contrition there is a promise to "nevermore offend thee". It is not that a "remarried" divorced person isn't forgiven it is that the "remarried" divorced person immediately returns to the way of "offending thee". The Church offers remedies but those remedies require faith and conviction.
Jesus challenged the religious authorities of that time because of their hypocrisy,false piety and pretentious rigorism. He challenged those certain members of the Rabbinical class who, because of their ritualistic adherence to the Law, considered themselves above others in sanctity and spirituality. This was a false holiness which was grounded in appearance and perception. Jesus Christ could challenge the religious leaders of that time because being God Incarnate, He could speak to them with authority and Divine knowledge. Christ came to establish a new covenant which would supersede the old covenant. It would not do away with the Ten commandments however.
At his morning Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae, Pope Francis reminded others that Jesus did "strange things," like "walk with sinners, eat with tax collectors" - things the scholars of the law "did not like; doctrine was in danger, that doctrine of the law" that they and the "theologians had created over the centuries"
Were not the laws of our Holy Church revealed , created and instituted under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is all so disconcerting and puzzling.
I don't know what to make of Pope Francis saying "if the law does not lead to Jesus Christ," said, "and if it doesn't get us closer to Jesus Christ, it is dead."in relation to some of the things said coming out of the Synod. If God's laws and Holy teachings don't lead us to him then for what purpose did he give them to us?
Jesus did not accommodate His teachings to the concupiscence of human nature:
'But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.'
‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
Post a Comment