Catholicism poses a fundamental challenge to the contemporary belief that everything is relative (except, of course, the truth that there is no such thing as truth). Truth is the person of Christ, and what flows from that belief. It is precisely for this reason that there is concern when any occupant of the See of St Peter seems not to be giving a clear statement of Catholic belief; if the trumpet gives an uncertain sound … and all that. As an academic I am always happy to stir up thinking by questioning the assumptions my students have about their subject, but what is appropriate in one arena is not in another. I happen to believe that the University where I work is a force for good in the world, and even if I had doubts about some of the things it does (I don’t), I would not raise the issue in public. It remains a mystery to me why Pope Francis cannot follow that simple rule.
One lesson he, and the rest of us, can learn from the postmodernists is that it is not the authorial voice which is authoritative; it is what is heard, as much as what was meant by the author, which counts. If people keep getting a certain impression about what the Pope is saying, that does not mean they are right, but it does mean that those who advise him might point out that greater clarity would be useful.
Of course, there will always be those whose perspective is such that they will misread what is said. One of the things which has concerned me from the start of this Papacy is that from the moment Francis stepped out onto the balcony, there were those who were criticising him. They might want to tell us that everything that has happened since justifies their doubts, even as those who oppose them would tell us that such a reaction os simple self-confirmation bias. From there we descend into the world of ‘fake news’. As with President Trump, those who have no time for him will read everything he does and says as confirmation that they are right. Those on the Right who take the view that such a reaction simply proves the Left will never give Trump a break, might, if they are critical of Pope Francis, like to ponder the irony that in the eyes of the Pope’s supporters, they are doing what liberals do to Trump. As so it goes on.
In all of this, what of the faithful? As with much of our political discourse, it may be a sobering reminder that most people do not follow what obsesses parts of the blogosphere.
The Pope is infallible only in certain matters and on certain issues. If the impression has gained ground over the last thirty years that almost everything the Pope says is to be taken as Gospel, then that certainly would not be the fault of those who spent so much time criticising St Pope John Paul II. The irony of those people now shifting their position to the one they used to criticise is not lost on some of us; nor is the irony of their opponents changing places with them.
Contrary to what is sometimes implied, the Catholic Church has always had a lively intellectual life. How could it be otherwise in a living Church? In a world with 24/7 media this allows more of us access to that process, but we should remember that just as we would object to anyone impugning our good faith in taking up a position, so others will object if we do the same. Tone influences what is heard. From His Holiness down, all who engage in such discussions would do well to remember that.
Scoop said:
It is true that the ‘tone’ of a discussion, particularly along the lines of moral teaching in the Church, should reflect sober, rational, and consistent thought as handed down through the ages. The tone is usually set by the Pope in such an instance: starting from his, hardly hidden, insults of the clergy to his dismissals and punishments of those who oppose his novel teachings or the dismantling of bastions of traditional thought such as the Franciscans of the Immaculate, the Knights of Malta or the sacking of Cardinals in various Congregations in the Vatican only to be replaced by notably pro-homosexualist and notorious yes men.
I am not sure we are seeing a ‘tone’ develop within the Church (due to fear of reprisals) but for sure it is not lost on the internet which responds with a tone that is an echo of the tone which the Pope himself initiated. It is also interesting to note that Pope will not engage in a dialogue with the conservative Cardinals and Bishops on anything theological but acts as though his words are self-evident truths to be accepted without comment.
The Pope said he likes for people of the Church to make a mess and he has shown us how to do that. And now that mess includes him as the sole catalyst for the mess and he doesn’t like it . . . and so the reprisals are fast and furious. His henchmen and closest allies seem to be about the most unorthodox Catholics this past century has reproduced and it is not hard for most people to draw conclusions about someone who takes his company with undesirables. He prefers them, obviously, to those who accept the teachings of the Church.
A quick look at what he has done and what he has failed to do leaves one no option but to be dismayed or (more proactively) to fight against the winds of change. Especially when those winds are not building up the Church but tearing Her apart.
