Hi, I am really struggling to understand certain parts of a homily t he Holy Father gave set forth on Vatican Radio.(Since it is set forth on this official Church radio station I am sure it is a true translation not garbled by the media) Here is the link: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-the-christian-life-proclaims-the-road-to-reco Pope: The Christian life proclaims the road to reconcilation with God Vatican Radio) Christian life is not a spa therapy "to be at peace until Heaven," but it calls us to go out into the world to proclaim that Jesus "became the sinner" to reconcile men with the Father. These were Pope Francis’ words during his homily at Mass Saturday at the Casa Santa Martha. The Christian life is not staying in a corner to carve a road which takes you into heaven, but it's a dynamic that encourages one to stay "on the road" to proclaim that Christ has reconciled us to God, by becoming sin for us. In his usual profound and direct way, Pope Francis focuses on a passage from the Letter to the Corinthians, from today's liturgy, in which St. Paul very insistent, almost "in a hurry", uses the term "reconciliation"five times. "What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it's not it ... True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us. " It is the beauty and the "scandal" of the redemption brought by Jesus and it is also the "mystery, says Pope Francis, from which Paul draws" zeal "that spurs him to" move forward " telling everyone" something so wonderful "the love of a God" who gave up his Son to death for me. " Yet, explains Pope Francis, there is a risk of "never arriving at this truth" in the moment when "we 'devalue a little the Christian life", reducing it to a list of things to observe and thus losing the ardor, the force of the '"love that is inside" of it: "But philosophers say that peace is a certain ordered tranquility: everything is tidy and quiet ... That is not the Christian peace! Christian peace is an uneasy peace, not a quiet peace: it is an uneasy peace, which goes on to carry this message of reconciliation. The Christian Peace pushes us to move forward. This is the beginning, the root of apostolic zeal. Apostolic zeal is not to go forward to persuade and make statistics: this year Christians in this country have grown, in this movement ... Statistics are good, they help, but that is not what God wants from us ,is to persuade... What the Lord wants from us is to announce this reconciliation, which is his own core message . " Concluding his homily the Pope recalls the inner anxiety of Paul. Pope Francis underlines that which defines the "pillar" of Christian life, namely, that "Christ became sin for me! And my sins are there in his body, in his soul! This - says the Pope - it's crazy, but it's beautiful, it's true! This is the scandal of the Cross! " "We ask the Lord to give us this concern to proclaim Jesus, to give us a bit of 'that Christian wisdom that was born from His pierced side of love. Just a little to convince us that the Christian life is not a spa therapy: to be at peace until Heaven ... No, the Christian life is the road in life with this concern of Paul. The love of Christ urges us on, it pushes us on, with this emotion that one feels when one sees that God loves us. We ask this grace. I draw your attention to one segment of this interview as follows. "What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it's not it ... True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example,it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us. " I am lost in this. I totally cannot understand. Is this Catholic teaching? I thought the intention of Confessing our sins was a , 'firm resolve' not to sin again? But how can we have a 'Firm resolve' if we are telling Christ , 'I will sin again@ I am not contradicting the Holy Father. I just don't understand this , can anyone square the circle for me? Lost, lost ,lost.
Also the Holy Father said, 'When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us.' But this is what I have been doing my entire life! Going to confession ,asking God to forgive me and He taking my sins away. This is what I was taught from childhood. Was I, am I wrong to think this? Lost, lost lost. I am not in the least critciising the Holy Father in any way, but I am totally baffled. Can someone please explain. Also I do not think I am a stupid person. But billions of Catholics are listening to this, do any of them understand it either? Aren't they just as lost as I am? Forgive me, if you say they do understand, but I very much doubt it. Please, please, please can someone explain?
Then there is this, from a very reputable web site: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350623?eng=y
I will say this though...and yes perhaps this is indeed a criticism. When I read the Gospel, Christs Words, they are crystal clear. When I read the Holy Fathers I am constantly struggling with grey mist and shadows. But what do I know? Lost. Lost Lost.
Well, anyway. I am going to print this homily off and take it to the Jesuits up the street and see if they can explain it. But, God forgive me, can I trust them? I wish Padre Pio was still alive and I would have gone to Italy and asked him. I know some folks who work in the Friary there and they would have let me in to see him. Still I will go to him in prayer and listen to the Jesuits. But surely it should not be necessary for me to do all this? Surely the Holy Father should be speaking in words that a poor, simple, lost sheep such as myself can easily understand?
Padraig said....I am really struggling to understand certain parts of a homily t he Holy Father gave set forth on Vatican Radio.(Since it is set forth on this official Church radio station I am sure it is a true translation not garbled by the media) Well if your confused, and Im also confused , and we are the minority of Catholics in the world who actually care, then we are in serious trouble.Pope Francis says some very good things ,and then...?
I still suspect some problems with translation. The Pope says not only do we confess but reconcile in a profound way. Sin is personal so we can say to Jesus my sin is your sin now set me free. The Pope speaks of liberation from sin.
