In a longer interview, one of those dreaded papal interviews, Pope Francis said this in the last few days which is the theme song of his papacy:
On the future of the Church, Pope Francis recalled the image of the Church outlined by St Paul VI in the apostolic exhortation Evangelii nuntiandi, the inspiration for his own Evangelii gaudium: “A Church on pilgrimage.”
Today “the greatest evil facing the Church, the greatest,” Pope Francis said emphatically, “is spiritual worldliness” which, in turn, “gives rise to a bad thing: clericalism, which is a perversion of the Church.” He pointed specifically to the clericalism found in “rigidity,” insisting that “underneath every kind of rigidity there is rottenness, always.” Among the “ugly things” in the Church today, the Pope noted “rigid, ideologically rigid positions” that take the place of the Gospel.
“Concerning pastoral attitudes,” he said, “I will mention only two, which are old: Pelagianism and Gnosticism.” Pelagianism, he explained, “is believing that I can go forward through my own power.” On the contrary, he said, “the Church goes forward with the strength of God, the mercy of God, and the power of the Holy Spirit.” He described Gnosticism, as a kind of mysticism, “without God,” an “empty spirituality.”
My comments: I think it is safe to say that Pope Francis has a negative attitude about the rigid and would like to rid the Church of this category of people.
Rigidity is a psychological disposition, no? And normally it isn’t the fault of the person but the bad things that have made them such. Many rigid people find solace in tradition, clarity, certitude all of which keep them sane. Does the pope wish to complicate their suffering by denigrating and excluding them?
Rigid people need not be allowed to control people or impose their orientation on others.
But the converse of rigidity, flexibility, is also a psychological disposition and taken to the extreme, the person stands for nothing, wants to be accepted by all and doesn’t want to rock the boat unless their comfort zone of being flexible is threatened by the rigidity of others.
Both extremes are harmful to the common good and need accompaniment not marginalization. The flexible person is adrift at sea; the rigid person sinks to the bottom as soon as he enters the sea.
Somewhere in the middle is the best approach which normally means a Church of both/and not either/or.
For example both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms of the Church not an either/or and allowing the Church of the both/and to make her pilgrimage through life to our final destination on that narrow waterway or canal to salvation.
I think the EF and the OF are the two lungs which the Latin Rite needs to breathe well, just like the Universal Church needs both lungs of the East and the West. In other words, both/and not either/or! But Pope Francis is said to have only one lung and perhaps he thinks that should be the norm?
It seems to me that rigidity in some areas, but not all, can lead to a severe clericalism that is quite inflexible in allowing both forms of the one Latin Rite to coexist in the Church and the same parish according to the flexible and non-clerical teaching of Pope Benedict XVI in that splendid flexible Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum. As it concerns SP, Pope Francis seems quite inflexible, no?
8 comments:
Pope Francis engaging in projection. Sad. Not a reflective type
I find this obsession on perceived rigidity, a behavior, as opposed to the message of the gospels disturbing, and equally evil. As an Eastern Catholic where tradition is fundamental, but not worshiped, this is insulting. Then again, a not insignificant amount of PF's rhetoric is insulting. He doesn't seem to care; so, why should I.
Papa Francis is rigid in every way. He decries that which he himself is. He is a full throated member of the "cancel culture". 'I will cancel you if you don't agree with me' v. journeying with all, together, to find common ground. "My way or the highway" is textbook rigidity. Sorry Papa Francis but it takes a rigid person to know one.
Having just said that His Holiness, Pope Francis, is, "...rigid in every way," the above poster goes on to say, "... it takes a rigid person to know one."
And there you have it.
Fr K is rigid and contumacious - he knows his party supports intrinsic evil but he cannot change
Yes, Fr M, I am rigidly opposed to the Pope's cancel mentality.
Perhaps I AM rotten. I'll leave that for God to judge, but it has always struck me that when it comes to something as eternal and important as the faith that is the basis of my hope to gain the Kingdom of Heaven and avoid the pains of Hell, I should probably adhere to such a faith with great rigidity. No doubt, I have failed many times in doing so.
I must have been born rigid. When all my friends at Catholic school were having a hoot of a time turning our school Masses into the "social-consciousness-folk-music-insult-the-establishment hour", I just couldn't join in the fun. It looked wrong, it sounded wrong, it smelled wrong--but that was only for ME, because I am rigid. I couldn't understand why REVERENCE was suddenly abandoned, I mean UTTERLY ABANDONED. I am sure that reflects a sick rigidity in my rotten soul, but there it is. My instincts told me that if certain ways of worshipping God had worked for hundreds of years, it made no sense to jettison all of it to satisfy the base cravings of a mass of angry and ignorant youth.
Rigid. Sick. Intolerant. Yup. That's me.
Thomas Garrett,
I agree with what you wrote, but I’d like to add that the liturgical abuses were of course planned and carried out by adults and the children who are tempted by silliness and irreverence were quick to just go along. If they had it their way, they would have dropped church altogether back then, but the culture still had some decency left in it and they would have felt ashamed to abandon the sense of obligation that God's burned into our hearts and souls. Now the culture says don't bother to make the liturgy a clown activity and stop going to church altogether because it's full of hypocrites and liars. The honor is in sitting at home and declaring moral superiority because you're not participating in all of the hate filled rules and rhetoric.
As many have written here and Father has posted, it seems that the younger crowd that still goes to church has a hunger for something with better taste. The numbers are pathetically low, but hopefully if you sample the 18-35 group that are regular attendees we’d likely find that reverential liturgy is most appealing to them. Curious how many of them relate to what the anachronistic pope is selling?
The other idea is that the numbers perhaps weren’t much different when we were young. More people attended church so the sample of people was larger, but my guess is that the group of people who have a desire to worship God with love, affection and respect has always been a minority and that’s why it felt to you that you were the anomaly. Also, it explains the cultural revolution that the Church adopted. The old fogies that really didn’t want to be in church but were their because it was what society still deemed as honorable had their chance to lash out and they did it with rage.
We’ve been in a cultural bear market for centuries. Secular bear stock markets last for about 15-18 years and when you’re in one and you think you’ve hit bottom the market surprises you with hitting a new lower low. Kind of like how Pope Francis talks about surprises. Our cultural graph is still going from the upper left to the lower right and it would be nice to know when we’ll hit rock bottom. The NASDAQ lost 80% in 2000 and the DOW 90% in the 1930s. What percentage value have we lost so far when it comes to our love for God?
Post a Comment