I placed this message on my parish’s Facebook page. I have had many people asking me about the pope’s recent indiscretion as it concerns papal speech and opinion. What a mess this creates!
What are we to make of a pope who loves to make off-the-cuff remarks? Throughout my priesthood when I teach RCIA classes on the papacy and papal infallibility, I make clear the Church’s teaching that there are different levels of authority in papal teachings and none are considered “infallible” unless what is taught is infallible or if the pope elevates to the level of dogma something that is believed but not taught in an infallible way.
For example the dogmas of Immaculate Conception defined by Pope Pius IX in 1854 and the Assumption of our Blessed Mother, defined in 1950 by Pope Pius XII were both considered doctrines believed by the Church since Apostolic times. The popes didn’t make up these teachings based upon their personal opinions.
Thus Catholics must accept these two new dogmas. Lesser papal teachings would be encyclicals, the most authoritative next to an “Infallible” declaration, letters, homilies and speeches.
Catholics need not agree with any pope’s off the cuff remarks if there is no precedence in those remarks in what the Church teaches, believes and proclaims to be revealed by God.
Pope Francis, and this is my opinion, speaks way too much off the cuff and this has gotten him into trouble numerous times where someone in the Vatican has to backtrack and clarify. It has become a bit of an embarrassment. It has and continues to cause confusion in the Church throughout the world and gives amunition to the Church’s enemies.
We don’t need to accept off the cuff remarks that aren’t Catholic teaching. Popes can experience dementia from the aging process, mental illness and the like and they can experience ignorance also.
We don’t need to accept papal political statments, prognostications on the weather or global warming or cooling or climate change. If a pope says Jesus Christ was an alien from outer space, we can dismiss that opinion. All of these things are outside the realm of papal authority, although any pope can have his own opinions. God willing, they keep them silent.
Thus Pope Francis’ political position that Civil Unions in Civil law (this has nothing to do with Church Law) is a better vocabulary term than “Marriage” as secular governments might use the term marriage. While the term “civil union” is to be preferred over “marriage” it still creates a moral problem for orthodox Catholic teaching as it concerns fornication, sodomy, adultery and the like. His advocacy for a particular form of civil law language calls into question the sinfulness of sexual actions within civil unions and the need for all sinners,no matter the sin, to repent, confess their sins and be reconciled to God.
Sin codified in law then becomes a public scandal and is quite serious in terms of the example it gives to others.
The Papal Magisterium serves the Church in the areas of Faith, Morals and Canon Law and is subordinated to Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law. The Pope is not above Scripture or Tradition, let alone natural law, but a servant to it. Even the Pope’s opinions must serve God and not be above God.
Pope Francis is very strong on pastoral theology and I appreciate His Holiness’ pastoral approach. But pastoral theology cannot be “dogmatized” and it must serve Scripture and Tradition. It cannot confuse sin with the sinner as though sin defines us. Love the sinner, but not the sin is the best teaching the Church has in terms of immorality of any type.
The whole discussion on what terms civil governments should use in terms of same sex unions seems to me to be outdated. Our Supreme Court has legalized same sex unions and calls these “marriage.”
In my opinion, it would be better for the pope to acknowledge that secular govenments and the legislative processes they have are not Catholic and Catholics are called to be converted to Divine Truth and its Splendor not the ideologies that governments advocate and make civil law.
19 comments:
I kind of lean toward the "Dementia" angle myself.
He has had these sorts of incidents throughout his life. I think the Jesuit process of examining thoughts and ideas has not served him well because he did not concurrently develop discretion and discipline. If he continues to follow pattern he will reverse course and track back to Church teaching, leaving this episode as another posit he considered out loud.
Who educated our educators?
From high school teachers, to university academics to the present pope?
I have recently been reading about Paulo Freire (1921-1997), the Brazilian educator and philosopher, whose 1968 “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” after 1970 achieved near-iconic status in the USA in teacher training programs.
But Freire’s massive influence on our era does not end there.
He was education advisor to the World Council of Churches.
His ideas and methods were central to the modern Black Consciousness Movement to Catholic basal Christian communities in the Phillipines to South American liberation theology AND influenced many South American Catholic clergy and Catholic teachers from the 1970s onwards.
So who was Paolo Freire?
He was a Christian socialist and member of the Brazilian Workers’ Party.
He was influenced in his thinking by not only Plato and Christianity but also a number of Marxist thinkers.
He believed teaching must be political and education must be a mechanism for social change (his ideas and methods led to the radical math movement in the USA which emphasises social justice issues as components of mathematical curricula.)
Students who are regarded as oppressed must be encouraged to participate in the transformation of their world; the oppressors must be encouraged to rethink their way of life and examine their own role in oppression.
So in a list of individuals who had the most influence in educating the educators in our era Paolo Freire would have to be easily number one.
I was particularly interested reading of his influence not only on teacher education around the world but also his influence from the 1970s on Catholic clergy and teachers in South America (including the future Pope Francis?).
This is so troubling. It's troubling because of what he said and even more so because I really think he supports this. I also believe this Pope is an avowed Socialist which is also contrary to church teaching. Who knows, he may even be "pro-choice". At this point who can tell? "Who am I to judge?"
To remain Catholic and retain our sanity, I think it's best to not read or pay attention to PF's statements and wait for a better Pope
How did Pope Francis speak off the cuff?
Reports have exploded on the Internet that the director of the film on Pope Francis lifted the quotes in question from a May 2019 A.D. interview that the Pope conducted with Mexican journalist Pope Francis.
Pope Francis had spoken clearly, precisely, and 100 percent in line with Church teaching.
