I have often wonder why I can’t understand what Pope Francis says or writes. I wonder if the problem is the one who translates his stuff into English, maybe there are things lost in translation thus leading to such confusion and head scratching.
Every interview Pope Francis gives leaves me wonder about what he exactly said it is so convoluted, confusing and capable of being interpreted in a variety of ways. No one is sure what the true meaning is as Pope Francis thinks.
Here is a case in point. I have no idea what this means, none whatsoever. I would give the pope an F for expressing his thoughts in a cogent and coherent way:
A reporter asks Pope Francis what he thinks about Cardinal Burke and the preface he wrote for a book on the Synod which sees it provoking confusion and schism and this is Pope Francis’ answer:
“If you go to the root of these ideas, you will find ideologies,” Francis told the reporters. “Always, when one wants to detach from the path of communion in the Church, what always pulls it apart is ideology. And they accuse the Church of this or that, but they never make an accusation of what is true: (it is made up of) sinners. They never speak of sin … They defend a “doctrine”, a doctrine like distilled water that has no taste and is not true Catholic doctrine, that is, in the Creed. And that very often scandalizes. How scandalous is the idea that God became flesh, that God became Man, that Our Lady kept her virginity? This scandalizes.”
I am not trying to slam Pope Francis, but it isn’t wrong to beg him to express himself in a way that the peripheries can understand it, meaning rank and file Catholics like me who don’t have the same intellect as His Holiness. I can’t understand what this means, not at all, I don’t know where to begin!!!!! Help me O God!
29 comments:
When he says the ideas are never a out sin I wonder if his staff are filtering his news and messages. In most cases like this it seems that context is important so maybe reading the entire discussion as well as what the Pope had been talking about the rest of his trip. I also think he so etimes has an answer he wants to give but the wrong question was asked.
To me, this means that per PF, Cardinal Burke, among others, picked an ideology that differs from his own and he's sour grapes about it and will say what he wants to discredit differing viewpoints.
Mean-spirited, poisonous, non-conciliatory, scorched earth to get to the desired end etc.
Unfortunately, there are those who only accept a similar viewpoint, won't ever consider the viewpoints of others, invoke the Holy Spirit as a result such that those whose viewpoint differs are discredited as they are simply filled with Satan.
The "my way or the highway" environment we currently are enduring is unhealthy, cancerous, beyond tiresome and is only driving disillusioned believers of a traditional bent, PART OF PF'S FLOCK away. Here we are.
ByzRus,
Spot on. The braindead worship PF and Vatican II.There is an old saying, "scratch a liberal, find a fascist." Here is an interesting take on PF and Catholic liberalism's big here, who we heard about morning, noon, and night following the Council. Needless to say, history will not be kind to them, either PF or Chardin:
"Each additional day with Francis is a day of wonder — wonder at how such magnificent melange of utter buffoonery, tackiness, ignorance, and malice could reach the see of Peter in this “enlightened” age. Maybe it is all a great plot by liberals to destroy papalotry once and for all.
Because when he isn’t promoting half-baked historical lies about despotic monsters, he is praising to high heaven the most influential heretic of the twentieth century, his fellow Jesuit (shocking) Teilhard de Chardin.
Catholics were warned about his works by the pontificate of none other than John XXIII himself. If that were not enough, Teilhard should also be radioactive even for any liberal-minded human beings due to his persistently and well-documented racist rantings, his support of eugenics, and his praise even of Nazi Germany's medical experiments."
Spin that, MT!
He is a politician, period. As advanced spiritually and mentally as a run of the mill populist South American politician, or North American. Nothing but contradictory blather and hot air, while ruthlessly persuing his agenda.
In the Army we called this "baffle'em with bs". You folk looking for meaning in his words may as well be trying to find meaning of the pattern in a pile of garbage.
His official written Church documents are the only time he will be clear, and by then it is too late. You play right into his and his cirle's hands by tying yourselves in knots trying to parse the meaning of a pile of garbage while they run right over you and do what they will.
