Teljam, I appreciate your reasoned dialog as it regards the thinking of Pope Francis. As a father of 11 children, confusion on what is said is not uncommon in the family. Sometimes when you can see that things you ask of your children are not done as intended, I or their mother, have to clarify. Perhaps, its because I was somewhat vague in my expectations and sometimes a couple of the kids (usually the same ones) want to do things the easy way, the way that takes less effort. Bottom line, some will do what is asked well, some will do them well but not like it, some will do the least possible and some just won't do it (especially if its cleaning their room). The thing is, everyone knows my and the wife's expectations, but some want to do it their way to make their life of leisure easier. Why did God give his children the 4th commandment to "obey your father and mother"? Could you imagine a father or mother suggest to their child who has fornicated that if they feel "right with God" they can receive communion, without repentance and the sacrament of penance? If there is ambiguity with parents teaching on this issue, it is upon them as well. This is the role of the parent to teach clearly the fullness of the faith. We will be held culpable for doing so. The task of the Pope is to teach, govern and sanctify the faithful in truth and love. When he gives any suggestion of the possibility of receiving communion in the state of mortal sin, he is culpable of that sin as well. The Church is very clear on what constitutes a mortal sin and it is clear what sins are mortal and what are venial. If the pope does not include chapter 8 (and his one footnote) of his document AL, no one would have a problem with it. Because it is there, it brings with it the ambiguity that Cardinals are concerned enough for the eternal salvation of the faithful that they requested clarification (the Dubia). As a father of several children, I could not imagine not providing clarity on a question they may have, especially if it concerns a matter of heaven or hell for all eternity. So could you or anyone provide any justification for his silence on this? St. John Paul surely provided clarity in his encyclical on the family, why won't Pope Francis do the same after a year now?
Can anyone please explain to me what he is saying here? Sounds like gobbledegook to me. Pope Francis \ Homilies Pope Francis: In God there is both justice and mercy 24/02/2017 11:55 SHARE: (Vatican Radio) In the journey of the Christian, truth is not negotiable; rather, a Christian must be just in mercy, as Jesus teaches us. That was the message of Pope Francis at the morning Mass at the Casa Santa Marta. The Holy Father warned against hypocrisy and the deception of a faith reduced to a “casuistic logic.” Listen to Christopher Wells' report: “Is it lawful for a husband to put away his wife?” That is the question the doctors of the law put to Jesus in the day's Gospel. Jesus does not give in to a casuistic logic, but always explains the truth They asked the question to once more put Jesus to the test, the Pope observed. Looking to Jesus' answer, the Pope explained what matters most in the faith: “Jesus does not answer whether it is lawful or not lawful; He doesn’t enter into their casuistic logic. Because they thought of the faith only in terms of ‘Yes, you can,” or “No, you can’t” – to the limits of what you can do, the limits of what you can’t do. That logic of casuistry. And He asks a question: “But what did Moses command you? What is in your Law?” And they explained the permission Moses had given to put away the wife, and they themselves fall into the trap. Because Jesus qualifies them as ‘hard of heart’: ‘Because of the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment,’ and He speaks the truth. Without casuistry. Without permissions. The truth.” The logic of casuistry is hypocritical, deceptive But if this is the truth, and adultery is serious, how then, the Pope asks, does one explain that Jesus spoke “many times with an adulteress, a pagan?” That He “drank from the glass of her who was not purified?” And at the end He said to her: “I do not condemn you. Sin no more”? How does one explain that? “And the path of Jesus – it’s quite clear – is the path from casuistry to truth and mercy. Jesus lays aside casuistry. Not here, but in other passages from the Gospel, He qualifies those who want to put Him to the test, those who think with this logic of ‘Yes, you can’ as hypocrites. Even with the fourth commandment these people refused to assist their parents with the excuse that they had given a good offering to the Church. Hypocrites. Casuistry is hypocritical. It is a hypocritical thought. ‘Yes, you can; no, you can’t’… which then becomes more subtle, more diabolical: But what is the limit for those who can? But from here to here I can’t. It is the deception of casuistry. From casuistry to truth to mercy: this is the Christian path The path of the Christian, then, does not give into the logic of casuistry, but responds with the truth, which is accompanied, following the example of Jesus, by mercy – “because He is the Incarnation of the Mercy of the Father, and He cannot deny Himself. He cannot deny Himself because He is the truth of the Father, and He cannot deny Himself because He is the Mercy of the Father.” Justice and mercy: This is the path that makes us happy “And this street that Jesus teaches us,” the Pope noted, is difficult to apply in the face of the temptations of life: “When the temptation touches your heart, this path of going out from casuistry to truth and mercy is not easy: It takes the grace of God to help us to go forward in this way. And we should always ask for it. ‘Lord, grant that I might be just, but just with mercy.’ Not just, covered by casuistry. Just in mercy. As You are. Just in mercy. Then, someone with a casuistic mentality might ask, “But what is more important in God? Justice or mercy?’ This, too, is a sick thought, that seeks to go out… What is more important? They are not two things: it is only one, only one thing. In God, justice is mercy and mercy is justice. May the Lord help us to understand this street, which is not easy, but which will bring us happiness, and will make so many people happy.”