Here is a brief Spanish language report:
Esto fue lo que dijo el Santo Padre
@Pontifex_es, no más. No utilizó la palabra “matrimonio” ni tampoco se refirió al sacramento. El Catecismo de la Iglesia siempre ha destacado el deber que tenemos todos de acoger, como Cristo lo haría, a cualquier persona.
=======================================================================
Translation:
"He did not use the word "marriage" nor did he refer to the sacrament."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The blog, Where Peter Is, posted a 2019 A.D. video of Pope Francis' interview with Mexican journalist Valentina Alazraki.
https://wherepeteris.com/those-pope-francis-quotes-video-editing-and-media-controversy-2/
The interview is one hour, 17 minutes long.
Reports this morning on twitter and the internet have stated that the director of the new film on Pope Francis lifted comments beginning at the 56-minute mark of His Holiness' 2019 A.D. interview with the Mexican journalist.
The Where Peter Is blog report stated that the director of the new film on Pope Francis had rearranged the order of Pope Francis' 2019 A.D. comments so as to alter the context of the Pope's comments.
Here is what Pope Francis said in 2019 A.D....and the last part was not reported yesterday by one right-and-left-winger after another, within and without the Church:
Pope Francis said that "homosexual people have a right be a part of a family, people with homosexual orientation have a right to be in a family and the parents have the right to recognize this son as homosexual, this daughter as homosexual. Nobody should be thrown out or be miserable because of it."
******* "And that does not mean approving homosexual acts, not in the least." *******
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark, you are missing the point. The fact that Pope Francis encourages families not to disown their homosexual children, is a pastoral response. Today, most parents don't disown their homosexual children and celebrate weddings with them.
The law of our land and of many other countries is that same sex marriage is legal and on an equal footing with heterosexual marriage. Is the Pope asking the USA and other countries to backtrack and rename same sex unions as civil unions or as some are saying his Spanish implies, "civil coexistence" which could be rendered in English as a civil partnership.
The barn door is open on this and Pope Francis knows it. I appreciate that he doesn't want to call these partnerships marriage but he is advocating for legal recognition of some type which is a partnership that is open to sexual activity and usually sodomy for homosexual couples, although they are capable of living chastely too.
The MSM in the UK (especially BBC/ITV) headlined this on the main TV news last night as the Pope backing civil same-sex unions. Very little the Pope says or does makes it into the news, so this was presented as a departure from the teaching made clear fifteen years ago.
Although he has a reputation as a motor-mouth, I did not believe he actually said this. Who is authorized to spin these things and muddy the waters? They would need to be highly placed in the Vatican.
Vatican News has yet to make any kind of clarification as far as I can tell. The former Cardinal and now laicized priest, Theodore McCarrick advocated for the same several years ago when he was still the Archbishop of Washington. He had to back track a bit too.
I would prefer that "civil union" or "civil partnership" be used instead of marriage, but no government is going to listen to me and I don't think they will listen to the pope unless Italy is thinking about making legal same sex "marriages." Perhaps Pope Francis could have some sway there, but I don't know.
I always qualify same sex "marriage" with the quotation marks since it isn't a marriage nor civil "marriages" between a man and a woman where a previous marriage is still valid in the eyes of the Church.
Here is a video by Father Agustino Torres.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WX5ZtXDoI4
Father's video examined the video interview granted by Pope Francis.
Father Torres demonstrated that right-wing, as well as left-wing forces, misrepresented Pope Francis yesterday.
-- Pope Francis had spoken carefully and precisely.
-- Pope Francis did not place homosexual coexistence on par with marriage.
-- Pope Francis declared that his comments did not gloss over sins associated with homosexuality.
Unfortunately, even such Churchmen as Cardinal Burke, and Bishop Tobin, were influenced by the lies that were disseminated yesterday against Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Maybe some of us will take a second look at the Eastern Orthodox Church....
I get it. PF gets his instructions from MT or vice versa. Either way, these gems are usually howlers. Dementia, having been a red-diaper baby, or whatever makes him emote in such curious fashion it confuses the innocent. This will be all sorted out at the right time by the head of the Church, Jesus of Nazareth.
Father McDonald said..."I always qualify same sex "marriage" with the quotation marks since it isn't a marriage..."
Very good.
I believe that Cardinal Burke stated that he refused to use the word "marriage" in connection to same-sex coexistence/unions.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Bee here:
Fr. McD said: "I have had many people asking me about the pope’s recent indiscretion as it concerns papal speech and opinion."
One instance would be an indiscretion. But the number of times this pope has made "off the cuff" remarks that the whole world recognizes as contrary to Church teaching (as reflected by the reaction of the main stream media), has become in itself a scandal.
And what of all the Catholic faithful who have pastors, unlike you Father, who hold heterodox or even heretical beliefs, who when they ask for clarification, hear an erroneous belief instead of true Catholic doctrine? How many souls cannot even learn the true Catholic beliefs anymore due to this sort of "personal opinion" spread far and wide?
Believe me, there will be hell to pay....
God bless.
Bee
John,
Fr Hunwicke on his blog states that one of Britain’s dailies has as it’s lead story : Pope Francis now favours “Gay Marriage” - even though Francis has never said that.
What that lead story stated, though inaccurate, is what millions around the world will now believe: Pope Francis favours, even supports, “Gay marriage”.
Homosexual sex is morally wrong and so the pope's statement about Civil Unions is perplexing. Has he changed the Catholic Catechism too or does he naively believe these unions are "chaste." Not a good message
Funny, Mark Thomas, has no comment to the Anonymous comment at 10:50 AM. Is he still searching for a brilliant response?
Post a Comment