I'm certainly no theologian and I hope that you report back to us what the Jesuits say. But in reading the CCC, it seems that perhaps the Pope's homily is taking these sections of the catechism: Jesus substitutes his obedience for our disobedience 615 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous."443 By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who "makes himself an offering for sin", when "he bore the sin of many", and who "shall make many to be accounted righteous", for "he shall bear their iniquities".444 Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.445 Jesus consummates his sacrifice on the cross 616 It is love "to the end"446 that confers on Christ's sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as atonement and satisfaction. He knew and loved us all when he offered his life.447 Now "the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died."448 No man, not even the holiest, was ever able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a sacrifice for all. The existence in Christ of the divine person of the Son, who at once surpasses and embraces all human persons, and constitutes himself as the Head of all mankind, makes possible his redemptive sacrifice for all. 617 The Council of Trent emphasizes the unique character of Christ's sacrifice as "the source of eternal salvation"449 and teaches that "his most holy Passion on the wood of the cross merited justification for us."450 And the Church venerates his cross as she sings: "Hail, O Cross, our only hope."451 Our participation in Christ's sacrifice 618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator between God and men".452 But because in his incarnate divine person he has in some way united himself to every man, "the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery" is offered to all men.453 He calls his disciples to "take up [their] cross and follow [him]",454 for "Christ also suffered for [us], leaving [us] an example so that [we] should follow in his steps."455 In fact Jesus desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its first beneficiaries.456 This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother, who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his redemptive suffering.457 Apart from the cross there is no other ladder by which we may get to heaven.458 The whole section is in link here http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
"For our sake God made him to be sin" 602 Consequently, St. Peter can formulate the apostolic faith in the divine plan of salvation in this way: "You were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers. . . with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was destined before the foundation of the world but was made manifest at the end of the times for your sake."402 Man's sins, following on original sin, are punishable by death.403 By sending his own Son in the form of a slave, in the form of a fallen humanity, on account of sin, God "made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."404 603 Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had sinned.405 But in the redeeming love that always united him to the Father, he assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin, to the point that he could say in our name from the cross: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"406 Having thus established him in solidarity with us sinners, God "did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all", so that we might be "reconciled to God by the death of his Son".407
I am not a theologian but could it be the difference between objective or thomistic theology, and subjective or phenomenology theology. I am still confused over this theology that PJP2 introduced, phenomenology. Being raised as a "thomist" I believe things are objectively defined. However, the theology of PJP2 and perhaps the current pope in one of phenomenology. It was described to me as follows: I say that that object I am sitting on is a chair, you say it is a step ladder. We are both correct, even though objectively it is a chair. The one thing that I am so impressed with the pope can be summed up by the following: I love the sinner but hate the sin. The pope "really and substantially" loves the sinner in an incredibly tangibly way and yet, still hates the sin. In this way he is incredibly "Christ-like" in ways I could never even imagine. This is where I believe he is chllenging all of us.
Lets face the truth......... if anyone else had said what Pope Francis said above, we would call this heretical teachings not supported from both biblical or traditional teachings of the Catholic faith. I pray that he further expands on what he has said here. Christ did not become the sinner, but the redeemer of sin!!!
Well, I can understand Christs role in taking our sins on Himself. He is the living 'Scape goat' so to speak..our Saviour. I was fine with this This was always Church Teaching So to speak of Christ , 'Becoming a sinner for us'. yes , not that the sinless one could sin, but in the sense of being a 'scapegoat' yes. The Lamb of God the 'Acceptable sacrifice. Yes No problem. I stumble at this: 'When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us.' But I understand it is probably a misunderstanding with use of language. Fine. But you know I recall several different Popes since I was a child and I always understood what they said. Actually you know to be honest I have kind of switched Pope Francis off as he is kind of beyond me, but someone sent me an email asking me to explain this and I can't. No doubt the Pope is right and its fine, but I will still try to keep him switched of I think.
Oh wait I suddenly understand now. Yes. It took a while, but now I see. He is talking about the role of Christ's sacrifice. It took a while but I got there.
I think Paul is right he has a different path of thought to the Traditional one I was brought up with. He is saying the same things but in a totally different way.
Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15). Is there something wrong with tradition? Something isn't right. I will stand with the Pope,..but something isn't right.
I don't really know the Holy Fathers mind. But this way of expressing the sacrament is very deep and beautiful. It occurs to me that this insight would be much more attractive to, say, our Protestant sisters and brothers than the one I was taught? Perhaps this is an Ecumenical outreach? Also I do not know the minds of the young but perhaps this would be more relevant? In either case I will stick with the old ways that I know otherwise I will comed own with headaches and high blood pressure. This reminds me of an event in the life of Padre Pio. One time the friars where talking together during the huge stages of Vatican 2. One of the brothers as a joke suggested Franciscans might drop their habit and were ordinary clothes. Poor Padre Pio burst out crying at the very idea and it took the old saint a while to settle down. Also of course he had special permission to say the Tridentine Mass till he died. I am afraid catching up in this new way of doing things would have me burst out crying too. So I'll stick with what I know. Oh well, it's God Church , no doubt he can look after it.
Wonderful interview. I may buy the book, /I am not sure. It might depress me. I am sorry, did I mishear? Did either himself or Michael Voris refer to the Holy Father as , 'A modernist'? I tired to turn the video back to rehear but could not find the spot.
Modernist? This is something I have struggled with. What would that make PJP2? The pope who changed almost everything including the holy rosary our Blessed Mother gave us! I still can't pray his luminous mysteries. What about all the modernist bishops he gave us. JP2 the Great? Even harder to stomach after the pedophilia scandal on his watch. And what about phenomenlogy? Anybody? Oh I know what Fr Gobbi said about him, but he was wrong about the triumph. I think we all have to be careful....
