Most of us who read religious blogs know that there is a great polarization in the Church since Pope Francis assume the papacy, not unlike the immediate aftermath of Vatican II.
To be honest with you, I don't have a sense at all that my parishioners are aware of it or even concerned about it. Like many Protestant denominations, Catholics are usually just concerned about their neck of the woods, their local parish.
In my own parish I never speak publicly of the polarization or problems we are now having and maybe only one or two people have asked me about it, but they are people who read blogs.
Often we see the Episcopal Church in meltdown because of liberalizing spirits and I often wondered that if they ever got to the point that the Episcopal Church would accept actively gay couples as "priests/priestesses" that we would see rank and file Episcopalians coming to Catholic parishes--hasn't happened though on a large scale.
In your neck of the woods, are people living life as they always have been with little or no concern for what Catholics blogs bring to blogdom's readers, as minuscule as they are, about the current unpleasantness in the Church?
44 comments:
"Most of us who read religious blogs know that there is a great polarization in the Church..."
No, there is not a "great polarization in the Church..." There is a group of neo-cons or traditionalists or "Mass Of The Ages" folks who generally make mountains out of molehills, be the molehills maniples, modern hymns, or girls serving on the altar. All of these "evils" will bring about the destruction the Faith.
"...since Pope Francis assume (sic) the papacy,..."
No, Pope Francis is not to blame. The chronically dissatisfied were unhappy with John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, B16, and, now, Francis. They choose to be unhappy because it gives them something to kvetch about. They will be unhappy with Francis' successor, too.
The folks who make Catholic blogdom their source of reality are a tiny, almost minuscule fraction of the Faithful.
And to that I say Thanks Be To God.
I wasn't referring to the Liturgy per se, but rather to the 5 dubia and that pulling one thread out of the tapestry of Scripture and Tradition's moral theology, doctrine and dogma can lead to the total collapse of it, and Episcopal Church-type acquiescence to the dictatorship or relativism. So, A, try again without your ax to grind as even reputable publications acknowledge the division over these things, the polarization.
Anonymous,
Didn't you mean to say: Deo Gratias
I read blogs, I see the facts and yes, I read ... prophecies. And also, I know, who "pope" Francis really IS... However, I am very angry that in all parishes I attended (I travel), nobody, but nobody is speaking about this crises in the Church. I put the fault also on the shoulders of priests and bishops, who would like to avoid questions and problems. But, this is not the calling of Jesus. We must speak the truth, because without it, we send people to hell. Nobody speaks about any of these HOT issues: abortion, sin, hell , devil, the pill and anti -conception, fornication and repentance. I always hear that we all love Jesus and that is way we all go to heaven. I am sick to my stomach to what is happening to the church: rebellion and apostasy !!! If priests will speak openly about all of these and about our heretical pope then maybe many will be awoken from this comatose sleep!!! young people already left this dead church!
The two Anonymous' are at polar opposites! AS a traditionally minded Catholic, I view the large institutional Catholic Church as being on life support. The Church will survive because Christ promised us She would, but we will see many more parishes and Catholic institutions close because of "jolly olly" priests and religious who prefer popularity to preaching the Gospel. Although Pope Francis is confusing, I would be reluctant to call him a heretic, a lefty yes, a heretic, no.
I am familiar with five parishes in my area. At any parish in question, I have not encountered the slightest sense that His Holiness Pope Francis has polarized the Church.
Not once...not once at the parishes have I encountered conversations about Amoris Laetitia...any Encyclical and/or Apostolic Exhortation...any supposed "heresy" or "controversy" related to Pope Francis.
As were the situations during the reigns of Popes Saint John XXIII, Blessed Paul VI, John Paul I, Saint John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, the overwhelming amount of Catholics I encountered believed that the Popes in question were holy men who held the unchanging Faith.
I haven't encountered at any of the parishes in question any sense that the Church has changed during Pope Francis' reign as compared to Pope Benedict XVI's reign...and so forth.
The parishes are the same today as they were five years ago, 15 years ago, 25 years ago...
