Go forth and sin boldly?? In another in a long stream of apparent attacks on his critics, Pope Francis gave a homily last week accusing Christians who avoid taking risks out of concern for the Ten Commandments as suffering from “cowardliness,” warning that such people become “paralyzed” and unable to “go forward.” “‘Not taking risks, please, no... prudence...Obeying all the commandments, all of them...,'” the pope said, characterizing the thinking of such Christians. “Yes, it’s true, but this paralyzes you too, it makes you forget so many graces received, it takes away memory, it takes away hope, because it doesn’t allow you to go forward.” Such people become “confined souls” who suffer from the sin of “cowardice,” the pope added. “And the presen[ce] of a Christian, of such a Christian, is like when one goes along the street and an unexpected rain comes, and the garment is not so good and the fabric shrinks...Confined souls...This is cowardliness: this is the sin against memory, courage, patience, and hope.” The remarks were made during a homily delivered on January 27th during a mass he was celebrating in Casa Santa Marta, a hotel for pilgrims situated inside of Vatican City where he currently resides. A translation was provided by both Rome Reports and Vatican Radio (the Rome Reports translation is quoted above). The translation published by Vatican Radio rendered the Italian word “pusillanimità” (similar to the English word “pusillanimity”) as “faintheartedness.” However, Italian-English dictionaries translate the word “pusillanime” and “pusillanimità” as “cowardly” and “cowardice.” The pope used the word twice during his homily. In particular, Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, recently decried those clerics who wish to give Holy Communion to remarried Catholics living in adultery. He labeled them “Aaronic” priests who enable their flock to sin against the Ten Commandments, like the High Priest Aaron in the Book of Exodus, who built a golden calf to allow the Israelites to violate the first commandment. In a thinly-veiled critique of Pope Francis’ Amoris Laetitia, delivered at the Lepanto Foundation in Rome, Schneider warned: “This first clerical sin is repeating itself today in the life of the Church.” He added, “Instead of the First Commandment, as it was in the time of Aaron, many clerics, even at the highest levels, substitute in our day, for the Sixth Commandment, the new idol of sexual relations between people who are not validly married, which is, in a certain sense, the Golden Calf venerated by the clerics of our day.” The pope’s statements are the latest in a volley of barbs apparently aimed at critics of Amoris Laetitia in recent weeks. In late December, addressing the issue of resistance to his attempted reforms, Francis decried “malicious resistance” that “takes refuge in traditions, appearances, formalities, in the familiar, or else in a desire to make everything personal, failing to distinguish between the act, the actor, and the action.” The last reference seems to be to those who object to his insinuation in Amoris Laetitia that those civilly remarried and living in an adulterous relationship are not guilty of a sin if they commit it with the intention of maintaining unity for the sake of children, or if they fear they might fall into another sin. On January 20 Francis complained in a homily about “lazy Christians, Christians, who do not have the will to continue, Christians, who do not struggle for a change of things, for new things to come, those that if changed would be a good for everybody.” He made an apparent comparison of his critics to “the doctors of the law who persecuted Jesus,” observing that “these men did everything prescribed by the law. But their mindset was distanced from God. Theirs was an egotistical mindset, focused on themselves: their hearts constantly condemned [others].” https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/w...-of-cowardliness-for-overfocus-on-following-1
Speaking of keeping mouths shut ... We know that PF and Bishops American/otherwise have made veiled and overt complaints about Trump but ..... would anyone here Point-Out like complaints about "Good Catholics" Pelosi, Biden, Kaine, Podesta .................????? .... and their absolute support for unlimited Abortion & Perversion and their vitriol, libel and threats directed at Pro-Life & Pro-Family Christians??? ..... Eh!!! I'm sure that the EU is full of "Good Catholic" Politicians that Bigs of The Church are equally silent about!? http://www.lifenews.com/2017/02/03/...