Roadblocksl in communication A quote from Pope Francis: “Communicating means sharing, and sharing demands listening and acceptance. Listening is much more than simply hearing. Hearing is about receiving information, while listening is about communication, and calls for closeness. Listening allows us to get things right, and not simply to be passive onlookers, users or consumers. Listening also means being able to share questions and doubts, to journey side by side, to banish all claims to absolute power and to put our abilities and gifts at the service of the common good.”-- Message for World Day of Social Communications, Jan. 22, 2016 It can be very difficult for me when a roadblock is reached in an important communication. Both parties can try, yet there are times when a bridge can’t be navigated because it is not there. I often forget what a tangle it can be when talking with others. I am almost 69 and with that comes a lot of experiences. I also believe that the most significant experiences are the ones that often happen very early in childhood which set the stage for our strengths and weaknesses and can make it hard to listen to others. Or there can be periods when the communication is one way. Where one party understands the position of the other, even if there is no agreement, but the other party is still unable to return the favor. I have been on both ends of this line. I have slowly learned that if this happens, no matter which space I occupy. The one who gets it or the one who does not, that there are times when I need to let it go without blaming anyone about it. This can be helpful because I know of the hopeless feeling that can surface when communications start to breakdown and both parties believe that if they yell loud enough, or get vulgar enough, then the other will get it. Of course the exact opposite happens. Being browbeat, or yelled at, or shamed only makes my walls go higher. Stances, perspectives etc., can become repetitious, making listening almost impossible. Stereotyping someone else, or being stereotyped only leads to anger. When some connection is garnered it is then that the two parties can truly listen and enter into the experience of the other. They become real to each other and not an obstacle to be overcome or converted. When we truly listen, we actually do walk side by side, like Jesus did on the road to Emmaus with his two disciples explaining the reality of the Gospel and the meaning of his life. If respect is not there, or love, then there are only enemies, each carrying the darkness of the other. Mirrors hating the other for its reflection. For if there is no communication, we become objects to one another. Contempt is the first step towards physical violence. Perhaps the Golden Rule is the only hope for us at this time. To actually enter into ourselves and come to some sort of understanding how we would actually want to be treated and then go out and treat others in that same way…….easier said than done, self-knowledge takes a lot of work.
I would respectfully disagree on this with our Holy Father in that communication and listening does not mean acceptance of the other's point of view. You can share your views with someone and truly listen to theirs but you don't need to accept each others point of view - what you rather need to accept is your disagreement. Sometimes listening means to respect the fact that we can't walk together side by side with whom we disagree - but we can still communicate, and communicate greatly. The common good is also a vague concept, because there are huge disagreements on what it is. For a large portion of society it means that everyone should have equal access to marriage and divorce. However that is against the REAL common good as Our Lord revealed it us. So I would rather put my abilities, gifts at the service of the Will of God, who brings about the common good for all. There is another problem with the quote that I think is very typically found in progressive thinking. For many people, to express your position or opinion about something without preceding your words with 'I think' or 'I believe' or 'I could be wrong but my view is', automatically means that you are speaking as if you were in possession of truth or from 'a position of power'. However, to add the 'I think' etc is preposterous and even subjectively cynical - one could say it is a structural cynicism introduced in our way of speaking in the 20th century. When you state 'A is this way' or 'B means this thing' or 'C is the truth', it is obviously your view, and you obviously believe it to be true, which means that you are (believe to) in possession of the truth. In fact, as Sartre would say, every man, and specially those who acuse others to be in possession of the truth, believes to be in possession of the truth, aka everyone wants to be right. And by the way, remember Carl Schmitt's book on Von Calusewitz. There is no better explanation as to how enemies do actually respect each other - they in fact admire each other. However when one enemy has no respect for the other, considering him as mere scum, then you get someone like Hitler whose goal is not to win over the enemy bu to exterminate it from the face of the earth - The 'peacefull' and 'charismatic' and 'on the right side' Felsenburgh in Lord of World by Benson is an even better example than Hitler.
As Pope Benedict wrote extensively on, "there is not right or wrong" and "relativism is the greatest error of our time". We truly live in a world where there is no longer absolutes in nearly everyone's mind and thus everyone is right...ie, the Church of nice.
The paragraph you quoted Mark is not logical. It says sharing demands listening and acceptance. I can listen and share but I cannot accept something that is not truth. Someone can share with me that they believe that gay marriage is a right. I can listen but cannot accept it. We must draw on our belief systems, and if the argument is the Truth, and came from the Truth, I can accept that. As a human, I do banish all claims to absolute power, that power belongs to God and He teaches us right and wrong through the inspired word of the bible, through the Holy Spirit, and the legacy of Jesus Christ. I am a lowly human trying to work through the maze of life . . .btw, we are the same age. Praise be Jesus Christ now and forever . . .
What Pope Benedict said is essentially, relativism teaches there is not right or wrong or that there is not absolutes. He wrote on this way back when he was still a priest.
The words and actions of the pope do not match: 1.No answer to the dubia. 2.Pope Francis ordered Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, prefect of the congregation, to dismiss 3 priests from the CDF. Cardinal Muller said: “Your Holiness, I have received these letters, but I did not do anything because these persons are among the best of my dicastery… what did they do?” The answer was, as follows: “And I am the pope, I do not need to give reasons for any of my decisions.
A quote from Pope Francis. Not one word of Scripture. Not one reference to the Fathers of the Church. Not one quote or example from the Lives of the Saints. Not a line from a previous Pope or Church Teaching. It all boils down to , 'I think , I feel'. Rather like some message from a Fortune Cookie. If I wanted a message from a Fortune Cookie I could always go out and buy one.
But to take one part of the Fortune Cookie Message, “Communicating means sharing, and sharing demands listening and acceptance'. So sharing demands acceptance? Really. Well say I am talking to a Doctor who kills unborn babies for a living as an example. We share , we listen. Now how and in what way is this to live me to, ..'.acceptance? ' ? Can someone please tell me in the name of all that is good and Holy how I am supposed to , 'Accept' someone who is a mass murderer? Not only am I supposed to , 'Accept', but it 'Demands' it. I mean, really Mr Fortune Cookie, really?
You know in these Latter Days the Days of the Final Battle between good and evil, between Satan and God's Church; did you expect the devil to come for you as a roaring lion or a dragon belching fire? No he is bouncing up to you as a smiling big, cuddly pink, smiling rabbit reminding you that every one and everything if fine and everything , 'Demands' , 'acceptance' . I am sorry but given the history of the Catholic Church over the last hundred years should the appearance of Satan as a loveable pink rabbit surprise you? Should it surprise you that the Vatican has been turned into a Fortune Cookie Booth?
We all get something unique when we read anything. Since I don't think the pope is a 'progressive' I don't look for that. When I read his statement, it made me think back on my life and how I found myself in situations where I was on both ends of the spectrum in seeking to communicate. This pope is Christ centered in his approach, though I agree he should stop and think before he speaks. Today everything said by a world renown figure is seen by millions or even billions. So, perhaps those in authority should think about the moreality of just sending out statments that can cause harm to others. A pope quotes carry more weight than mine would. I affect few in any, the pope many, many thousands, millions even. Peace mark
The devil's anti-Christic slogan for our times is 'Love is Love', which people in high places use now to give us the satisfaction of our fallen way of life and make peace with the corruption of marriage indisolubility and many intrinsically disordered human behaviors, instead of mercifully calling us to live by the truth and surrender our lives to His Will. They tell us it is possible to divorce and live a new conjugal life while remaining in a state of grace (because God is compassionate!), or marry the same sex and be confirmed by God, or sexually cohabit and be in communion with Christ. That is wisely called to light a candle to the devil and another to God. But those who defend the unchanging truth even at the expense of their social or professional prestige, or their physical freedom, are now seen as fundamentalists. How far would you go to bear witness to the truth? Jesus went to the Cross...there is no greater act of Love and Mercy than to bear such witness for the love of God and the salvation of souls. The mercy that operates outside of truth is an arm of the devil, as CS Lewis portrays well, it is his most beloved and sharp resource, and it always presents itself with tenderness and enlightening words, but we have the truth received from our fathers to discern... -- Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. For this I was born and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears my voice." Pilate said to him, "What is truth?"