That is, there are Catholics who take the Faith "seriously"...there are Catholics who view Catholicism on their terms.
There are Catholics who strive to obey Church teachings. There are cafeteria Catholics who accept teaching "X"...reject teaching "Y."
But I have not encountered at the parishes in question anything close to the supposed "polarization" (rage against Pope Francis) that certain Catholic blogs insist daily is widespread throughout the Church.
Instead, I have encountered overwhelming love and respect for His Holiness Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Cardinal Sarah made it clear not very long ago that there is a deep crisis in the Church.
A.
Hey, you asked, "In your neck of the woods, are people living life as they always have been with little or no concern for what Catholics blogs bring to blogdom's readers, as minuscule as they are, about the current unpleasantness in the Church?"
The answer is, "Yes." They are living life as they always have been.
Blogdom's obsessions are of little or no concern to the VAST majority of Catholics who are not interested - nor should they be - in the political machinations, the palace intrigue conspiracy theories, the outright lies told by one side about another in the trads vs the progressives debate.
You asked and then implied strongly that this is Pope Francis' fault.
It is not.
Anonymous said..."The chronically dissatisfied were unhappy with John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, B16, and, now, Francis. They choose to be unhappy because it gives them something to kvetch about. They will be unhappy with Francis' successor, too."
I agree with the above.
I agree most certainly that the folks who are dissatisfied will "be unhappy with Francis' successor, too."
One need only to consider the vicious comments that many among the "chronically dissatisfied" have attacked such Churchmen as Cardinals Burke, Sarah, and Schneider.
There any dissatisfied "Catholic" bloggers who have labeled the above "traditional" Churchmen as "Novus Ordo sellouts...frauds" as the Churchmen in question have refused to condemn His Holiness Pope Francis as a "heretic".
To the dissatisfied folks in question, everybody must march in lockstep with their (the dissatisfied folks) opinions. Any Pope, Cardinal, bishop, priest, religious...anybody...
...who, in regard to any issue, does not march in lockstep with the "chronically dissatisfied" will be attacked viciously.
The folks in question will attack viciously Pope Francis' successor. There isn't any question about that.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
What you all are missing is that Pope Francis set the stage with AL and has been silent while Bishops and priests implement communion for the remarried - clearly against scripture and Catholic teaching (it has been challenged 4 times in the past and every time upheld as the correct teaching based on scripture). Pope Francis is complicit through his silence. He has not answered the dubia. He knows he cannot just change Catholic teaching so he is accomplishing his agenda "under the table" Cardinal Burke has just outlined what a formal correction would look like, so expect this soon. This could very well publically formalize the schism. Being a Catholic in God's eyes cannot include both those who believe in communion for the remarried and those who believe in official Catholic teaching. So, there are many Catholics that may not, in God's eyes, any longer be Catholic. This is part of the tragedy of what Pope Francis has brought about by his satanic "flip-flop" theology of suggesting God forgives without repentance and a firm resolution to change.
Mark Thomas
In my rural neck of the wood we to have heard non of that, mainly because the priests don't want any controversy, so all we get is pablum, week after week, poems and pablum, and if any questions are asked we get blank stares and are told that the church today emphasizes the horizontal not vertical, what ever that is supposed to mean
Mark Thomas,
One question. Did you slobber over St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI the way you do Pope Francis, or were they too orthodox for you?
Many many people in my parish Are Aware of the 'changes' being implimented by P.F,: and all are happy about it !! 10 miles away, at another parish, the vast majority are dismayed. The difference, that I observe: at the 'far away' parish, they have had a series, over the past 7 years, of young, very well educated and devoted priests. Also, the physical church has been unchanged (unmodernised) since its inception. The music is played in the back, above the pews in a loft: usually it is organ music. The most recent priest has no altar girls when he serves: the cantor is a man, usually a young seminarian. Latin is being introduced. I could go on and on but I will spare the reader, if there is one.