-mom-should-have-had-the-choice-to-abort-you/ GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinio...s-merciful-jesus-and-the-early-christians-saw Is ‘accompanying’ sinners always merciful? Jesus and the early Christians saw it differently February 2, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – “Mercy is inclusive and tends to spread like wildfire in a way that knows no limits,” wrote Pope Francis in his apostolic letter Misericordia et Misera in November of last year. As the months and years have passed since the two Synods on the Family and the publication of Amoris Laetitia, the metaphor seems increasingly apt. Pope Francis’ emphasis on “inclusivity” has become a wildfire that is now threatening to consume the whole of the Catholic Church’s sacramental discipline, its canon law, its evangelical mission, and even its distinctive institutional identity. What began with manipulated meetings of bishops and became a convoluted and ambiguous apostolic exhortation, has now exploded in a free-for-all in which priests and bishops seek to outdo one another in discarding the Church’s restrictions on the reception of the sacraments. Shortly following the publication of Amoris Laetitia in March of last year, the president of the Philippines episcopal conference declared cryptically that “there is always room . . . at the table of sinners.” Then the Buenos Aires bishops announced in September that they would allow divorced and remarried couples to publicly receive the sacraments if they met certain conditions. Now, the bishops of Malta have declared that anyone living in an adulterous “relationship” outside of a previously-contracted marriage may receive Holy Communion and the sacrament of Penance, as long as they have come “to acknowledge and believe” that they are “at peace with God” regarding their behavior. In numerous official declarations, such as Amoris Laetitia and Misericordia et Misera, as well as countless interviews and other informal statements, the pope has emphasized “inclusiveness” and its relationship to mercy. He has made this point so frequently that there appears to be a virtual equivalency between the two. The virtue of “inclusiveness,” as well as its analogues “welcoming” and “accompaniment,” have been repeated so many times by Pope Francis that Religion News Service calls “inclusiveness” the “signature theme of his pontificate.” Christ both includes and excludes However, the Sacred Scriptures, as well as traditional Catholic theology and doctrine, offer a very different understanding of the relationship between inclusiveness and mercy. Although the two are, in certain contexts, related, they are quite often seen as opposed to one another, so much so that exclusivity, as much as inclusivity, is understood as an integral part of the virtue of mercy. Christ himself offers a profound example of mercy and inclusiveness when he forgives those who have repented of their sins and invites them to return to communion with him, such as the woman caught in adultery (John 8: 1-11), and the sinful woman who washes his feet with her tears of remorse (Luke 7: 36-50). He also offers compelling parables of inclusive mercy, such as the prodigal son received by his father after leaving home and living a dissolute life (Luke 15: 11-32). These examples, however, have a common element: the sinner who is received into communion is always repentant. The mercy of God is offered to all, but only those who renounce their immoral behavior are able to receive it. Full inclusion of the sinner in the Christian community is predicated upon his confession of the Christian faith and his abandonment of grave sin. For those who refuse to repent of grave sin, the message of Christ and of the inspired authors of the New Testament is clear: true mercy requires their exclusion from the life of the Church, partially or completely, particularly those who have been baptized and bear the name of “Christian.” The Sacred Scriptures urge the exclusion of sinners from the Christian community so many times that it is difficult to list every passage. However, the most striking examples come from Christ himself, who orders his disciples to rebuke evildoers three times: first privately, then in the company of several others, and finally before the whole Church. Those who will not hear correction are to be ejected from the community of the faithful: “If he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican” (Matt. 18: 17). The counsel of Christ to exclude recalcitrant evildoers from the Church was an analogue to his much more terrifying doctrine of perpetual and eternal exclusion from the community of heaven. In many passages of Scripture, Christ portrays himself as ordering unrepentant sinners to go “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25: 41) and promises of “them that work iniquity” that he will “cast them into the furnace of fire” (Matt. 13: 42). In the Book of Revelation, Christ assures the apostle John that those who “wash their robes” in his blood may “enter by the gates into the city” of heaven, while those who are “dogs, and sorcerers, and unchaste, and murderers, and servers of idols, and every one that loveth and maketh a lie” are left outside (Rev. 22: 14-15), in a final and perpetual act of exclusion and marginalization.
