Video of Pope Francis going to Confession
#81
(03-29-2014, 05:40 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote:
(03-29-2014, 05:14 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(03-29-2014, 05:08 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: The world praises Francis' humility as to the world there is little or no distinction between personal humility (a holy virtue, obviously) and the "humbling" of the See of Peter - which is, on the other hand, a grave evil.

- Pope Francis praises the novelty of collegiality - humility.

- Pope Francis prefers to be called the "bishop of Rome" instead of the supreme pontiff (not that the former isn't a valid title - it's a matter of emphasis) - humility.

- Pope Francis greatly praises the Orthodox, in some manner placing the Holy Catholic Church, the one true faith, on the same level as schismatic churches - humility.

- Pope Francis calls a Protestant "prosperity Gospel" preacher a "brother bishop", again telling the world that there is, after all, nothing much special about the Catholic Church (in the full spirit of Vatican II ecumenism) - humility.

Of course I could go on.

I think this is what's really being objected to, even if everyone in the world that feels the bite of these rebukes of the Lord from the Vatican don't always articulate their impressions perfectly.

Those are all reasonable, serious concerns, ones I share myself, and anyone can start a thread about each or all of them at any time. But they have nothing to do with the Pope going to Confession. If we want to be taken seriously and also destroy the stereotype of the irrational, angry trad, then addressing real concerns and not nit-picking and finding trouble where there isn't any is a good first step to take.

I would say the "trouble" started with Fr. Z - he is the one who started making a "big deal" about this - and Fr. Z is a papalator, a spinster and a pollyannaist.  Honestly, what was his point in devoting a blog post to the pope going to confession?

I'm not sure who you think sounds irrational or angry.  Of course, sometimes just anger is just what the doctor ordered - "he who is not angry when he has cause to be, sins" says the saint.  Often neo-Catholics are perplexed by just anger as they have no real understanding of the crisis in the Church.  And, this crisis - the unprecedented crisis of faith ushered in by Vatican II and presided over by the post-conciliar popes - is, as usual, the real issue here.

That's it from me.  :tiphat:

The "irrational" and "angry" descriptors come from piling on. It's like -- lemme think of an analogy...  OK, say you have a problem with your neighbor. He lets his dog crap in your yard, his trees are always dropping branches into your yard, he's building a deck that encroaches onto your property, he and his wife are always having loud and hellacious fights in the middle of the night, his car has an obnoxiously loud muffler -- and he's often up and running around at night. So you decide to sue him about that deck thing. When you go to Court, the Judge doesn't want to hear about the late-night domestic disturbances, the muffler, the dog crap, etc. All that case is concerned with are property lines. If you go into Court ranting about dog crap, if the Judge asks you a question and you answer it by relating a legally irrlevant story about your neighbor's muffler, he might get fed up and throw your case out of Court.

In this thread, someone posted a video of the Pope going to Confession. But we ended up hearing about:

Quote: Pope Francis praises the novelty of collegiality - humility.

- Pope Francis prefers to be called the "bishop of Rome" instead of the supreme pontiff (not that the former isn't a valid title - it's a matter of emphasis) - humility.

- Pope Francis greatly praises the Orthodox, in some manner placing the Holy Catholic Church, the one true faith, on the same level as schismatic churches - humility.

- Pope Francis calls a Protestant "prosperity Gospel" preacher a "brother bishop", again telling the world that there is, after all, nothing much special about the Catholic Church (in the full spirit of Vatican II ecumenism) - humility.

-- with a side dish of anger over the above, but in the context of talking about the Pope's going to Confession, there being a video of it, what it means.

To the "judge" looking over our shoulders, it shows that some trads aren't able to stay on-topic; that they have this general rage through which they see everything the Pope does and, so, they think the Pope can do no right; that some trads judge someone on X because of what that person does with regard to an unrelated Y, which is illogical and unfair, and so forth. It comes off as bitter and unjust ranting.

I absolutely agree with you that there is a time for righteous anger (and for serious criticism) But there are also times when there is nothing to be angry about or criticize (like the Pope going to Confession and someone happens to film it). And when it is time to be righteously angry, the anger must be expressed in a fair way that doesn't impugn motives we can't know, doesn't go into detraction or calumny, etc. And when it's family, such as our Holy Father, a weak Pope or not, one'd think extra care would be taken. We're even supposed to love our enemies and not do evil against them. Our NOT doing these things is what turns many people away from the trad "movement," and my mission in life, my mission with this site, is to BRING folks to Tradition. I want to curb things that work against that goal. Make sense?