'My' parish, a 5 minute walk for me, has currently a wonderful priest, an elderly (my generation) Monsignor who is currently walking a fine line: he is 'pastoral'in that he clearly loves his flock: he came out of retirement to be here, due to the shortage. I suspect that he meets each one of us 'where we are', and his wonderful homilies make up for a great deal. I think it is very hard for him. I go to all such things as Stations of the Cross, whenever offered, and other events considered 'old fashioned' by other parishioners; though never well attended, all of these are faithfully offered by Monsignor, and I observe his comfort with those who come.
Also: it is "wreckovation" church: a resurrrection Crucifix above the wall, in back of the altar: a true Crucifix against the back wall, toward which Monsignor faces, but not the people. the pews are in a semi-circle, so 'we' tend to be looking at one another, unless not careful: I really dislike this aspect of the church building. The musicians are in the front: much like a production: Saturday Vigil it is a pianist - and very jarring - never a moment a silence: he even puts a mirror in such a way so as it play at every moment that Monsignor is not vocal. Sometimes....I can imagine a large cognac glass upon the piano...just...there...empty and waiting for tips. yes, it's that bad.
I guess I can not write any more without getting upset: I think often of these two very different groups, so close yet so far. The only Latin Mass is at 7 am quite a ways away: would that I could go, I would....
My point has been that there are many factors in the awareness of the present moment of our church's crisis. One needs to be searching, through prayer, Mass, reading, and yes also going on-line to read up on current events in Catholicism. I believe in the necessary solemnity and beauty of the physical worship space to convey and teach the faith, and this has been lacking and often destroyed in many places, since VII, though I am not making a statement for or against this event. I don't know enough - , also, and then I really will stop; at the 'far away' parish the Rosary is faithfuly prayed before every Mass. There is Silence, Blessed Silence, before Mass, after Mass: in other words...reverence. *sigh*.
In Vat II, the Church made a conscious, theological decision to go with humanistic theology (now, there's an oxymoron), the culmination of Enlightenment theology/philosophy in the Church. Mainstream academic and pastoral theology, both Catholic and Protestant, may never recover from this...the cultural pressures are too great and most seminarians and Priests/Preachers are too titillated by and enamored of existentialist, "wholistic," and psycho-babble-istic influences in theology. In the Catholic Church, the answer has to come from the top down. I don't see that happening in any meaningful way. If we just had a Trump-like Pope..."Ok, ya'll, from now on it is the TLM...learn it, like it, or leave. Oh, and you can throw out those modern hymnals, too, and you are going to kneel for communion unless you have two broken knees and, then, you'd better at least squat. Hey, Priests, people need to hear about Hell and Judgement and the Blood of Christ. Enough of this feel-good, take a minority to lunch social crap. Whining should not be part of a homily." But, no chance of that...
Gene says, "In Vat II, the Church made a conscious, theological decision to go with humanistic theology..."
What bishops/theologians made this "conscious" decision? And how do you know this? Were you there?
Gene says "If we just had a Trump-like Pope..."
Do you mean one who has five children by three different wives? (Mind you, if a BLACK man in this situation had run for or won the office, Genes' tune would be vastly different.)
Or do you mean one who lies repeatedly - almost daily - in his absurd claims and/or his re-writings of historical facts?
Or do you mean one who talks openly about sexually assaulting women, who brags in print about his multiple adulteries and fornications?
Or do you mean one who made multiple promises during his campaign and who has jettisoned the vast majority of these promises?
Or do you mean the one who repeatedly encouraged violence against those who opposed him in the campaign and who now claims that he does not condone violence in any way, shape, or form?
At the time of the Great Schism (1378-1417) the entire population of western Christendom heard Mass and received the sacraments largely unperturbed by the chaos at the top. The fact that England prayed for one pope in the Canon of the Mass and Scotland for another was of little consequence to the faithful and their priests.
In the 1960s priests were always urging their congregations to buy a Catholic paper on Sundays. This was less to do with informing them on Church developments - it was more to do with weaning them off the 'immoral' Sunday popular press.
Now the proportion of Catholics who attend Mass has declined dramatically. Few of them buy a Catholic paper; even fewer visit a Catholic website. The controversy over AL is of no significance to them since they have never read it nor ever intend to do so.