continued.... How exclusion benefits the sinner, and the whole Church The connection between exclusion and mercy is explained in detail in the letters of the apostles. The exclusion of recalcitrant sinners is seen as merciful in two ways. First, it removes a source of scandal and corruption from within the Church, thus protecting the spiritual health of the rest of the faithful. This is illustrated by a case of a man living in sexual sin in the Church of Corinth, whom St. Paul urges the Corinthians to excommunicate. “I wrote to you in an epistle not to keep company with fornicators,” Paul reminds the Corinthians. He says they are “not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator or covetous or a server of idols or a railer or a drunkard or an extortioner: with such a one, not so much as to eat. ... Put away the evil one from among yourselves” (1 Cor. 5: 11, 13). His reasoning is clear: the Church must be protected from such a scandalous example, which can confuse the faithful and lead them into similar evils. “A little leaven corrupts the whole lump,” he warns them, urging them to “purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened.” Later, in the same letter, he adds: “Do not be deceived: ‘Bad company ruins good morals.’” Second, exclusion induces the sinner to consider the gravity of his sins by illustrating his estrangement from God, giving him a foretaste of the miseries of hell as he lives out his immoral behavior in the fallen world outside of the Church. This is done in the hope that malefactors will be lead to repentance, confession, and reparation, by which they will be reunited with Christ and the community of his followers. Paul explains this to the Corinthians by stating he intends “to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.” In his first letter to Timothy, Paul speaks similarly of two heretics, Hymeneus and Alexander, “whom I have delivered up to Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme” (1 Tim. 1: 20). The leadership of the early Church was aware too that failure to properly discipline the flock and to punish recalcitrant evildoers would not only harm the souls of their flocks, but would accrue to their own personal guilt before God. They kept in mind the warning of the Prophet Ezekiel (3:18), “If, when I say to the wicked, Thou shalt surely die: thou declare it not to him, nor speak to him, that he may be converted from his wicked way, and live: the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but I will require his blood at thy hand.” The clear instructions in the Scripture regarding the exclusion of recalcitrant sinners from the Church made their way into the Church’s ritual practices and jurisprudence in the centuries that followed. The laws of the Church recognized a wide variety of offenses for which it excluded people from the reception of the sacraments or from Church membership altogether. The 1917 Code of Canon Law, which systematized most of the Church’s traditional law for the first time in a single tome, provided for excommunications for a wide variety of offenses, including heresy and schism, attacks on prelates or their rights, blasphemy, grave abuses of the sacraments, membership in Masonic organizations, and particularly heinous acts of aggression or abuse against other members of the faithful. Among those acts considered grave enough to merit an excommunication were offenses against life and family, in particular the procurement of an abortion (which automatically excommunicated the offender), and the sin of public bigamy, in which people enter into an illicit second marriage, even if only a civil one. Those guilty of other sexual sins, such as public concubinage, and publicly-known acts of incest, pederasty or pedophilia, were at a minimum excluded from the reception of the Eucharist until they made public reparation, and could be struck with stronger penalties at the discretion of the bishop. Although the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which prevails today, is more general, and allows discretion in most cases in applying penalties (which can include excommunication and interdict), it still prohibits anyone from receiving the sacraments who is living in manifest public sin (canon 915). The Catholic Church’s traditional rite of anathema, which is the strongest form of excommunication, sums up the Church’s reasoning regarding exclusion from the Church. The rite expresses this exclusion in terms of the greatest mercy of all: the salvation of souls. It also reminds the prelates of the Church, particularly bishops and popes, that they will be judged on the last day if they fail to protect the faithful from the wolves in their ranks. Below, I provide my own translation of the rite from the Latin of the Pontificale Romanum. ANATHEMA (THE RITE OF SOLEMN EXCOMMUNICATION) When an anathema, that is, a solemn excommunication for more grave sins, must be given, the bishop, dressed in his amice, stole, purple cope, and simple miter, accompanied by twelve priests dressed in surplices, and with both him and the priests holding burning candles in their hands, sits upon his seat before the high altar, or in some other public place that is more pleasing to him, and there pronounces and carries out the anathema, in this way: Wherefore [Name], persuaded by the devil, discarding, by his apostasy, his Christian vows, which he made in Baptism, has not feared to ravage the Church of God, to plunder ecclesiastical goods, and to violently oppress the poor of Christ: therefore, anxious