Like I said above (and have said elsewhere many times), charitable, respectful criticism of the Holy Father is fine here, and folks can start threads about things they truly and humbly believe he needs to be "called out" on. I just want for folks to go about it in the right way, the way Jesus expects of us.

Reply
#82
Sorry - a spinster is UK English for an unmarried woman. I figure you mean someone who puts spin on stories?
Reply
#83
as it is for the US. id say "spin doctor" would be the term.
Reply
#84
Why did the pope make a "show" of his going to confession?  Very simply, the Sacrament of Penance has gone by the way of the dogs.  Nobody goes anymore.  The line to the confessional no longer exists.  Further, here in the Philippines where Catholicism is touted to be very strong, we see children make their first confession and that's it.  Almost all of my daughter's friends and classmates shocked her that none ever went to confession yet they go to communion every Sunday.  My own sister, when asked when was the last time she went, she said I don't go anymore cause I don't sin.  Anybody ever notice that the devil is most successful in saying he doesn't exist.  Modernism is very much on the front.

I am sick and tired of reading of pope bashing.  And this from trads who should know better, well -- perhaps they know better because we believe we are more Catholic than the pope.   

My only complaint about the pope(s) is that of his blatant disobedience.  Disobedience is probably the foremost sin that offends the infinite majesty of God.  His beloved Son and the woman He created to be His Son's mother were the only ones who obeyed.  The whole human race was punished because of this.  Now, I don't see how these popes who refuse to obey the simple request to Consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary are in the Eternal Father's favor.  Yet, the Church is set on beatifying them.  ?????
Reply
#85
(03-30-2014, 02:10 AM)Vincentius Wrote: Why did the pope make a "show" of his going to confession?  Very simply, the Sacrament of Penance has gone by the way of the dogs.  Nobody goes anymore.  The line to the confessional no longer exists. 

That makes a very good point. Everyone is talking about "the Francis Effect". Maybe this will be part of it.
Reply
#86
(03-30-2014, 09:06 AM)PrairieMom Wrote:
(03-30-2014, 02:10 AM)Vincentius Wrote: Why did the pope make a "show" of his going to confession?  Very simply, the Sacrament of Penance has gone by the way of the dogs.  Nobody goes anymore.  The line to the confessional no longer exists. 

That makes a very good point. Everyone is talking about "the Francis Effect". Maybe this will be part of it.

I hate to always have to be downer - I really do - but the notion of Francis spurring everyone back to Confession just doesn't jive well with his pontificate.  With his theology.  With the entire post-conciliar New Orientation.

De-facto universal salvation, or something close to it, is still largely the rule of the day.  (Save perhaps for the worst mobsters.)

If Penance is a critical Sacrament, why is there not just no emphasis whatever on conversion to the faith, but a policy dissuading it?

Sure, Francis might suggest that Catholics should go to Confession to become better people.  That is still a shadow of what Catholicism is, and what the Church used to be in practice.

The lines to the confessionals dissipated when the Council was implemented, and, honestly, we're not any closer to reversing that.
Reply
#87
It would always be wonderful if any Pope, at any time or for any reason, were to succeed in leading the faithful to more frequent Confession, more attentive prayer, more conscious Mass attendance, and more attention to the poor, but unfortunately there has been no "Francis Effect" in the U.S.A.  That has been documented.  There have been temporary upsurges of confession, prior to his election, when various U.S. bishops announced coordinated invitations ("The Light's on for you")  in certain dioceses.  (Which of course would be outstanding were that to be more universally coordinated every year, regardless of who is pope.) 

Time will tell if this video succeeds in any "effect," but I have to agree with ACT that the evidence prior to this reinforces the modern Catholic's distaste for the sacrament, confusion about the nature of sin, and the lukewarm, deadened consciences which the Church has yet to vigorously address, post V2.  That is all part-and-parcel of the uninspired and uninspiring atmosphere in too many modern parishes, with their quasi-Protestant liturgies.  And it doesn't give me any satisfaction to say that.  I wish I could be more optimistic, but most weakly practicing Catholics I meet state that they feel confirmed in that weak practice, by this pope.
Reply
#88
is there any time period that neo-trads would pinpoint as the root of what became vatican II?
Reply
#89
The 19th Century.

EDIT: What in the world is a Neo-Trad?
Reply
#90
(03-30-2014, 11:58 AM)Zea mays Wrote: is there any time period that neo-trads would pinpoint as the root of what became vatican II?

Yikes...I would say the "enlightenment" era, so 1675-1775.  But that's a tough question, and not easy to answer in a single sentence.  That'd be a good question for another thread, Zea. 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)