So Mark Thomas is right in one sense. However, he is utterly wrong in assuming that concern over this papacy is limited to right-wing nutters. He rails against Rorate Coeli while forgetting that this particular blog has a number of contributors; one of them, Dr Joseph Shaw is someone I know quite well - he is a young Oxford don and chairman of the Latin Mass Society. He is the antithesis of a spittle-flecked ranter.
All the Catholics with whom I associate are interested in liturgy and liturgical music (especially Gregorian Chant). Many of them are too young to remember the pre-V2 years. None of them criticize the bishop or the Pope. They do take the mickey out of trendy practices but we've been doing this for forty-odd years and five pontificates.
Be that as it may, when well-respected senior churchmen and theologians voice concerns they deserve to be listened to. The vast majority aren't interested, nor need they be. It is intellectual conceit to despise the masses for being uncultured. It was also intellectual conceit to impose a new rite of Mass on those same masses because 'we know what's good for you'. The Protestant Reformation did the same. To read the bible in English one had to be literate, yet in 16th century England literacy assumed literacy in Latin; Shakespeare as a schoolboy would have been beaten for speaking English in school.
The four years of Francis's pontificate have seen no decline in the provision of the EF in England and Wales; in fact it increases year on year and bishops seem to be actively encouraging it. It also has an effect on how younger priests celebrate the Novus Ordo, which was what Benedict intended. Francis seems to have not understood what SP was about, but he talks too much anyway and one needs to filter his utterances, which means ignoring most of them.
Sereni manete, et persistite. (Keep calm and carry on.)
I see Kavanaugh has taken this opportunity to whine about Trump. My post had nothing to do with Trump, only about an imaginary Pope with Trump's attitude. So, once again Kavanaugh misses the point completely. He must have taken lessons somewhere...nobody is that stupid without some training.
John Nolan,
Bene, well said.
You say, "My post had nothing to do with Trump..."
Yet, you said, "If we just had a Trump-like Pope..."
With your tenuous grasp of reality, it is not hard to understand your support for Trump.
Do we require Cardinal Sarah to inform us that there is a deep crisis within the Church?
From Her beginning to date, the Church has experienced one crisis...one schism...one heresy...after another.
Our first Pope denied Jesus Christ three times. Bishop Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus Christ. Apostles fled.
Saint Paul noted controversies that plagued the early Church.
When has the Church been crisis-free? Answer: Never.
Remain close to God. Do not be troubled. Go about your business. Turn the controversies over to God. Allow God to deal with the nonsense within the Church.
Should Catholic left-wingers and right-wingers wish to waste precious time and energy screaming at each other...whining about latest Church-related "controversy"...then so be it.
Fortunately, the reality is that 99 percent of Catholics don't care (more likely, are unaware) about the nonsense that consumes Catholic left-wing and right-wing special-interest groups.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Each week at Mass, I encounter holy and humble people whose love of God and His True Church inspires me...as well as shames me as the Faithful in question are far holier than I.
Via my conservations with my holy and humble brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ, few have exhibited any knowledge of the Pope Francis-related "controversies" that have "polarized" supposedly the Church.
I mentioned during some conversations with them that there are "Catholics" who refer to His Holiness Pope Francis as an "Evil Clown", "heretic"...a subversive who hates (supposedly) God and His Holy Church.
My brothers and sisters in question are shocked...amazed...and hurt deeply as they assumed that each Catholic on earth views Pope Francis as a holy man.
The notion that Pope Francis has "polarized" the Church is foreign to the majority of Catholics I know and with whom I've conversed about Church-related topics.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Agree with John - well said, Gene.
From my reading, Gene mentioned a pope with Trump-like characteristics, how he leads, it wasn't a comment about Trump's personal life or, his bombastic/innapropriate rhetoric. I'm not sure I see how reasonably there can be confusion here. Hopefully, we won't devolve into numerous volleys parsing Gene's words.
Back to topic: In the Northeast, there is no discussion from the pulpit, church electronic and print media or, by most in the pews. There is private discussion between persons both clergy and lay who tend to follow the blogs or, are more traditional as to the current state of affairs.