that he not perish because of pastoral negligence, for which we might be compelled to render account in the terrible judgment before our Lord Jesus Christ the Prince of Pastors, regarding which the Lord himself gives a terrifying warning, saying: “If you do not declare to the evildoer his iniquity, I will require his blood at thy hand,” (1) we warned him canonically, a first time, a second time, a third time and even a fourth time in an attempt to convince him of his evil, inviting him to amendment, satisfaction, and penance, and rebuking him with paternal affection. Lamentably, however, he spurned these salutary warnings, and puffed up with a spirit of arrogance, contemptuously refused to make amends to the Church that he had injured. We, however, are informed by precepts of the Lord and of the Apostles, of what we should do with evildoers of this kind. For thus says the Lord: “If thy hand, or thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee.” (2) And the Apostle says: “Put away the evil one from among yourselves.” (3) And again: “If any man that is named a brother be a fornicator or covetous or a server of idols or a railer or a drunkard or an extortioner: with such a one, not so much as to eat.” (4) And John, beloved by Christ above the rest of the Apostles, forbids us to greet such a nefarious man, saying: “Receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you. For he that saith unto him: God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works.” (5) Therefore, fulfilling the precepts of the Lord and of the Apostles, by the sword of excommunication we cut off from the body of the Church this putrid and incurable member who did not receive his medicine, lest the rest of the body be infected, as with a poison, by such a pestilential illness. Therefore because he has despised our admonitions and our numerous exhortations, because he was called to amendment three times in accordance with the precept of the Lord and refused to repent, because he did not consider his guilt, nor confess it, nor give any excuse to the legation sent to him, nor ask for mercy, but his heart being hardened by the devil, he persevered in the evils he had begun, as the Apostle says: “According to his hardness and impenitent heart, he treasurest up to himself wrath, against the day of wrath:” (6) therefore with all of his accomplices and his supporters, by the judgment of Almighty God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and Saint Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and of all the saints, as well as by the authority of our mediocrity, and our power of binding and loosing in heaven and on earth which has been divinely conferred upon us, we separate him from the precious reception of the Body and Blood of the Lord, and from the society of all Christians, and we exclude him from the entrances to Holy Mother Church in heaven and on earth, and we declare him to be anathematized and excommunicated; and judge him to be damned with the devil, and his angels, and all of the reprobate in eternal fire; until he escapes from the bonds of the devil, and returns to amendment and penance, and gives satisfaction to the Church of God, which he injured, we deliver him to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved on the day of judgment. (7) And all respond: So be it, so be it, so be it. This having been done, both the bishop and the priests must throw the burning candles, which they have in their hands, on the ground. Then letters are sent to the priests by way of the parishes, and also to neighboring bishops, containing the name of the one excommunicated and the reason for his excommunication, lest anyone out of ignorance have further association with him, and so that on the occasion of his excommunication he might be removed from the company of all.
I have seen parts of this interview quoted in various places but I don't recall seeing the entire interview. This man was a Franciscan. If he is telling the truth, it is very worrying. May God protect us all, especially the Church in Latin America. There was a time I would have dismissed what the man is saying but not now. The interview is easier to read on the website but since it is in German you would need to open it in Google, right-click and choose Translate. http://www.ksta.de/kultur/leonardo-boff-im-interview--papst-franziskus-ist-einer-von-uns--25372660 I think that the interview was given to a German Catholic newspaper and is reproduced on the linked website. I have seen it on the other website but didn't save the link. I deleted the first couple of questions because they are really just pleasantries and I needed to reduce the word count in the post. Leonardo Boff in an interview "Pope Francis is one of us" Berlin - The Brazilian Leonardo Boff , born in 1938, is the son of Italian immigrants. In 1959 he joined the Franciscan Order and studied in Germany for five years. In the 1980s, Boff became the main representative of liberation theology, and because of his criticism of the church, he was in conflict with the Vatican and Joseph Ratzinger, his supreme faithful. After having been subjected to a publication ban twice, Boff left the Order in 1992 and laid down his priesthood. How does a faith, which speaks for Christmas of a "God of peace", fit the dissatisfaction we experience everywhere? Most of the faith is promise. Ernst Bloch says: "Real genesis is not at the beginning, but at the end, and it only begins to begin when society and existence become radical." The joy of Christmas lies