Video of Pope Francis going to Confession
#71
(03-29-2014, 04:54 PM)Miriam_M Wrote:
(03-29-2014, 04:35 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: The second post in this thread, my emphasis:
Miriam Wrote:Are you serious?  It brought tears to your eyes because you actually assume that other popes were not humble (perhaps more so), repentant, pious, and regular in the practice of the sacrament, but just didn't make a photographic production of it?  !!!   Un.  Real.

It was a question, Vox, designed to encourage the poster to consider why he would be so moved by a photograph of a confession event as opposed to the historical reality of every previous Pope engaging in frequent confession.

It was not an accusation.  An invitation to consider the logical and rational extension of a reaction to something which every Pope has done, except that none of them brought cameras with them.  An emotional reaction would make sense if it had never been done before.

Again, he's entitled to his different opinion from mine.  I'm entitled not to be persecuted for having a different and equally legitimate reaction.  I'm entitled not to be challenged on the legitimacy of my Catholicity just because Pope Francis doesn't make me weep when he participates in the sacrament.  That's his job, and I don't think he deserves praise or congratulations for it, any more than any of us deserve praise and congratulations for participating in the same sacrament.

I have been called vile names, including being accused of "hypocrisy" and "calumny" for not sharing in the reflexive group emotion.

Absurd.

It wasn't a mere question; it was an accusation ending in a question mark. You indicated that you think he felt emotional "because [he] actually assume[ s ] that other popes were not humble (perhaps more so), repentant, pious, and regular in the practice of the sacrament, but just didn't make a photographic production of it?"

Emotional reactions don't only come in reaction to things that haven't been done before. A woman will typically cry in joy after each kid she gives birth to, for ex.

No one has accused you of being anything because you didn't cry at seeing the video (I didn't cry either. So what?) What is bothering people is your intimating that others are "spiritually malformed" or ignorant of the Historical fact that all Popes have gone to Confession because those others had an emotional reaction to seeing the Pope go to Confession. Alongside that are accusations that the Pope was just wanting a "photo-op" instead of a Sacrament -- something you seem to want to back away from, but without admitting that that is what you intimated with your first post.

Reply
#72
(03-29-2014, 04:54 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: If it wouldn't be for "personal aggrandizement," then what sort of aggrandizement would it be for?

I explained it already.  You must have missed that recent post.  I agree with ACT on the purpose, which is political, not personal.  PF has made his intentions clear from the get-go, and he is being consistent in those intentions.

Have a lovely day, seriously, but you have very much misinterpreted me, and I think it would help if you didn't attenuate this further.  Thank you again.
:)
God Bless.
Reply
#73
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.
Reply
#74
(03-29-2014, 05:00 PM)Miriam_M Wrote:
(03-29-2014, 04:47 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Re. the bolded, you did make intimations about his motives by posting as you did in the second post of this thread, which I just reposted above.

Please let it go, Vox.  You have misinterpreted both my intent and my words.  And by the way, the OP and I have had a private conversation about it. I have no problem with him, nor he with me.  Please just stop.  (Speaking of assuming intent to others.)  It's very unseemly.  Thank you.

OK, sure. But I'd love to know how I misinterpreted your words (and I don't see anything unseemly about responding to something that doesn't require any specialized knowledge to comphrehend, that is right in front of you, and which a "reasonable man" would interpret in the same way I and most others here have).
Reply
#75
(03-29-2014, 05:05 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: It wasn't a mere question; it was an accusation ending in a question mark.

I am sorry that you interpreted it that way, or that anyone else did.  Again, since the OP is fine, I think it would help if you let this go.

Sorry for my part in any confusion.

:flower: :crucifix:
Reply
#76
(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.
Reply
#77
(03-29-2014, 05:12 PM)Miriam_M Wrote:
(03-29-2014, 05:05 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: It wasn't a mere question; it was an accusation ending in a question mark.

I am sorry that you interpreted it that way, or that anyone else did.  Again, since the OP is fine, I think it would help if you let this go.

Sorry for my part in any confusion.

:flower: :crucifix:

If it's all a big fat misunderstanding; then I apologize to you for accusing you of engaging in calumny and being hypocritical.

May we all at least be happy that our Holy Father goes to Confession and tries to encourage his flock to do so as well. Holy Father may not be encouraging Confession the way we individually may particularly wish he would; but he's encouraging Catholics to go to Confession....that much credit, he at the very least, is entitled to without belittlement.


(03-29-2014, 05:14 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: 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.

:amen:  :clap:
Reply
#78
(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:
Reply
#79
A spinster? ???

Maybe fr. Z was looking for the positives rather than the negatives.
Reply
#80
(03-29-2014, 06:21 PM)triumphguy Wrote: A spinster? ???

Maybe fr. Z was looking for the positives rather than the negatives.

I was speaking generally, of course: Fr. is one of the cognescenti who is always telling us what the Pope really meant by this or that action or statement (or completely ignoring the doosies even he can't quite deal with).

As for "looking for positives", I like this quote from Dr. von Hildebrand, that "20th century Doctor of the Church":

"Indignation over something evil is just as much a pure value response as enthusiasm for something good.  Because both of these responses are fitting and appropriate with respect to their objects, and are indeed required by them, and because furthermore they both belong together, they both have a value, they are both something positive."

And: "And so we have to emphasize again: the rejection of evil and of sin is a response which is purely positive and morally called-for, and it possesses a high moral value.  One cannot true love God without hating the devil.  One cannot really love the truth without hating error.  One cannot find the truth and grasp it clearly as such without seeing through errors.  Knowledge of truth is inseparably linked with knowledge of error, with the unmasking of error.  All talk about the superiority of 'yes' over 'no', about the 'negativity' of rejecting that which should be rejected is so much idle chatter."

In other words, actually, looking for positives isn't necessarily wise or good.  Rather, we should see things as they are.

(This should not be confused with giving souls the benefit of the doubt in subjective matters.)
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)