Kavanaugh, You have very poor reading comprehension, as you have proven time and again on this blog.
Not at all---typical discussion after Sunday Mass in 30327 is more about the ordinary----school is back, college football season is not far behind, where did you vacation this summer? Probably most folks at our parish think if things are fine there, then we're OK...if they have any doubts, they can look at a board with the pictures of 50 or so seminarians for the Archdiocese of Atlanta ("hmmm...sounds like we are really growing")
The politics of "who is in and who is out" at the Vatican does not seem to be much of a concern locally---even if it were, what could one as a layperson do about it? There isn't really any lay involvement in church government, so not like the laity can go oust some bishops. Speaking of bishops, probably to most parishioners a bishop is a far-off figure, even if geographically not far away; since some parishes may see the bishop just once a year (and that at a weeknight confirmation---obviously there are not enough Sundays in a year for a bishop to do confirmations just on the Lords Day), there really isn't much in the way of close contact.
As for the Episcopal Church---which has lost half its total membership since the mid 1960s--most everyone there with any sense of traditional Christianity has gone or "fled". Some of the more traditional Episcopalians became Catholic, while some joined the Eastern Orthodox and others jointed splinter Anglican groups (though a lot of times those groups have their own disagreements---they often agree that same-sex marriage is wrong but then squabble over ordination of women, authority of bishops, the sacraments and so on---like lifeboats tossed about the waves after the big ship has gone down) These days, the "cause du jour" among the Episcopal Church is "transgender rights"---the Church has threatened to pull out of Austin next year (sight of their triennial convention) if the Texas Legislature has passed legislation to require persons to use the bathrooms of their birth certificate assigned gender---but Texas did not pass such legislation. More concern about transgender rights than the rights of the unborn---talk about the wrong priority!
TJM said..."Mark Thomas, One question. Did you slobber over St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI the way you do Pope Francis, or were they too orthodox for you?"
I held the same love and respect for Popes Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI as I hold for His Holiness Pope Francis.
I believe that Pope Francis is a humble, holy man...a great man of God and His True Church. Pope Francis is a tireless promoter of Jesus Christ and the Culture of Life.
I believe that Popes Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI demonstrated humility and holiness. They were also great men of God and His True Church. They served also as tireless promoters of Jesus Christ and the Culture of Life.
===================================================================
Please recall that more than a few "traditionalists" insisted that Popes Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI were "heretics."
Please recall the vicious comments that, for example, Pope Saint John Paul II received at the hands of "traditionalists"...such as the leading "traditionalist," Archbishop Lefebvre.
http://archives.sspx.org/archbishop_lefebvre/1986_declaration_against_assisi_archbishop_lefebvre-bishop_de_castro_mayer.htm
Archbishop Lefebvre (with Bishop de Castro Mayer):
"Adopting the liberal religion of Protestantism and of the Revolution, the naturalistic principles of J.J. Rousseau, the atheistic liberties of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the principle of human dignity no longer having any relation with truth and moral dignity, the Roman authorities turn their backs on their predecessors and break with the Catholic Church, and they put themselves at the service of the destroyers of Christianity and of the universal Kingdom of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
"The present acts of John Paul II and the national episcopates illustrates, year by year, this radical change in the conception of the Faith, the Church, the priesthood, the world, and salvation by grace.
"The high point of this rupture with the previous Magisterium of the Church took place at Assisi, after the visit to the synagogue. The public sin against the one, true God, against the Incarnate Word, and His Church, makes us shudder with horror. John Paul II encourages the false religions to pray to their false gods—an immeasurable, unprecedented scandal."
=========================================================================
TJM, I "slobbered over" Pope Saint John Paul II when right-wing Catholic spat upon and spewed venom at our saintly Pope.
I "slobbered over" Pope Saint John Paul II when "traditionalists" denounced his Beatification (as well as Canonization).
https://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2011-0515-ferrara-beatification.htm
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas
The reason you hear no polarization is because they see you coming and they immediately change the subject.