in this promise: The earth and the people are not condemned, That it always goes on as we experience it - with all the wars, violence, fundamentalism. We are promised in faith that in the end everything will be good; That despite all the mistakes, missteps and setbacks, we are coming to a good end. The real meaning of Christmas is not that "God has become man," but that he has come to tell us, "You men belong to me, and when you die, you come home." Christmas means: God is coming to pick us up? Yes. Incarnation means something of us is already divine, immortal. The divine lies within us. In Jesus it has been shown most clearly. But it is in all people. In an evolutive view, Jesus does not come to the world from outside, but grows out of it. Jesus is the manifestation of the divine in evolution - but not the only one. The Divine also appears in the Buddha, in Mahatma Gandhi, and other great beliefs. This does not sound very Catholic. Do not say that. The entire Franciscan theology of the Middle Ages conceived of Christ as part of creation, not only as the Redeemer of Debt and Sin, who comes into the world from above. Incarnation is also salvation, yes. But first and foremost it is a glorification, a deification of creation. And something else is important at Christmas. God appears in the form of a child. Not as an old man with white hair and long white beard ... Just like you ... So, if at all, I rather resemble Karl Marx. What I am concerned with is the following: If, at the end of our lives, we have to face the divine judge once before, then we are faced with a child. But a child does not condemn anyone. A child wants to play and be together with others. This side of faith must be re-emphasized. The Latin liberation theology, to whose most prominent representatives you belong, has come to new honor by Pope Francis. A rehabilitation also for you personally after the decades of fighting with Pope John Paul II and his supreme faithful Joseph Ratzinger, the later Pope Benedict XVI? Francis is one of us. He has made liberation theology the common property of the Church. And he has extended them. Those who speak of the poor must also speak of the earth today because they are also plundered and desecrated. "To hear the cry of the poor," means to hear the cry of the beasts, the forests, the whole tormented creation. The whole earth cries. So, says the Pope, quoting the title of one of my books, we must at the same time hear the cry of the poor and the earth. And both must be liberated. In recent times, I myself have been very concerned with this extension of the theology of liberation. And this is also the fundamentally new one in "Laudato si" ... ... the "eco-encyclical" of the Pope from 2015. How much Leonardo Boff is in Jorge Mario Bergoglio? The Encyclical belongs to the Pope. But he has consulted many experts. Did he read your books? Even more. He asked me for "Laudato si" for material. I have given him my advice and sent some of what I have written. He also used it. Some people have told me that they had thought of reading, "that's Boff!" By the way, Pope Franziskus said to me, "Boff, please do not send the papers directly to me." Why not? He said: "Otherwise, catch the Sottosegretari (employees in the Vatican administration, d.Red.) It from, and I do not get it. I would like to know that the current Vatican ambassador is an old acquaintance of the Pope from his time in Buenos Aires. They have often drank mate together. One day before the encyclical was published, the Pope had to call me to give me his thanks for my help. But a personal meeting with the Pope is still pending? He has sought reconciliation with the most important representatives of liberation theology, with Gustavo Gutierrez, Jon Sobrino, and also with me. I said to him, with a view to Pope Benedict and Joseph Ratzinger, "but the other one still lives!". He did not accept this. "No," he said, "il Papa sono io" - "the pope is me". So we should come quietly. You see his courage and determination. Why did it not work out with your visit? I had an invitation and had already landed in Rome. But on that very day, just before the beginning of family code 2015, 13 cardinals - among them the German Cardinal Gerhard Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Congregation of the Faith - rehearsed the rebellion against the Pope with a letter addressed to him, and then - miracles! - stood in the newspaper. The Pope was angry and said to me, "Boff, I have no time. I have to make peace before the Synod. See you another time. " Even the one with the peace has not really gone, right? The Pope feels the sharpness of the wind from his own ranks, especially from the USA. This cardinal Burke, Leo Burke, who has now written a letter together with your Cologne Cardinal Meisner, is the Donald Trump of the Catholic Church. (Laughs) But unlike Trump, Burke is now cold in the Curia. Thank God. These people actually believe they should correct the pope. As if they were above the Pope. Such a thing is unusual, if not unprecedented in the church history. You can criticize the Pope, discuss it. I have done this often enough. But that Cardinals publicly accuse the Pope of spreading theological errors or even heresies, which I think is too much. This is an affront which the Pope can not accept. The Pope can not be condemned, that is teaching the Church. With all your enthusiasm for the Pope, what about the Church reforms that many Catholics had hoped for from Francis, but where so much has happened? You know, as far as I