FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The Pope's First Commandment Problem
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
A little old, but it shows the chastisement the Church is going through. I will not comment on it, but maybe you can get the picture:

https://culbreath.wordpress.com/2014/10/...t-problem/


Modified by Vox to add text:


The Pope’s First Commandment Problem

“I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.” – Exodus 20:1-3

    “Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.” – Matthew 22:36-40

It’s official: Pope Francis has a problem with the First Commandment.

The first sign was his homily on July 3, 2013, in which he said that knowledge of Jesus Christ cannot be arrived at through “meditation”, which in his words is the “path of the gnostics”. Meditation – which might also be called contemplation or adoration – is a work that is focused on God alone, and has been the vehicle for countless saints in their ascent to God. According to the pope, one can only find Jesus through “His wounds … [in] the body of your wounded brother” – that is, through loving one’s neighbor.

The second sign was his bold inversion of the commandments as given to us by Jesus. In his Apostolic Exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium” (par 161), the pope stated that the “first and greatest of the commandments” is to “love one another”, which of course is contrary to the words of Our Lord in Sacred Scripture. This mistake is so obvious and fundamental that I expected it to be corrected eventually. But, alas, eleven months later it’s still there in the document. As every Catholic schoolboy has been taught, the first and greatest commandment is “thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind”. Jesus could hardly have taught otherwise, as the First Commandment of the Decalogue imposes this primary obligation upon all believers.

The revolutionary nature of this error cannot be overstated. It undermines the Church’s entire theology. There are, after all, Christian duties that are prior to love of neighbor. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that adherence to the First Commandment – which derives from the love of God – demands sacrifice, worship, and adoration; the assent of faith to all that God has revealed; obedience to the divine and natural law; and public witness to divine truth. The Catechism states clearly that “adoration is the first act of the virtue of religion” and is directed to God alone. The First Commandment also forbids sins like idolatry, witchcraft, superstition, blasphemy, sacrilege, heresy, schism, apostasy, atheism, agnosticism, voluntary doubt, religious indifference, despair, and presumption. Whereas obedience to the commandment to love God results naturally in the love of neighbor, the same cannot be said of the reverse. The love of God is the necessary foundation for properly loving one’s neighbor.

And now we have more confusion on the matter from Pope Francis. It’s simply not credible to say that his previous statements were just careless “off the cuff” musings, mistranslations, or media spin. No, Pope Francis has a real problem with the First Commandment. In yesterday’s Angelus the pope chose a different approach. Rather than ignore the first and greatest commandment altogether, as he has done in the past, he chose to present the first and greatest commandment (i.e., the love of man for God), and the second which is like unto it (i.e., the love of man for neighbor), as though they are totally merged without hierarchy or distinction, as though one did not have priority over the other. It is the error of false equivalence. The practical effect is the same as before: seek God in your neighbor first, to the exclusion of divinely revealed truth (doctrine) and the demands it imposes. Vatican Insider/La Stampa reports:

    “In the midst of the dense forest of rules and regulations – the legalisms of yesterday and today – Jesus shines a ray of light that helps us to make out two faces: the face of the Father and that of our brother,” Pope Francis said at today’s Angelus. “Today’s Gospel reminds us that the whole law of God is summed up in love for God and neighbour.” The “novelty” of Christ’s teaching consists “in the union of the two commandments – love of God and love of neighbour – proving that they are inseparable and complementary, they are two sides of the same coin.” …

    “Remember this: love is the measure of faith,” Francis said speaking off the cuff. “How much do you love? What is your faith like? I believe as much as I love.” “A visible sign that the Christian can show to witness God’s love to the world and to others, to his family, is the love of his brethren,” Francis observed. This is why, he explained, “the commandment of love of God and neighbour is the first, because it is not high on the list of the commandments. Jesus does not put it at the top, but at the center, it is the heart from which everything eradicates and to which everything returns.”

Ah, so the two commandments are now merged as one! And this new merged commandment of Francis is not even “high on the list of commandments” or “at the top” – that’s too much like the old scholasticism, I suppose – but “at the center”, whatever that means. Are the commandments are now arranged in a circle? And aren’t we supposed to start with the existential peripheries? Nevermind …



Interesting that no one commented on this (might be because the text wasn't originally included!)  I find this pretty radical -- about as radical as it gets.
I run into this attitude quit a bit, things like people quoting the bible claiming that Jesus said "I give you a new commandment to love one another as I have loved you". When pointing out that Jesus first said love your Lord with all your heart and soul first the response is usually lacking the love for one another.  Titanic