Anon-1
Hey, Byz - "Trump-like characteristics" are adultery and fornication, dishonesty and exaggeration.
"How he leads" is a non-existent thing at this point, as no leadership has been evidenced.
He blusters, he exaggerates, he makes false accusations, he blames everyone but himself for his troubles....
Yeah, like, we REALLY needs a "Trump like Pope."
John Nolan said..."He rails against Rorate Coeli while forgetting that this particular blog has a number of contributors; one of them, Dr Joseph Shaw is someone I know quite well - he is a young Oxford don and chairman of the Latin Mass Society. He is the antithesis of a spittle-flecked ranter."
Rorate Caeli has promoted repeatedly lies about Pope Francis (as well as additional Churchmen).
Rorate Caeli's lies have been exposed time and again. However, I don't recall apologies from Rorate Caeli in that regard.
Rorate Caeli has never evinced the slightest desire to treat the Vicar of Christ, His Holiness Pope Francis, with the love, respect, and fairness that the Holy Catholic Church demands that Her children cultivate and display toward each other.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
John Nolan said..."Francis seems to have not understood what SP was about, but he talks too much anyway and one needs to filter his utterances, which means ignoring most of them."
Right-wingers and left-wingers have done a good job at having ignored the majority of Pope Francis' utterances.
From the beginning of his Pontificate, I have sought Pope Francis' utterances. I refused to permit right/left-wing forces within and without the Church to control (to filter) for me Pope Francis' utterances.
What I have found from having read his many comments...his General Audiences...addresses, etc...that which he has said as opposed to that which the right/left-wing has claimed that he has said, is that the real Pope Francis differs greatly from the right-wing/left-wing presentation of Pope Francis.
Mister Nolan, it is a shame that you have ignored most of Pope Francis' utterances.
By having done so, you have ignored Pope Francis' countless exhortations to...
-- Keep Sunday holy.
-- Go to Mass.
-- Go to Confession.
-- Pray the Holy Rosary.
-- Cultivate a strong friendship with the Blessed Virgin Mary.
-- Cultivate a strong friendship with Saint Joseph.
-- Remain attached to Catholic devotionals.
-- Avail yourself to Indulgences.
-- Flee Satan.
-- Be aware of angels.
-- Read the Holy Bible.
-- Read the Catechism.
-- Promote the Culture of Life.
-- Oppose with a Catholic warrior's mentality the Culture of Death.
-- Oppose the homosexual mafia.
-- Oppose Satanic forces that oppose Church teachings related to the family.
-- Promote Catholic Social Teaching.
On and on go the countless beautiful Church teachings that His Holiness Pope Francis has defended and promoted.
Mister Nolan, thanks to my having read Pope Francis' many utterances, I have been aware that His Holiness is far removed from the Pope whom you (as well as right-wingers and left-wingers) have portrayed.
Catholic and secular right-wingers and left-wingers, to advance their respective agendas, have mischaracterized Pope Francis.
As Cardinal Sarah declared in 2016 A.D., His Holiness Pope Francis "openly and vigorously defends Church teaching on contraception, abortion, homosexuality, reproductive technologies, the education of children and much more."
He who hears Pope Francis hears Jesus Christ.
Therefore, I refuse to ignore to any degree His Holiness Pope Francis.
Deo gratias for God's great gift to His People...that is, Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Anonymous -
The group less one seemed to understand the inference to Trump's leadership style relative to his ability to confidently and directly give the 'troops' marching orders. To compare the rest of his characteristics namely, the bad and the ugly, to what one would look for in the successor of Peter is plain silliness. Seriously, at this level of thought, analysis and discussion?
Maddening how often these discussions get hijacked like this.
Why am I, Gene or, anyone else trying to rationalize with 'Anonymous'? 'Anonymous', please note that this is a rhetorical question.
On the one hand, it likely is true that the typical pew Catholic is not aware of the polarization in the Church, of the deep divisions between different camps of bishops and other Church leaders in their views of the current papacy. Thus they are blissfully unaware that the Church apparently faces one of the most serious crises in its history.
On the other hand, solely on the basis of secular news coverage of Church events—superficial and mostly in passing—both ordinary Catholics and informed non-Catholics undoubtedly perceive a Catholic Church in a process of substantial change and liberalization of its policies on issues ranging from immigration to gender and marriage. Of which many or most ordinary Catholics, and certainly most non-Catholics generally approve. In any event, one hears anecdotally of nominal Catholics—the sort who’ve never been near a Catholic blog—wondering whether the Catholic Church is now headed down the Episcopal trail.
Hey, Byz, the ONE problem with the suggestion that Gene referred to Trump's "ability to confidently and directly give the 'troops' marching orders" is that . . . he hasn't.
BUILD A WALL... Nope.
PUT HILLARY IN JAIL. Nope.
KEEP AMERICAN JOBS IN AMERICA. Nope.
(All those jobs at Carrier in Indiana he "saved"..? Guess what. As of this month that plant starts laying off 632 workers.)
LABLE CHINA A CURRENCY MANIPULATOR. Nope.
SCRAP THE IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL. Nope.
REPEAL AND REPLACE. Nope and Nope.
TAKE NO VACATIONS. Nope.
ELIMINATE COMMON CORE. Nope.
BRING BACK WATERBOARDING. Nope.
IMPOSE TERM LIMITS ON CONGRESS. Nope.
Etc etc etc.
It seems the only thing he has accomplished, reluctantly and only when publicly shamed into doing so, is fire the BEST, BRIGHTEST, MOST INTELLIGENT staffers who, it turn out, are so deeply flawed that they can't even stay on in a Trump White House.
Mark Thomas,
Did you slobber over SAINT John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI in the same manner as you do Pope Francis, or are they too orthodox for you?
Mark Thomas
Methinks thou dost protest too much. For what it's worth, Pope Francis's theology appears orthodox, but to regard him, or any pope as an 'oracle of God' every time he opens his mouth is borderline heresy, as you well know.
As far as Summorum Pontificum is concerned, he sees it as a concession to a small group of diehards, whereas its significance is far greater than this.
Gene:
We do not even need to go outside the language of your Trump-like Pope’s imagined statement. If such a Pope were to say “Whining should not be part of a homily" as you suggest, it would be hypocritical at best and internally inconsistent at worst given that Trump whines in almost every utterance. He is indeed the Whiner-in-Chief. So, for this reason, as well as for all the other reasons that have been adduced by Anonymous, I too have no desire for a “Trump-like Pope.”
Anonymous -
The attached, to me, is how many are reacting reading this:
https://media.giphy.com/media/XsUtdIeJ0MWMo/giphy.gif
or;
https://media.giphy.com/media/ExCtsGDgaGYBa/giphy.gif
or;
https://giphy.com/gifs/loop-thinking-triple-CaiVJuZGvR8HK
John Nolan -
"As far as Summorum Pontificum is concerned, he sees it as a concession to a small group of diehards, whereas its significance is far greater than this".
So spot on! SP's purpose is so much greater than appeasing the <=1% 'diehards'. Pope Francis, privately, must know this and will continue to ignore the 'fruit' it yields.
Now here's something to get Mark Thomas worked up:-
I see certain resemblances between Pope Francis and Urban VI (1378-1389).
Urban kicked off his papacy by lambasting the Curia for worldliness and threatening reform. He quickly showed himself to be quarrelsome and bad-tempered.
When six cardinals opposed him he had them imprisoned, tortured, and (with one exception) subsequently murdered. Watch your backs, Burke and company!
His reign saw the beginning of the Great Schism which was not resolved until 1417. His mental stability has been questioned - some refer to him as the 'mad pope'.
John Nolan said..."For what it's worth, Pope Francis's theology appears orthodox, but to regard him, or any pope as an 'oracle of God' every time he opens his mouth is borderline heresy, as you well know."
Mister Nolan, I agree with your statement above.
That does not mean, however, that your declaration in regard to His Holiness Pope Francis, "... he talks too much anyway and one needs to filter his utterances, which means ignoring most of them," is sound Catholicism.