understand it, the center of its interest is no longer the church, certainly not the inner church enterprise, but the survival of mankind, the future of the earth. Both are in danger, and one must ask whether Christianity can contribute to overcoming this great crisis that threatens humanity. Francis takes care of the environment, and now his church is on the wall? I believe there is a hierarchy of problems for him. When the earth perishes, all other problems have also settled. But as for the inner-church questions, wait a while! It was only recently that Cardinal Walter Kasper, a close confidant of the Pope, said that there would soon be great surprises. What do you expect? Who knows? Perhaps the deaconess of the woman. Or the possibility that married priests can be used again in pastoral care. This is an explicit request from the Brazilian bishops to the Pope, especially his friend, the emeritus Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes. I heard that the Pope wanted to comply with this request - initially for an experimental phase in Brazil. This country, with its 140 million Catholics, should have at least 100,000 priests. But there is only 18000. Institutionally, this is a disaster. It is no wonder that the faithful overflow with the evangelicals and Pentecostals who fill the vacuum. If the many thousands of married priests were to exercise their office again, this would be a first step towards the improvement of the situation, and at the same time an impulse for the Catholic Church to loosen the fetter of the obligation celibacy. If the Pope were to decide in this sense, would you, as a former Franciscan friar, take on priestly duties again? Personally, I do not need such a decision. It would not change for me, because I am still doing what I have always done: I baptize, I bury, and when I go to a church without a priest, I celebrate the Mass together with the people. Is it very "German" to ask: Can you do that? So far, no bishop I know has ever criticized or forbidden. The bishops even rejoice and tell me: "The people have a right to the Eucharist. So keep quiet! "My theological teacher, Cardinal Paulo Evaristo Arns, who had died a few days ago, for example, was very open. He went so far as to bring married priests, whom he saw sitting in the bench during the Mass, to the front of the altar, and together with them celebrated the Eucharistic celebration. He often did that and said. "You are still priests, and you will remain!"
Thank you so much, Brian, for this gem from Fr. Hardon. I taught elementary school, both public and Catholic, for 17 years before I got married and I saw first-hand what was happening to our education system. Even many Catholic schools are not what they should be. And so my husband and I decided that I would homeschool our girls. Katie is in kindergarten this year and Maggie will be in preschool next year. All our curriculum is solid Catholic material. Our Religion textbooks are the Faith and Life series from Ignatius Press (the only orthodox text I ever taught from in my second and best Catholic school... not the fluffy "Jesus loves the flowers" nonsense I had to use at my first Catholic school!). Anyway, we all love homeschooling and we feel it's one of the best decisions we've ever made. Hopefully, saint-to-be Fr. Hardon would approve of our efforts... P.S. God bless your son and you and your wife for raising him so well!
And here is the Pope's actual homily without the comments from his critics: Shrunken souls JANUARY 27, 2017 A Christian’s garment must be sewn with “memory, courage, patience and hope” in order to endure even the heaviest rains without giving up and shrinking. During during Mass at Santa Marta on Friday morning, 27 July, the Pope warned about the “sin of pusillanimity” — which is “being afraid of everything” and becoming “souls that shrink in order to preserve themselves”. He recalled that Jesus himself warned that those “who seek to preserve their life, without taking risks and always citing prudence, will lose it”. Francis drew inspiration for his meditation from the day’s First Reading from the Letter tot he Hebrews (10:32-39). He began by noting that it is “an exhortation with three points of reference, three temporal points, shall we say: past, present and future”. The Letter’s author “begins with the past and exhorts us to recall: ‘Remember the former days’”. The Pope explained that these were “days of enthusiasm, of going forth in faith, when one begins to live the faith, the trials suffered”. Indeed, “Christian life is not understood, even everyday spiritual life, without memory”. And, the Pontiff continued, “not only does one not understand: one cannot live in a Christian way without the memory” of “God’s salvation in my life”, without “remembering the troubles in my life: how has the Lord saved me from these troubles?”