LikeLiked by 2 people
chalcedon451 said:
Indeed. As I suggest, there are arenas where throwing everytuging p
LikeLiked by 2 people
Scoop said:
Huh? 🙂
LikeLike
stevebrown5376 said:
Scoop, let me help you out. C makes lots of good points, but it seems in less than a week since returning, he is laboring. He forgets that he is on one of those postmodern inventions called a blog. Lots of people like this new invention because they can say what they want. But, they also learn that others will do the same, and some of those will be opposed to their point of view. All of a sudden we have to learn to support our views and since most can’t, they stay off the field.
Seems C is making the point that discussion has no use in this divided world. Those that take one side will always oppose those on the other side, so why bother. Tone. Some didn’t like Churchill’s tone, but he saved Europe. Some don’t like Jorge Bergoglio’s tone, but he is changing Catholicism. Some don’t like Trump’s tone, but he is changing our political world.
Fragile sensibilities, and those that have such, need to toughen up and this blog might just be the place.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
It seems incumbent on anyone commenting not to impute to others what they wouldn’t want imputed to them. If Christians cannot manage that degree of charity, then whatever else they say will be at a discount.
If the Pope sounded less like a scold when talking to his own employees, his comments about other employers might resonate more.
LikeLike
stevebrown5376 said:
C, I agree. But, your post struck me as why bother at all. Bergoglio is wrong about lots of things and just because he doesn’t think so, is no reason for me to lay off.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
I wan’t arguing we should not bother, but rather that we should hold ourselves to higher standards
LikeLike
Scoop said:
I guess its a point of view. For instance if I think that I am living at the foot of an active volcano it seems silly for me to spend my time talking to my neighbors about how nice the weather has been lately or worse yet, saying nothing at all. It is unhelpful. More helpful would be a full discussion of the suspicion that there is a danger looming over our heads and that we need to get the experts involved (even if the people demand it) in order to sort out the facts. I think I am more dissatisfied by those who have the positions to look into these things simply remaining quiet or singing a happy tune that nothing is changed. Yet, the rank and file know quite well that something has changed: an explanation seems in order . . . providing they still have a backbone.
LikeLike
Steve Brown said:
Yes, Scoop, well let’s go down this rabbit hole, shall we?
You stated: “I think I am more dissatisfied by those who have the positions to look into these things simply remaining quiet or singing a happy tune that nothing is changed. Yet, the rank and file know quite well that something has changed: an explanation seems in order . . . providing they still have a backbone.”
Now first, please all of you watch this video and then answer the question, has the current Catholic hierarchy remained quiet and continued singing a happy tune that nothing has changed?
After you watch the video answer the question, does the rank and file (this means YOU) know quite well that something has changed?
Lastly, after you watch the video answer the question, did Michael Matt’s tone help or hurt him make his points?
Thank you. Enjoy. https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3736-school-shootings-church-closings-the-neo-catholic-spring
LikeLike
Nicholas said:
You have my sympathy in this situation. I suppose I feel something similar politically. Part of the issue is knowing how to choose your battlegrounds, and, as you say, determining the tone. There are times when what we would call gentleness is inappropriate: Jesus was harsh with the Pharisees, after all. So far as I can see from my view across the Tiber, wisdom probably lies in not getting in the mud with the pigs. Do not speak to every issue the media would have us get embroiled in: speak to what Catholicism has to say about life, about Truth, about charity, and about the war with the elohim.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Philip Augustine said:
Remember during Christ’s passion, when accused his response was often silence.
LikeLiked by 3 people
chalcedon451 said:
I think that is good advice Nicholas.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nicholas said:
Here’s a sobering story on point: a teacher in Bristol was fired for telling a lesbian student, ‘God loves you’. https://www.dailywire.com/news/26804/england-teacher-fired-telling-lesbian-student-god-paul-bois
LikeLike
stevebrown5376 said:
The teacher got fired because he was a christian, so you are very correct, to the unbeliever his tone was excruciatingly harsh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
It is an interesting case, and the appeal will be one to watch
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Heretic said:
What mechanism does the Holy Father use to speak infallibly? Does he say some incantation or push some button? And how does one know when hes speaking infallibly? A lot of you catholics are accusing the Holy Father of making a mess of things. So, hes a fallible man most of the time and then once in a while he goes into a infallible mode or trance.