And you persist in trying to treat him as a real pope rather than the politician that he is, and so it has gone since his election, and he has run right over everyone at every turn, and they count on this weak paralysis and get it. It is like watching Chamberlain vs Hitler, same problem and just as pathetic.
Thanks, TJM.
Bob,
Agree, very political/agenda motivated.
To those who get the vapors speaking about him and his "initiatives" (which, from an orthodox and Orthodox perspective are questionable/unnecessary), many must be opportunists/careerists hoping to ride his white coattails to success.
As for the rest of us, my sense is that "they" think us to be really stupid lemmings.
Father McDonald, here is Mike Lewis'(Where Peter Is) commentary today in regard to Pope Francis' reply in question:
https://wherepeteris.com/us-cardinal-and-brazilian-ideologues-team-up-attack-synod/
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Thanks for that link, MT. We know that this papacy is winding down. I can't wait to read Mike Lewis if someone like Cardinal Burke gets elected the next pope and cancels Pope Francis' syndoal vision of the Church since Pope Francis canceled Pope Benedict's vision for the Church. Maybe Lewis is like a reed blowing in the wind and will support any pope no matter what he teaches.
It's odd that Pope Francis has not said a word about the Archbishop of Berlin allowing priests who desire to do so the bless same sex relationships, meaning the sex they are having, along with their union which in many cases are legally seen as "marriages."
Fr. James Martin, SJ, a close advisor to Pope Francis also believes what the Berlin bishop believes.
Of course we know that when this is allowed for the universal Church, the next step is to make the blessing the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony which then opens the door to a new anthropology of all of the sacrament. No concern by this Pope and Mike Lewis as far as I can see. This of course opens the door to all kinds of people, no matter the sexual identification, sexual relationships they have, becoming bishops, priests and deacons, unless these are suppressed in favor of a completely lay Church.
I wonder, though, if Mike Lewis or Pope Francis would say that what I have described is presenting doctrine as "distilled water" breaking communion with the Church.
Yet, if a person chooses to love their mortal sin and promote that, which are against the laws of God, they don't break communion with the Church of Pope Francis' vision. Only breaking with Pope Francis is a mortal sin. Odd, no?
It may be distilled water, but at least it’s clean.
I cannot blame just Francis even though he is following classic South American dictator modus operandi and surrounded by shameless toadies.
I blame the institutional church which has prized only get-along-boys for promotion from priest to bishop, they are conciliators rather than pastors, always steering the middle course of whatever extremes are popular. They are mostly spineless careerists climbing towards the golden ring. They most certainly will not correct anyone above them. They are not pastors but weathervanes.
Very few priests and bishops have dared to speak up and they have mostly been ruthlessly destroyed for their efforts as an object lesson, and so everyone mostly very cautious and playing a waiting game in what is a reign of terror of a dictator, more a Vichy goverment and no organizer of a reaistance.
I am utterly disgusted with the entire dog and pony show of the hierarchy which is showing its essential worthlessness while Holy Church is raped and told to like it, and everyone just stands around and says, "Somebody oughta call a cop". While Francis supporters say, "Nothing here to see, she asked for it and likes it, doncha know, it's consensual and nothing wrong in that, the rapist told us so."
MT again demonstrates he lacks Faith and Reason! Support PF's support of Mortal Sin! Yey!
Father McDonald said..."Maybe Lewis is like a reed blowing in the wind and will support any pope no matter what he teaches."
Father McDonald, thank you for the opportunity to respond to you.
Mike Lewis, as he Catholic, has stated that he would submit to Pope "Burke." Mike has made it known that he will obey Pope Francis' successor(s).
Father McDonald, in regard to your comment: "no matter what he (a Pope) teaches."