Casuistry - definition: The use of clever but unsound reasoning especially in relation to moral questions. The Pope is warning us not to use casuistry which is widely regarded as an especially Jesuitical device and which has been applied lavishly in the above statement. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. The dog is off the leash, I pity the poor priests who cannot 'fall into line'.
Pope urges EU leaders to ‘blaze the path of a new European humanism’ by Junno Arocho Esteves posted Friday, 24 Mar 2017 Pope Francis speaks during the European Union summit at the Vatican (CNS) Francis addresses 27 leaders on eve of Treaty of Rome anniversary Europe must recover the memories and lessons of past tragedies in order to confront the challenges Europeans face today that seek to divide rather than unite humanity, Pope Francis has said. While the founding fathers of what is now the European Union worked toward a “united and open Europe”, free of the “walls and divisions” erected after World War II, the tragedy of poverty and violence affecting millions of innocent people lingers on, the Pope told European leaders gathered at the Vatican. “Where generations longed to see the fall of those signs of forced hostility, these days we debate how to keep out the ‘dangers’ of our time, beginning with the long file of women, men and children fleeing war and poverty, seeking only a future for themselves and their loved ones,” he said. Pope Francis welcomed the 27 European heads of state to the Vatican to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Treaties of Rome, which gave birth to the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community. Signed on March 25, 1957, the treaties sought to unite Europe following the devastation wrought by World War II. The agreements laid the groundwork for what eventually became the European Union. Entering the Sala Regia of the Apostolic Palace, Pope Francis placed his hand above his heart and bowed slightly to the European leaders before taking his seat. At the end of the audience, he and the government leaders went into the Sistine Chapel and posed for a photograph in front of Michelangelo’s fresco, the Last Judgment. In his speech, the Pope said the commemoration of the treaty should not be reduced to “a remembrance of things past”, but should motivate a desire “to relive that event in order to appreciate its significance for the present”. “The memory of that day is linked to today’s hopes and expectations of the people of Europe, who call for discernment in the present so that the journey that has begun can continue with renewed enthusiasm and confidence,” he said. At the heart of the founding fathers’ creation of a united Europe, the pope continued, was concern for the human person, who after years of bloodshed held on “to faith in the possibility of a better future”. “That spirit remains as necessary as ever today, in the face of centrifugal impulses and the temptation to reduce the founding ideals of the union to productive, economic and financial needs,” he said. But despite achievements in forging unity and solidarity, Pope Francis said, Europe today suffers from a “lapse of memory” where peace is now “regarded as superfluous”. To regain the peace attained in the past, he added, Europe must reconnect with its Christian roots otherwise “the Western values of dignity, freedom and justice would prove largely incomprehensible”. “The fruitfulness of that connection will make it possible to build authentically secular societies, free of ideological conflicts, with equal room for the native and the immigrant, for believers and nonbelievers,” the Pope said. The economic crisis of the past decade, the crisis of the family “and established social models” and the current migration crisis, he said, offer an opportunity for Europe’s leaders to discern and assess rather than “engender fear and profound confusion”. “Ours is a time of discernment, one that invites us to determine what is essential and to build on it,” the Pope said. “It is a time of challenge and opportunity.” Europe, he added, will find new hope “when man is at the centre and the heart of her institutions” in order to stem “the growing ‘split’ between the citizenry and the European institutions which are often perceived as distant and inattentive to the different sensibilities present in the union”. The migration crisis also offers an opportunity for Europe’s leaders to refuse to give in to fear and “false forms of security” while posing a much deeper question to the continent’s citizens. “What kind of culture does Europe propose today?” he asked, adding that the fear of migrants “has its root cause in the loss of ideals”. “Without an approach inspired by those ideals, we end up dominated by the fear that others will wrench us from our usual habits, deprive us of familiar comforts and somehow call into question a lifestyle that all too often consists of material prosperity alone.” By defending families, investing in development and peace and defending the family and life “in all its sacredness”, Europe can once again find new ways to steer its course, Pope Francis told the European heads of state. “As leaders, you are called to blaze the path of a new European humanism made up of ideals and concrete actions,” the Pope said. “This will mean being unafraid to make practical decisions capable of responding to people’s real problems and of standing the test of time.”