Needless to say, assuming Pope Francis has the best of intentions, either his lack of precision in speaking is making our case extremely difficult to make against radical liberals and atheists. Either that or his lack of precision in speaking is intentional and he is a radical liberal. Either way we know who wins in the end  Grin
I suppose the author would take issue also with S. Paul, who, apparently, also has problems with the First Commandment; from Galatas 5:13-14
Quote:For you, brethren, have been called unto liberty: only make not liberty an occasion to the flesh, but by charity of the spirit serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Really, I think the only thing the pope is expressing here is a quite Iohannine theology (this is basically the main content of the first letter of John).
Of course, I would be much calmer if the pope were to stress love for God as the first thing (not only chronologically, but morally and ontologically). But by what he said in those citations I really cannot say that he's a heretic.
(11-18-2014, 09:02 AM)Renatus Frater Wrote: [ -> ]I suppose the author would take issue also with S. Paul, who, apparently, also has problems with the First Commandment; from Galatas 5:13-14
Quote:For you, brethren, have been called unto liberty: only make not liberty an occasion to the flesh, but by charity of the spirit serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Really, I think the only thing the pope is expressing here is a quite Iohannine theology (this is basically the main content of the first letter of John).
Of course, I would be much calmer if the pope were to stress love for God as the first thing (not only chronologically, but morally and ontologically). But by what he said in those citations I really cannot say that he's a heretic.

I concur.
I pray for this pope. But it's becoming even harder and harder day by day to ignore the alleged prophecy of St Francis and other such prophecies, especially with pastors keeping quiet. And if a schism does happen starting next year, it looks like all the churches around me will go with whatever nonsense may be preached at the top because they believe it too. Where does one get the sacraments if, theoretically, every priest around you follows a heretic pope? The two conflicting thought are: 1) whether all Christians endowed with reason have an obligation to recognize and resist heresy; 2) whether we have to wait for someone high up to declare the pope a formal heretic. I understand we can't judge formal heresy. This is a question that greatly disturbs me. When we take communion, are we not declaring that we are in communion with the pope? What happens in the worst case scenario where the priests consecrating the bread and wine recognize a heretic as pope?

I won't say what I think about the things he's saying day by day, but I really want to know how one could get saved if Rome loses the faith and the Church is eclipsed. I think this is a pragmatic question that we should all be asking at this point. A backup plan would be great. I don't know what to do at that point. There is no SSPX where I live.
(11-18-2014, 11:03 AM)ThomasTheDoubter Wrote: [ -> ]I pray for this pope. But it's becoming even harder and harder day by day to ignore the alleged prophecy of St Francis and other such prophecies, especially with pastors keeping quiet. And if a schism does happen starting next year, it looks like all the churches around me will go with whatever nonsense may be preached at the top because they believe it too. Where does one get the sacraments if, theoretically, every priest around you follows a heretic pope? The two conflicting thought are: 1) whether all Christians endowed with reason have an obligation to recognize and resist heresy; 2) whether we have to wait for someone high up to declare the pope a formal heretic. I understand we can't judge formal heresy. This is a question that greatly disturbs me. When we take communion, are we not declaring that we are in communion with the pope? What happens in the worst case scenario where the priests consecrating the bread and wine recognize a heretic as pope?

I won't say what I think about the things he's saying day by day, but I really want to know how one could get saved if Rome loses the faith and the Church is eclipsed. I think this is a pragmatic question that we should all be asking at this point. A backup plan would be great. I don't know what to do at that point. There is no SSPX where I live.

TtD, Jesus told us the Gates of Hell will not prevail. Say the Rosary, stop worrying about the Pope. Pray for yourself, the Pope and the Church; for your own spiritual health...
I pray the Rosary everyday. I'm just trying to think of a backup plan for the worst possible case. If the Dogmas of the faith will be preserved what does that mean outside of Portugal?  What do the words at La Salette mean? I'm not going to jump ship but is it even possible to ignore the pope and just take communion? If the priests start calling the Eucharist a symbolic shared meal amongst the brotherhood of men, teach that homosexuality is a gift instead of a disorder and start interfaith services with all the religions of the world is it possible to ignore it all, take communion and not sin against God? Is it prudent to disregard even the possibility and have no idea what to do if it happens.

I'm not jumping ship. But I really think things are going to get much worse before they get better, and that we live in a time of a great trial. I don't want to fail the trial.
The devil often tempt us by presenting the future and the possibility of our future sins.

The theological virtues are given today, and its now where/when we must respond to God's love, not tomorrow.

As our Lord says
Second Person of the Trinity Wrote:Be not therefore solicitous for to morrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof.