Tuesday, December 8, 2015

LET'S HAVE A SANE, RESPECTFUL DEBATE OF THE BENEFITS OR EACH PAPAL STYLE.

I am deleting more and more anti-Catholic, anti-papal rhetoric of the Jack Chick kind (look him up if you don't know who he is and what he writes). I think as adult Catholics we can be respectful of the papacy and the different styles each pope brings. We can also have our favorite popes too. Let's have a good discussion and not descend into hell with it:

This is Pope Benedict visiting the beautiful statue of Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception near the Spanish Steps in Rome:

Pope Francis' visit today, December 8, 2015:

And this is the much maligned light show on Saint Peter's:

13 comments:

Jusadbellum said...

I was exasperated during the reign of Benedict XVI on account of how few people, pundits, "experts" and theologians actually would quote or cite his words before criticizing him as a "Grand Inquisitor".

With Pope Francis, the general 'feel' is affable, smiling and indulgent grandfather - the vibe - which is what 99% of people apparently base their opinions on, is that he's a kind hearted, nice guy.... the galling thing about this is that Pope Benedict is the most gentle and kindhearted guy you'd ever meet but he got no credit for it.

Pope Francis is kind I'm sure, but his words and some actions make him more of an enigma rather than less.

So it's sort of like near sighted vs. far sighted. The closer you got to Benedict the clearer and more edifying he appears. The farther away you are from Francis, the more positive the vibe and good feeling...

Having struggled too keep up with his various texts and statements etc. I've got to admit that I'm exhausted. It's just too hard to make sense of it all so I'm retreating back to the distance where it's fuzzy but less baffling.

Anonymous said...

Benedict wow I miss him!!

gob said...

"Sane and respectful debate".....good luck...Maybe Eugene could be in charge of it.

Anonymous 2 said...

JusadBellum:

I agree about Benedict and use every opportunity I can to defend him. This includes telling people that he is a kind and gentle man. I also defend Pope Francis. It is what Catholics do.

Jan said...

Well, I thought the first looked like the arrival of a Pope and what a joyful occasion it was and more crowds it seemed to me. The second looked like the arrival of a Bishop [of Rome], more low key and what you might expect for a bishop. There is definitely a big contrast. To me it's like the contrast between the Ordinary Form of the Mass and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass - one stripped down to the bare bones and supplying only the necessary and the other decked in splendour and beauty and so raising the mind and heart to God. The new modern ways just don't cut it, architecture, art, film, music, you name it, and will never measure up to the traditions, beauty and nobility of the past. And that is what man is looking for to raise himself up out of the humdrum of this life to the realms of heaven and what we hope for in the next.

When you look at the horrid music of today, the horrid black films, nothing of beauty, nothing to uplift the human spirit so is it any wonder suicide is on the rise. Even the humblest of peasants flock to see a king in his finery, and none would begrudge that finery either because it shows there is hope for a better future and hope for a life beyond. That is what completely goes over the heads of the liberals. It has been expressed that they may have a chromosome missing and I agree that they are certainly missing something, perhaps it is the joy of life. They are so weighed down to earth by sin, misery and drudgery that they cannot rise above it and express joy in beauty. I see their outlook summed up in the black movies of today, which usually show no hope for the future and usually end with a burnt out blackened world.

Thank you Fr McDonald for putting up the video of Pope Benedict, which for a few moments lifts us up out of the humdrum into a world of beauty ...

James said...

It's fascinating comparing the two videos. One benefit of Pope Benedict's more distant and - well, monarchical - approach is that each ceremony becomes more of an event: something to be savoured rather than just got through quickly.

I do wish that Pope Francis would wear choir dress for these kinds of events: just a surplice and stole would do, if he's not comfortable wearing a Santa-style mozzetta. But he touched the lives of individuals in the congregation in ways that they will never forget. The lines of wheelchairs at each ceremony may seem just a photo opportunity, but he engages with each person in such a caring and responsive way.

What's interesting in the videos is that some papal staff - perhaps most noticeably Leonardo Sapienza, the Regent of the papal household - cling stubbornly to the old script. Others, such as the chief bodyguard (I can't remember his name) seem much more comfortable with the new regime. There's a third group of papal retainers, such as Guido Marini, who seem to have reinvented themselves entirely to suit the current pope. His role and influence, though, seems much diminished compared to Benedict's time.