It is extreme to view the Pope as "an oracle of God."
It is extreme to declare that one should "filter" the Pope to the extent that one ignores "most" of his "utterances."
God has empowered His Holiness Pope Francis to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God. Pope Francis is our chief (human) shepherd to whom God commands us to submit.
Pope Francis is our spiritual father. Honor Thy Father.
As Catholics, our spiritual fathers lead us to God. A Catholic does not honor his (spiritual) father by dismissing him as a talkative gasbag whose utterances in the majority are to be ignored.
How can Jesus Christ's flock possibly follow and submit to Pope Francis the shepherd while dismissing Pope Francis as one who, in the main, is to be ignored?
Mister Nolan, I believe that your comment in question is fraught with danger.
Anyway, I hope that His Holiness Pope Francis continues to talk, and talk, and talk as he, our spiritual father, leads us to God and eternal life.
I, along with millions of Catholics, enjoy hearing from and reading about the Vicar of Christ, His Holiness Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
“…whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope.”
— Pope Saint Pius X, 1912 A.D.
Mister John Nolan said..."Now here's something to get Mark Thomas worked up:- I see certain resemblances between Pope Francis and Urban VI (1378-1389). Urban kicked off his papacy by lambasting the Curia for worldliness and threatening reform. He quickly showed himself to be quarrelsome and bad-tempered.
"When six cardinals opposed him he had them imprisoned, tortured, and (with one exception) subsequently murdered. Watch your backs, Burke and company! His reign saw the beginning of the Great Schism which was not resolved until 1417. His mental stability has been questioned - some refer to him as the 'mad pope'."
Mister Nolan, here is my response to the above:
https://www.google.com/search?q=pope+francis+hugs+child+with+cerebral+palsy&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj199KOtPDVAhXF5yYKHS6kACsQ_AUICigB&biw=1093&bih=602#imgrc=Dr3tH601PIlzHM:&spf=1503596172146
=====================================
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=pope+francis+san+giovanni&spell=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjcyua8tfDVAhXFu48KHU0jBpgQvwUIIigA&biw=1093&bih=602&dpr=1.25
==============================
Many God grant many happy and blessed years to our God-loving, peaceful, Culture of Life Bishop of Rome, His Holiness Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
Thanks for the laughs. Did you ever hear of the phrase: brevity is the soul of wit?
John Nolan said..."As far as Summorum Pontificum is concerned, he sees it as a concession to a small group of diehards, whereas its significance is far greater than this."
If that is correct, then Pope Francis has simply adhered to Pope Benedict XVI's declaration related to Summorum Pontificum.
From the Vatican's web site.
Pope Benedict XVI, 2008 A.D. In response the a reporter's question en route to France.
"What do you say to those who, in France, fear that the "Motu proprio' Summorum Pontificum signals a step backwards from the great insights of the Second Vatican Council? How can you reassure them?"
Benedict XVI: "Their fear is unfounded, for this "Motu Proprio' is merely an act of tolerance, with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy.
"They form a small group, because this presupposes a schooling in Latin, a training in a certain culture.
"Yet for these people, to have the love and tolerance to let
them live with this liturgy seems to me a normal requirement of the faith and pastoral concern of any Bishop of our Church.
"There is no opposition between the liturgy renewed by the Second Vatican Council and this liturgy."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
TJM
Why did MT choose to quote my light-hearted observation verbatim and by way of response provide links you can't click on?
I wouldn't want him at a dinner party. He's too pious by half. Mind you, I wouldn't want Bergoglio either, or Montini, or Pacelli. I imagine Roncalli would have been good fun, and it would be fascinating discussing Bruckner with Ratzinger.
In general, most of the faithful are not paying attention to Circ de Roma, and just carrying on living the Faith at least within the parishes I frequent. To those that are paying attention, we really can't control the circus, but we can control what we are doing, so we do that.
Some priests will make some thinly veiled comments against papal mouth openings at 30 000 ft, but the vast majority of the time, the homilies are focused on the Faith, and not what's not in our control.
Post a Comment