. For this reason “memory is a grace, a grace to ask for: ‘Lord, may I not forget your passing in my life, may I not forget the good times, and also the bad; the joys and the crosses”. Thus, the Pontiff explained, “a Christian is a person of memory”. Thus, “when we pick up the Bible, we see that the prophets always make us look back: consider what God did with you, how he freed you from slavery”. But “Christian life does not begin today, it continues today”. And, Francis continued, “memory is wisdom: to remember everything, the good, the not so good, the bad; many graces, many sins, the family, the personal history of each one”. Thus, “I go before God with my history; I must not cover it up, hide it: no, it is my history, before you”. Thus, “the exhortation to live a Christian life begins with this point of reference: memory”. Then, the Pope continued, the author of the Letter to the Hebrews helps us “understand that we are walking in expectation of something; we are walking expecting to arrive or to encounter”. In other words “to reach a point: an encounter; to encounter the Lord”. In fact we read in the Letter: “For yet a little while, and the coming one shall come and shall not tarry”. And straight away “he exhorts us to live by faith: ‘My righteous one shall live by faith’”. Here “hope: looking toward the future” comes in to play. Indeed, Francis explained, “as one cannot live a Christian life without remembering the steps taken, one cannot live a Christian life without looking toward the future with the hope of the encounter with the Lord”. In the Letter to the Hebrews, the author writes “a beautiful phrase: ‘for yet a little while’”. We are well aware, the Pope recalled, that “life is a breath”, it’s fleeting. “When we are young, we think we have so much time ahead, but then life teaches us that phrase that we all say: ‘how time flies, I’ve known him since he was a child, now he is married, how time flies!’”. Thus, “the hope of encountering Him is a life in tension between memory and hope, the past and the future”. The third point “is in the middle: it’s today, that is, the present”, the Pontiff affirmed. It is a “today between the past and the future”. To live this today, the “advice” is “to continue with this attitude that describes the first Christians: of courage, of patience, of moving forward, of not being afraid”. This is because “Christians live the present — oftentimes painful and sad — courageously or with patience”. These are “two words that Paul and his disciple who wrote this letter like very much: courage and patience”. The Pope described it as “curious” that, for the word ‘patience’, the author of the text “uses a word in Greek which means ‘to endure’; and courage is honesty, he says here, to say things clearly, to move forward facing ahead”. These are “two words that he uses a really great deal: parresìa and hypomoné, courage and patience”. And, Francis continued, “Christian life is this way”. It’s true, he recognized, that we are all sinners, “those before and those after”, and “if you want, afterwards we can make a list, but let us go forward with courage and with patience; let us not stay there, still, because this will not make us grow”. Therefore, the Pontiff explained, “it is our Christian life, as today the liturgy exhorts us to live it” with great memory of the journey experienced, with great hope of that beautiful encounter which will be a beautiful surprise”. Certainly, he continued, “we do not know when: it could be tomorrow, it could be in 15 years, we don’t know, but it is always tomorrow; it is soon, because time flies”. In any case, there must always be “the hope of the encounter”. And also the attitude of “enduring, with patience; bringing here patience and courage, honesty”, while “facing forward, without shame”. This is precisely the way “Christian life moves forward”. To conclude, the Pope highlighted “a little thing to which the author” of the Letter to the Hebrews “calls the attention of the community to whom he is speaking: a sin”. It is a sin “which does not let them have hope, courage, patience and memory: the sin of pusillanimity”. It is a sin, Francis explained, “that does not let one be Christian, it is a sin that does not let you move forward because of fear”. For this reason, “many times, Jesus said: ‘Fear not’” — precisely to warn of “pusillanimity” and thus not to give up, not to “always back up”, being too careful, out of a “fear of everything”, and citing “prudence” as a reason for “not taking risks”. “You could also say“, the Pope stated, “that you follow all the commandments, yes, it’s true; but this paralyzes you, it makes you forget many graces you have received; it takes away your memory; it takes away your hope because it doesn’t allow you to go”. Thus, “the present of a Christian is like that of a person going along the road when an unexpected rain comes, and his or her garment is not very good and the fabric shrinks: shrunken souls”. This very image shows the sin of “pusillanimity: the sin against memory, courage, patience and hope”. http://insidethevatican.com/popeswords/morningmass/shrunken-souls
Welcome home David. \I had a feeling that like Douglas McArthur you would return to the battle. View attachment 6042
The deal apparently for May 13 2017 ? if confirmed a symbolic date for most, let's see ! in any case interesting time for sure.
If this happens it will be a very defining moment in our church and a clear indication that the church is in formal schism and no longer defacto.
Living the moment...what all saints do. So simple yet so hard to comprehend. Our Holy Father is trying to lead us to sainthood. The past memories including the good and the bad is a grace of God. That also means remembering our past sins. Not dwelling in them because we should have gone to confession but understanding we our sinners. And also understanding, that as we live in the moment, the future is coming and that includes the good and the bad. Which also includes sin. The moment should not be a time for feeling so perfect (living in 10 commandments) that we forget past memory (Grace of God) or our future actions. This is a path to sainthood. Note: This also is a lesson to Our Holy Fathers detractors.
