The temptation to remind us that Jesus said the world would hate his disciples, and then comment on the disjunction between that and the Pope’s reception in America, has not always been resisted, and, with the Synod on the Family almost upon us, one can almost touch the tension; whatever the Pope’s achievements, making his flock feel as though they were safe from wolves appears not to be one of them. We should, I think, beware of seeing things in terms of the American ‘culture wars’ however tempting that is. To say that a man opposed to abortion and same-sex marriage is a ‘liberal’ is a strange definition of that word. It would be a brave person who said they knew precisely what the Pope wants on the issue of marriage, but in so far as I can work it out, it looks rather as though he’d like to make it less difficult for people to get a decision on whether their failed marriage was valid or not, whilst tightening up on marriage preparation; that might not pleases everyone, but it seems an over-reaction ot see it as Catholic approval of divorce; but then over-reaction is something Pope Francis attracts in the way wild flowers do honey bees.
Everything we see of the Pope is through the media, and the media always has its own agenda; that he speaks in Spanish and that the media in pretty illiterate when it comes to Catholic teching, all combine to make the problem of public perception even more difficult. It seems unfair to criticise Francis for talking about the need for ‘love’ and ‘mercy’ by saying the Church has always preached that, when nothing he has said implies the opposite. It would be equally unbalanced to say that the Church has always practised what it preached; much as those of us here who are Catholics dislike the tone of much that Bosco says about the Church, it is a reminder that some of the things it has done has made such smears easier to believe.
Would it be better for the Church if the Pope were hated and despised? It would, I suppose, depend on what he was being hated for? Those committed to a totalitarian view of same-sex marriage will continue to hate the Pope because he upholds Catholic teachin; the same will be true of those hoping for women priests (not, one would have thought, a hugely popular cause outside Catholics of a certain age?) or for Catholic approval of divorce. Whatever alarmists claim, these things are not going to happen; they cannot as they run counter to the teaching of the Church.
Is it possible, as in the area of declarations of nulluty, to make changes which might be helpful from a pastoral point of view? Yes, it is, and if there are other areas, then the Church has a duty to explore them and to see what can be done. The world has changed, and the pressures it puts on ordinary Catholics are greater in some ways than ever before. Divorce is at an all-time high, family life more complex, and the temptations to which people are exposed likewise. For the Church to react by adapting to these things by accepting them, would be wrong; but it would be wrong for it not to consider how to react to the places in which so many Catholics find themselves. If it is mindful of its own failures in catechesis, that will help.
So yes, it is easy and tempting to imagine that if the world seems to love the Pope, the Pope must be wrong, but we should resist temptation.
I for one have no reaction whatever to popularity; after all, Obama was popular enough to become President twice and the Socialist Bernie Sanders is leading the polls in the Democrat Party for their choice in President. The world is modernist, progressive, socialist and definitely not Catholic. Whether our Pope is a Peronist, or a typical Jesuit raised and fed on Liberation Theology or both is something that the Church will have to decide in the future. But there are facts emerging on the ‘good’ side as there are facts emerging on the ‘bad’ side that do not make the intentions of this Pope all that transparent, even to his own flock. Judge Andrew Napolitano asks a few pertinent questions I think: http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2039-a-papacy-of-novelty
As far as a perspective, which is not American, one need only review much which has been written by Sandro Magister and Marco Tosatti to get a view that has been proven right more times that they were proven wrong. This gem by Tosatti is just the latest, and today we are about to receive a set of ‘new rules’ for the Synod which might might shed some light on the Holy Father’s intentions: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/10/bombshell-secret-parallel-synod-papal.html
Did Edward Pentin, who is highly regarded as an unbiased reporter, get it right when he uncovered what looks like the stacking of the deck or the rigging of the Synod? I am a bit wary of the upcoming rules regarding the Synod and the packing of the Synod with certain players as well as the removal of others. We shall see if the process was merely a sham for an outcome that the Pope already wrote at some point. We’ll see.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We shall, but it is a shame it has to be this way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agree wholeheartedly. It was so much easier a few years ago than it is today. Where did all this confusion eneter in?
LikeLiked by 1 person
In my view it tends to come from the need to use words to obfuscate.