Life wouldn’t be worth living without you catholics. (;-D
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
DO read up on it Bosco. A bot of education would help you, I am amazed that someone so deeply ignorant of what he is commenting on comments quite this much
LikeLike
Bosco the Heretic said:
Read up on what? Your Mystical Holy Father and his hotline to the almighty? (;-D Life wouldn’t be worth living without you either my good brother. Its always a joy to see grown reasonably educated men taken in by flights of fantasy. Kinda makes me wonder……Hmmmmmm…what in the world is going thru their minds. Quite refreshing actually.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
In other words, although discovering what Papal; Infallibility really means, which would take about 10 minutes, you prefer to hang on to your fake news version; why is no one surprised?
LikeLike
Bosco the Heretic said:
You are great fun. But I find such blind devotion is mostly from cradle cathols. Its odd that a, excuse the pun, Johnny come lately would really fall for the mysticism of this cult. Im not taken aback anymore at the sheer abandon that you cathols have when denying the obvious. Infallible….we all know the definition of the word. I guess we all know….never know about some folks. Good brother falls in line by saying Bosco doesn’t know what it really means. (;-D Ive gone over this befor and everyone knows the drill….the cathols believe and do everything the bible says not to do. The reason is the same each time they are inquired as to why they do these things…..its because Bosco et al don’t know the real meaning of thus and so and thus and so. Next time I get a ticket for running a red light, im going to tell the judge that he doesn’t know the real meaning of stop at the red light and go on the green. (;-D
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
It is sad, Bosco. You have been called out for your ignorance and prefer to confirm it. No one in the BIble ever says “I am saved” and yet it is your creed. You preach a false Gospel, not that of Jesus Christ.
LikeLike
Bosco the Heretic said:
No one says the exact words..”i am saved”, but they say it in other words. As some weirdo people point out that the word “trinity” isn’t in the bible. Is that all you’ve got to besmirch me and my message with?
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
So, you say something is essential, when challenged you have to resort to admitting no one in the Bible says it. The Trinity is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, last time I looked, they were all there
LikeLike
Bosco the Heretic said:
The word trinity isn’t in the bible. I am saved isn’t in the bible. Make you point as to how I am of the devil and how you are godly.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
The Trinity is in the Bible – father, son and holy ghost
LikeLike
Bosco the Heretic said:
People in the new test didn’t go around using the word saved, according to the English translation of the scriptures. Jesus referred to the state of being saved as “born again”. Christians wasn’t used in the new test to refer to the believers or saved. Good brother Paul called the born again “saints”. The word saved is short for…”saved from the wrath of god”. Born again mean one has received a new spirit from heaven, one which knows Jesus personally and was with him in heaven. Being born again saves one from the wrath to come upon the world. Im accused of preaching a false gospel because I allude to being born again. Im accused of saying…”I am saved”, something that I don’t ever remember saying. Im sure if one searches every comment ive ever made in this site, one will not find me saying…..”I am saved”. Ive said I got a new spirit put in me, not because I was out looking for it. I didn’t even know about that. I had never even once opened the bible for myself.
Ive been told that I have a devil. Well, the devil doesn’t have this kind of power to make someone transformed to a bible believing person who know Jesus, and can relate with others that this thing has happened to also. The religious said this about my Master also. The servant is not above his master. Jesus told me to rejoice when they speak all manner of evil against me, for his sake. Notice the proviso…..for his sake. Now if I do evil by stealing or kidnapping, then people can speak evil of me because I didn’t do that in Jesus behalf. But when I am spoken evil of for preaching His gospel , I am to rejoice for being spoken evil of for doing that. But the born again shouldn’t be involved in bad crimes…..they know better.
LikeLike