Charles G said...

Sorry, I don't find Pope Francis friendly or likeable at all. He is a left-wing partisan scold, and never ceases to tar with a broad brush and call people names, solely for fidelity to the doctrine of the faith. Where is the mercy for the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate? For those who hold to the absolute truth of Christ? For those "fundamentalists" who take the words of Our Lord and St. Paul seriously? For those who don't think the magisterium of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI should be overturned on a whim by Kasperite cardinals? For those who don't think mercy should be divorced from truth, or doctrine from practice? For those who think that science involves objective investigation of facts and the free exchange of ideas and not simply left wing political partisanship disguised as scientific "consensus" that no one is allowed to question? I gave this Pope the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but I simply don't trust him anymore. And if Archbishop Fisichella wants to say that that is tantamount to physical violence and thus excommunicable, I challenge him to state where in Canon Law that is the case. If Fisichella is correet, perhaps the Protestants are right that Rome is a dictatorial state where you have to check your brains and all free thought at the door... I just hope the Holy Spirit will protect the Church's magisterium from teaching error.

Bernard Fischer said...

I wouldn't be in that crowd when ISIS threatens the Pope and the authorities have no answer for it.

Gene said...

One thing the protestants are correct about...the freedom of the Holy Spirit to shake the dust from His feet and establish His presence in some other embodiment or manifestation of the true Church. They did not get it right in the Reformation, but that does not mean the doctrine of the freedom of the Holy Spirit is not true. I consider this Pope and the humanistic nonsense going on in the Church to be strong warnings regarding taking God's presence for granted in the Church. Perhaps SSPX, for instance, is our Ezekiel...

Jan said...

Charles G, I totally agree. Ed Peters says that the Fisichella is patently wrong as there is nothing in Canon Law to back up what he has stated. On top of that, Fisichella is responsible for the light show that Fr Z has described as irreverent treatment - but it is much more than that when, as he says, St Peter's is the very place where St Peter was martyred and buried. Personally, I think this will have serious consequences for those responsible for this because God will not be mocked. Fr Z said this:

“St. Peter’s is, without question, a sacred place and object (a very large one, too!). It is, without question, dedicated by the Church to sacred purposes. The use of this sacred building and place (where St. Peter was martyred and buried, a pilgrimage place, etc. etc. etc.) as a projection screen for mere secular purposes is irreverent treatment,”

Lifesite has a petition that people can sign to express their concern. One can only wonder: what next?

https://www.lifesitenews.com/petitions/i-oppose-vatican-climate-change-light-show/891648

James said...

I don't view the facade of St Peter's as something sacrosanct and untouchable: it's a poorly proportioned, workaday baroque concoction, which wrecks Michelangelo's original conception. So I don't have any problem with it being used as a projection screen, and I was quite impressed with the bits of the light show which I saw (though I haven't seen the whole thing yet).

That being said, I'd hate to see the inside of St Peter's being used in this way, let alone the area around St Peter's tomb (if you want to see this, or a copy of it, being treated irreverently, then watch Angels and Demons, which is far more objectionable than projected pictures of lions and the like).

Anyway,Lifesite shouldn't make out that the petition is about irreverence, since it's clearly an attack on Pope Francis's views on climate change. Call a spade a spade.

Mikey Angelo said...

The ceiling of the Sistine Chapel is painted in cartoonish colours with nekkid people - 20 athletic nude males - and pagan Sybils, and showing butterflies on the fa├žade of the basilica is "irreverent"?

Jan said...

James, I hold the opposite view to you and I know many other Catholics who feel the same as me. We don't believe that any Catholic church building, particularly one that houses the bodies of many saints and martyrs, should be the subject of a common light show. And that is what it was - common. I think it is far worse than irreverent and I thought Lifesite could have had a much more strongly worded petition. I certainly wonder why Pope Francis allowed himself to be used in this manner because the whole point of using the facade of St Peter's was surely for effect. They could have had the light show anywhere in Rome but, no, they chose to use the sacred hallowed building of St Peter's to give insult to Catholics.