I am genuinely curious Mark. I think the quote from the Holy Father sounds marvellous. That we should really listen to people and that this will lead to us accepting them. But without picking an argument with you I have two questions. Where in Scripture and the teaching of the Church does it talk of , 'Accepting ', people? What does it mean to , 'Accept' someone? I mean, I know it is an extreme example but say an Islamist Jihadist. I listen to him very carefully, fair enough. But what would it mean having listening to him to , 'Accept' him.? I am genuinely curious as to what this in fact means Mark? What do you think it means? Or say I listen to say a child molestor, very ,very carefully; how in what way should I be, 'accepting', of him ? Thanks. ( I am not trying to catch you out, I am genuinely curious as to how you explain this. I may be missing something here)
I wonder if there is some translation problem here or that the sentence is just worded poorly. It doesn't make sense that communication means acceptance of someone else's position. If this were so we would constantly be shifting our beliefs based upon who we talk to. This doesn't even make any sense from a pragmatic point of view. I think it must mean that we accept that the other person has beliefs different from ours and perhaps we should not become angry or stop communication with them because of this.
Excellent new quotes from Charlie Johnsston about what is happening in the RCC: " The Church, traditionally the refuge in times of great crisis, is itself in great crisis, as too many Bishops think their job is to correct what they believe to be the many errors of Christ, with seeming encouragement from the top. Catholics gaze in wonder as abortion advocates, jihadists, radical population control advocates, homosexual activists and just about anyone who scorns Catholic Doctrine are welcomed at the Vatican and even appointed to Pontifical Commissions while Orthodox prelates are routinely and summarily dismissed and scolded."
CJ on the "fake mercy" which has consumed the pope: "I know many are dismayed by the strange doings in the Church. I count myself among them. I think of the Church as a great hospital for souls, founded by the Divine Physician, who commanded His followers to carry on and do likewise in His name. At times we have had “doctors” who were all doctrine and no pastoral care: who eagerly diagnosed the illnesses, but were so disgusted by the sick that they would do no doctoring. That is a betrayal of the Master – and they will be held to account for the arrogant tyrants they are. That is not the main problem now. Today we have “doctors” who, faced with a deadly disease, have no answer except to tell the dying patient he is okay just as he is while congratulating themselves on their mercy. Vain fools! Their “mercy” is to condemn their patients to death, merely soothing them in their misery. They are passive serial killers of the soul – and they will be held to account for their betrayal of the Master. In his magnificent new book, “The Power of Silence,” Robert Cardinal Sarah says that “Bishops who scatter the sheep that Jesus has entrusted to them will be judged mercilessly and severely by God.”
Reminds me of a video: I have posted this video and emailed this video to many a person. It has annoyed MANY people, even in my own family. Our world has changed the meanings of words and now we are left with "squishy" morality. Universalism is running rampant. I love the clarity of this video. I think you can replace the word tolerance with acceptance. I do not have to accept anyone's behavior or lifestyle. I have to accept the person. But it is becoming increasingly hard to accept the person with opposing views as they reject my views and reject me as some kind of hater. The agenda at large only wants a one way acceptance. Our Holy Father speaks with a lot of ambiguity and I dislike it. It creates confusion. But I pray for him each and every day!
Yes but if it is a mistranslation leading to Zonk, gibberish, why did Mark post it like it came from Mount Sinai? Perhaps if he could intepret? I am genuinely curious.