Of my 11 children, all but one made it through the 6 grades that our Catholic school offered. When my youngest was going into the 5th grade, I was making a trip to a Twins baseball game with my son who just graduated the 6th grade. I asked him what they learned in religion. He said, "Sister ...... said it was okay to be gay and that there was nothing wrong with being gay". I said WHAT? Yup, she had all the boys and girls in separate classes when she declared this lie. So needless to say, I took Archbishop Fulton Sheen's advise when a parent asked him where to send their child, to a Catholic college or to a public college to which Bishop Sheen replied, "Send them to a public college where they will have to fight for their faith rather than a Catholic college where their faith will be taken from them". So my last child did not complete Catholic grade school and did fine in the public school where religion was naught taught. At least this way I did not have to un-educate them from what they were wrongly taught at the Catholic school that most parents would never have found out. Now I know that being gay in itself is not a sin, but the way she presented it there was no distinction between the tendency of being gay and the gay action that is gravely sinful.
What the 'feel-gooders' seem to dismiss is, Jesus never taught mercy at the expense of not living out the 10 commandments. They both go together. This is where I feel Pope Francis pursuit in social justice comes into play. He feels, like all social justice minds, that God's mercy trumps God's commandments. It's as if you can set aside God's law, cause his mercy will close the gap. It is not an 'either/or' question. You can't live part of God's truth and find his grace. Note: This is also a lesson for his adorers. Half truth is still half lie. God does not live in half-truths.
You just missed the point completely. Fast on the draw. This has nothing to do with feel-gooders. This has to do with your personal soul. You immediately attack. When all the Holy Father did was explain how it is to be a saint. He is scratching at the basis of sainthood and you poo-poo it. That is what is wrong. It starts from within, that is all he is saying. And rockstar saints have true knowledge of just how unworthy, we all are, to salvation. Quick Draw McGraw Just breath and understand our house must be in order first. And if you say it is in order... then you missed the point. u
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.ca/2017/02/unheard-of-since-papal-states-fell-rome.html?m=1 Unheard-of since the Papal States fell: Rome covered in posters critical of the Pope Rome woke up this Saturday with something quite new, and very old, in its streets: posters throughout the City (in the style of the old "pasquinate") critical of the Pope. In English, from the Romanesco-inspired Italian: "Ah Francis, you have intervened in Congregations, removed priests, decapitated the Order of Malta and the Franciscans of the Immaculate, ignored Cardinals... but where is your mercy?" These were common at the time of the Papal States (before the fall of Porta Pia and the full unification of Italy in 1870): not for religious reasons, but rather for political complaints, since the Popes were also the secular rulers of the Pontifical territories. Since then, these public criticisms of Pontiffs mostly disappeared in the City, considering the new Italian authorities were now those responsible for the secular government of the old papal territories, and that the Pope remained responsible only for religious matters. They still show up all the time against Italian politicians. But when, by common Roman consent, the most tyrannical Pontiff since the Renaissance, still has the gall of speaking under the name of mercy (!!!!), the humor of the Roman people does not remain silent when faced with this charade. [Reported by ADN Kronos, via Marco Tosatti; second image by Mark Lambert]
The truth is what is essential with the soul. God said, "I am the way the truth and the life". Pilate is the one that asked, "what is truth". If what is in the heart is not based on truth, then the heart is confused at best and in deep sin at the worst. The truth is supposed to be what is embedded within the heart, it is what sets us free. How can a "house be in order" when the soul is in sin?
When I read nonsense like the quote below. I think to myself how mean, dark, ugly, arrogant and evil one is to write such mean spirited things. Then I say to myself it must be a saint. Too much "But when, by common Roman consent, the most tyrannical Pontiff since the Renaissance, still has the gall of speaking under the name of mercy (!!!!), the humor of the Roman people does not remain silent when faced with this charade."
From what I've heard it's been in the works for a while....w/possibly C. Schonborn as a replacement. But possibly C. Mueller's latest statements are showing a certain learned approach of mediation instead to keep such replacement from occurring or at least keep it postponed.