Thanks to the promise of Jesus Christ, we know that it is impossible for the Roman Pontiff to teach error. Therefore, Mike Lewis, as well as each Catholic, is assured that the Roman Pontiff will provide us with orthodox teaching.
That is why without knowing Pope Francis' successor, Mike Lewis, with complete confidence, as well as in line with Pope Benedict XVI, will offer "unconditional reverence and obedience" to our next Pope(s).
Father McDonald, thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Popes can and due err in their opinions. The problems with pope Francis are usually based on his off the cuff remarks, which normally express opinions about individuals or groups of people.
For Germany to bless same sex marriages or adulterations relationships would be a simulation of a sacrament. A pope can certainly mishandle those that do this in terms of disciplinary action or lack thereof. They make mistakes too in terms of naming bishops and cardinals, McCarrick a case in point.
The case of Pope John XXII is instructive. His error was in the realm of theological opinion, the idea that the souls who die in the state of grace, after purification in Purgatory if needed, wait in Heaven without the Beatific Vision of God, until the general Judgment. His error was not heresy at the time that he presented it, in sermons, as opinion. Everyone rushes to say that he changed his mind on his deathbed about this error, but that point is irrelevant. The idea was in the realm of mere opinion at the time. Then the subsequent Pope, Benedict XII, defined as dogma that the departed faithful do have the Beatific Vision as soon as they enter Heaven.
So a Pope can err in personal opinion, even if that error subsequently becomes a heresy. This implies that a Pope can contradict an infallible teaching of Tradition or Scripture (material dogma); he can err to that extent. But he cannot contradict formal dogma, an infallible teaching of Tradition or Scripture confirmed infallibly by the Magisterium.
Pope Francis has clear opinions on development of doctrine. There is no defined teaching on it, just opinions at this point and some quite in error. A future pope could define it and limit what Pope Francis believes is possible.
MT,this is truly fascinating and it really happened! So much for this form of synodality.
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-strange-case-of-pope-formosus
Father McDonald, in regard to your notion that Pope Francis has "cancelled" (whatever that means) Pope Benedict XVI's "vision of the Church."
Let us say that such is the case.
-- In the history of the Church, is Pope Benedict XVI's "vision of the Church" the only such acceptable, orthodox vision?
-- If not, then Pope Francis has the same right as did Pope Benedict XVI to establish his (Pope Francis') "vision of the Church." Correct?
-- Is Pope Francis' "vision of the Church" orthodox?
Father McDonald, thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald, in regard to your notion that Pope Francis has "cancelled" (whatever that means) Pope Benedict XVI's "vision of the Church."
Let us say that such is the case.
-- In the history of the Church, is Pope Benedict XVI's "vision of the Church" the only such acceptable, orthodox vision?
-- If not, then Pope Francis has the same right as did Pope Benedict XVI to establish his (Pope Francis') "vision of the Church." Correct?
-- Is Pope Francis' "vision of the Church" orthodox?
Father McDonald, thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The ultimate game of "yuh huh vs nuh uh".
Shame the lessons learned there have been ignored.
A similar vicious circle could ensue with successive popes yinging and yanging back and forth on the pronouncements of this papacy.
Father McDonald said..."Popes can and due err in their opinions."
Then, for example, Pope Francis' immediate predecessors, Popes Benedict XVI, and Saint John Paul II, may have erred repeatedly.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."Pope Francis has clear opinions on development of doctrine. There is no defined teaching on it, just opinions at this point and some quite in error. A future pope could define it and limit what Pope Francis believes is possible."
Then Pope Francis has the right to limit that which his predecessors had believed possible.
Also, if Pope Francis is in error, then his predecessors may have been in error.
Determining when Popes err...when I should determine to reject this or that Pope...is far beyond my very limited intelligence and abilities. Therefore, I will keep things simple.
That is, in line with Pope Benedict XVI's promise and practice, I will grant unto the Roman Pontiff my "unconditional reverence and obedience." I am safe that way as the Vicar of Christ is protected from teaching error.
:-)
Pax.
Mark Thomas
If Pope Francis allows female ordination and the blessing of couples of whatever sex in irregular unions, he will have contradicted two encyclicals, one from JPII, Veritas Splendor, the other from Paul VI, Humana’s Vitae, as well as the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church concerning Holy Orders. Those ain’t opinions.
So when a bishop or priest votes Democrat, they can expect more of this.
3:40
Democrat Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is cutting millions in taxpayer funding to a pro-life program that supports counseling and housing for pregnant women.
“Pennsylvania plans to end on Dec. 31 its longstanding contract with the nonprofit Real Alternatives, the first organization in the nation to secure significant state and federal subsidies to support anti-abortion counseling centers,” the Associated Press reported. “Under the program, Real Alternatives distributed the state and federal funds to dozens of Pennsylvania centers, including Catholic Charities, anti-abortion counseling centers and maternity homes, which provide support and housing for pregnant women.”
In a statement, Shapiro said his administration will not “continue that pattern” of supporting the pro-life organization and will instead work to promote abortion."
Earning your place in Hell, one vote at a time! Proportionate reasons! LOL
PF's mission is to continue the work of Vatican II, destruction of the Church! MT will still slobber over him!
ByzRus, we would not be in that game had not enough bishops gone along with the Francis agenda in the first place. Had enough stood up in synods and said, "NO!", had enough preached that this new pope was flirting with heresy and perhaps had mental problems, had an assembly been called by bishops on how to deal with and replace an errant pope with obvious problems, there would not be such contradiction required at all.
As it sits now, generations must pass before the Church can attempt to abrogate documemts or the entire papacy well after all with living memory of the times have gone to their respective rewards, they must wait until Francis just another forgotten pope....and if they never get around to even that, it will no doubt cause many to doubt the Church is what it claims to be, or even ever was....
for many, that time is already here, thanks to the leftist modern "progressive" martinet currently in the office.
Father McDonald said..."If Pope Francis allows female ordination and the blessing of couples of whatever sex in irregular unions, he will have contradicted two encyclicals, one from JPII, Veritas Splendor, the other from Paul VI, Humana’s Vitae, as well as the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church concerning Holy Orders. Those ain’t opinions."
Father McDonald, I do not fear that Pope Francis, or any Pope, would teach error. Why worry as the Apostolic See will always preserve the Catholic Religion immaculate?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The problem with the above mentioned waiting game in dealing with a papacy which flirts with redefining the Church, contradicting its most ancient teachings on the nature of man, the Church, and even salvation and God....
Is that this papacy created openings in those areas, openings for those who deny those ancient, and giving them the appearance of legitimacy within the Church, where they properly belong outside it with the assist of a size 14 boot in what they think is their brain.
Until these openings have been firmly closed, and the boot remains unemployed, there will be turmoil, and even outright schism, and all in the name of unity...so the swifter with which they are dealt, the swifter the Church can get back to her mission of birthing saints truly united to God amd his holy will...
So, maybe sanity will prevail and these problems uprooted and cast out. And if sanity does not prevail, it already plain that most.folk want nothing to do with an insane Church and them safer without it.
MT,
Why has PF not:
removed the Archbishop of Berlin for apostasy?
disciplined the Vatican clerics who engaged in a cocaine fueled gay sex orgy?
excommunicated fake Catholics Biden and Pelosi for promoting abortion while claiming to be Catholic?
not disciplined clerics for violating the norms for celebrating Mass?
repudiated his failed deal with Communist Red China?
not answered the 4 cardinals dubia?
not repudiated the LGBT agenda?
You will never answer the above because you are a leftwing bot
Our resident papalotar cannot find any cut and paste non sequiturs to rebut my statements.
The audience has long since moved =on. No one care what he says any more
monkmcg,
Yes, I suppose you are right. His postings here are his daily therapy
Post a Comment