Isn't Humanism something that is anti-God and a teaching within the UN and Freemsonry? And of all places to invite these EU leaders into the Sistine Chapel ???? Doesn't the EU support abortion, euthanasia, sodomy, contraception etc.....? Then why is the Pope trying so hard to keep them united? Hoping some of you Europeans can clue me in on this.
George Soros could have given this speech (possibly he did write it). 'Fear of migrants has its root cause in loss of ideals'. What??? This was a European Union founded to increase solidarity and peaceful relations between European nations, not to allow unfettered immigration from countries with an alien and evil religious and political culture to invade Europe and take it over. Has he ever heard of the Battles of Lepanto or Vienna or the suffering of the Europeans captured at sea or from European coastal towns and enslaved in North Africa (including St. Vincent de Paul)? Defending life? When the Dutch introduced euthanasia for children, he made no protest, when Trump indicated that he wanted a wall, he attacked him, indirectly but unmistakeably thus supporting the candidacy of the anti-life, anti-Catholic Clinton. He is a disgrace to the Papacy.
And should a pope of all people be be promoting the immigration of Muslims into Christian countries? Has France not taught the Church and countries the truth of what takes place when Christians are not having children and Muslims are? Does he not want Christian countries to remain Christian? Am I missing something here?
Yes, you are missing something. Soros type NGO's are pressure groups in Europe and the US. They combine their protests with some charitable work in other regions of the world. The Pope expects the taxes of Europe's 99% to fund the plans of the 1% he pays attention to. No matter that in many European countries about a quarter of the youth are unemployed, competing for jobs that are increasingly eliminated by technology. The Holy Father is as out of touch as the political leaders he was addressing. Really, he was giving them a dig out in anticipation of elections, sending the message to European Catholics that only bad Christians would vote for parties other than those represented by the people in the Sistine Chapel. We have a politician in Peter's chair telling us that anyone who disagrees with his brand of politics is defying the Holy Spirit. Only a very small percentage of migrants are fleeing war. The rest are economic migrants and the cost of resettling one of them would fund one or more families in their countries of origin.
Seems to me that bringing these humanists into the Sistine Chapel is an abomination itself. I have read enough prophecy to know that the Antichrist will be a humanitarian. Pope Francis or for that matter no pope will be the Antichrist, but this is very concerning. However, it is prophecized that a pope or an anti-pope will be the False Prophet.
Is the Sistine Chapel really a sacred place now? I know they celebrate the occasional Mass there and wealthy people can book it for their weddings, but there's no tabernacle or anything other than the paintings to suggest that it's primary purpose is to facilitate the worship of God. I wonder whether they de-consecrate it for secular events and re-consecrate it before Mass? Surely, they would have wined and dined Porsche's clients in a consecrated place. Or would they? http://www.autonews.com/article/201...pany-to-host-event-in-vaticans-sistine-chapel
I believe that PF has got this one Right! "Pope Francis Adds ‘Fourth Path’ to Official Sainthood" http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...ancis-adds-fourth-path-to-official-sainthood/ I'm surprised that this 4th way to Sainthood was not instituted long ago. Being an old Military Man I can think of five Catholic Chaplains of the top of my head: Fr. Al Schmitt of Oklahoma. https://www.catholic.com/magazine/o...r-pearl-harbor-the-sacrifice-of-fr-al-schmitt Fr. John Washington of Dorchester. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._Washington Fr. Emil Kapaun, MOH - Korea http://fatherkapaun.org/father-kapaun Fr. Vincent Capodanno, MOH - Vietnam https://www.mca-marines.org/mcaf-blog/2011/05/16/father-vincent-capodanno-and-meaning-sacrifice GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!