LikeLike
A need? Whose need would that be and by whom?
LikeLiked by 1 person
That, of course is the $64 thousand question
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed it is. I read passages from Leo XIII such as these:
“The underlying principle of these new opinions [he is speaking of Americanism] is that, in order the more easily to attract those who differ from her, the Church should shape her teachings more in accord with the spirit of the age and relax some of her ancient severity and make some concessions to new opinions. Many think that these concessions should be made not only in regard to ways of living, but even in regard to doctrines which belong to the deposit of the faith. They contend that it would be opportune, in order to gain those who differ from us, to omit certain points of her teaching which are of lesser importance, and to tone down the meaning which the Church has always attached to them. It does not need many words, beloved son, to prove the falsity of these ideas if the nature and origin of the doctrine which the Church proposes are recalled to mind. … Let it be far from anyone’s mind to suppress for any reason any doctrine that has been handed down. Such a policy would tend rather to separate Catholics from the Church than to bring in those who differ. (Testem Benevolentiae)” . . . written in 1899 and see everything he objects to as the new excuse used by nearly everyone . . . and you wonder how it became so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Again, a key question – changing attitudes is fine. The way in which homosexuals were treated in the past was bac, so a change is good. But doctrine cannot change.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed not, not should practive and practical concerns that might perhaps bring scandal to the Church were always, in the past, of great importance. Today, it is when a well known pro-abort politician receives the sacraments or an openly gay celebrity in in the sanctuary of the Church reading as a lector during a Papal Mass, one wonders if the Church cares anymore about an obvious appearance of scandal. I, like many others, are stunned at this progression of this attitude and the rate of change that I have witnessed in my short 23 years of being a Catholic. It seems to cry out that we no longer care about the appearance of scandal and one wonders why we don’t???
LikeLiked by 1 person
Who are we to judge? 😇
LikeLiked by 1 person
Poor lost lambs, who are starting to feel like we being herded up for a great slaughter, perhaps?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m beginning to wonder exactly who is lost?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Me too . . . I just don’t want to get in line with all the rest of the lambs to be led to the slaughterhouse. Sometimes the voice sounds familiar and at other times it sounds to be but an impersonation and the actions and movements are not familiar to me. A sooting voice at times but not at all convincing at other times.Not so sure this the prophecy of St. Francis is not for our times: “Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them, not a true pastor, but a destroyer.”
I certainly hope not but I withold both judgment and blind obedience at this point of examination: prudence, fortitude, temperance, justice must be kept in mind. I am right now dealing with the first 3 of these Cardinal Virtues before I examine the todays dilemmas via the standard of the last of these virtues. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yup, waiting and seeing seems the way to go.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know no other . . . though a day of decision making may not escape this generation. I always hoped I’d be long gone before I was asked to do so . . . or asked for some form of martyrdom. But whatever happens, it is part of the plan of Christ for His Church. We know he has sent us many trials in the past so I guess we should not be surprised. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have been here before. A large helping of fudge will be on offer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aye, and I won’t get to eat it because of my diabetes . . . just my luck!
LikeLiked by 1 person
BTW: What happened to the ‘Like Box’ that is on the other posts?
LikeLike
I hadn’t noticed it had gone – will look into it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said.
LikeLike
C, of course only Jesus knows, but I think it would save far far more souls for the Church to acknowledge that she has made a grave error some many hundreds of years ago when that first annulment was granted. Even you would have to say that it would be a super fast answer that many are asking of the Church. No one seems to even consider that direction.
LikeLike
And addressing the idea of Pope Francis popularity. The man is supposed to be Catholic. Backing up on Kim Davis (Francis had already defended her as being a conscientious objector) and doubling down with his friends, those two sodomites, might not be the way to be Catholic, but might be the way to be popular. I may be wrong but IMO those pictures with his friends should have been accompanied with audio asking them to go and sin no more. The Vicar of Christ does have the duty to be like Christ and in so doing save souls.
I’m not sorry that many times Mundabor has unabashed Catholic thoughts. https://mundabor.wordpress.com/2015/10/03/the-other-side-of-jesuitism/
LikeLike