I don't think, CrewDog, that it's a new path to sainthood. Even in primary school, I was taught that "Greater love hath no man than to give up his life for another" meant certain Heaven for the person sacrificing his own life and that only saints are in Heaven. Does the change mean that people like firefighters who lose their lives while saving others can be canonised but haven't been in the past? If so, it's a good change. Does it mean that no miracles will be required? Sorry if my questions have already been answered in your link. I'm in a rush out and haven't time to read it.
Yes but I do wish that they keep the requirement for miracles which they tossed. If someone is a saint they should be able to work a couple of miracles from heaven.
Yes but they only have to have one. Not two like the others. If it is Gods will...the miracle will come.
My questions were answered in the Breitbart article linked in CrewDog's post. It's a very well written explanation by Thomas D. Williams, worth quoting in full. Thanks to CrewDog for the link. Thanks, also, to Fallen Saint for the additional information about one miracle being required. "Pope Francis has established a new path to canonization as a saint, adding the “free and voluntary offering of one’s life” to the three previously recognized ways to sainthood. In a new letter bearing the Latin title Maiorem hac Dilectionem, taken from Jesus’ wordsthat “no one has greater love than the one who lays down his life for his friends,” the Pope has cleared the way to official sainthood for those lay down their lives for someone else out of Christian love in imitation of Jesus Christ. Until now, the two ordinary ways to being declared a saint were martyrdom for Christ and the practice of “heroic virtue.” A third, exceptional way also existed: that of “ancient veneration” of a person as a saint. According to Catholic teaching, every person who goes to heaven is a saint, but a small percentage of these are officially recognized as saints and put forward as examples and models of a closer following of Christ. The new decision follows on a process carried out by the Vatican Congregation for the Causes of Saints, which asked “whether those servants of God are not worthy of beatification who, inspired by the example of Christ, freely and deliberately offered and sacrificed their lives for their brothers and sisters in a supreme act of charity.” While this new “fourth way” of the offering of one’s life closely resembles both the path of martyrdom and that of heroic virtue in certain respects, it has been put forward to underscore a specific form of heroic Christian witness. While resembling martyrdom in the aspect of heroic self-giving up to death, it differs because there is no persecutor who puts the Christian to death out of hatred for the faith. A typical example of this new path to sainthood was the case of the Polish Saint Maximilian Kolbe, who freely offered his life in the Auschwitz concentration camp to save another inmate who had been condemned to death. Kolbe, a Franciscan priest, was arrested by the Gestapo on February 17, 1941 for the crime of harboring Jews. Soon after, he was sent to the Auschwitz concentration camp as prisoner #16670, where he was sentenced to heavy labor. In July of 1941, the Deputy Commander of Auschwitz ordered 10 men to be chosen at random to be starved to death in an underground bunker, in punishment for three prisoners having escaped from the camp. When Franciszek Gajowniczek heard that he had been selected, he cried out “My wife! My children!” At this point, Kolbe stepped forward and volunteered to die in his place. “I am a Catholic priest from Poland; I would like to take his place, because he has a wife and children,” Kolbe said. When Pope John Paul II canonized Maximilian Kolbe in 1982, he departed from protocol and declared Kolbe to be a “martyr,” rather than a “confessor.” According to the new Vatican disposition, Kolbe would have been declared a saint for the fact of offering his life for another. Kolbe is the patron saint of the pro-life movement, and was declared by Pope John Paul to be “the patron saint of our difficult century.” Kolbe’s canonization was attended by Franciszek Gajowniczek, by this time in his 90’s – the man whose place Father Maximilian took in the death cell at Auschwitz."
