Sad to think that is all you could find. Google his homilies on the devil, sin, salvation and any other spiritual truth and you will see what a holy man he is. Nobody reads his homilies if they did they would see what a mystical pope we have.
Seek and you shall find http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/201...ation_repentance_key_to_door_of_mercy/1186556 Repentance is key to door of Mercy.
Indeed, nobody reads his homilies but everybody knows we don't need to breed like rabbits, that contraception may be used if a good enough excuse can be found, that abortionists can be some of Italy's greatest figures, that Lutherans and the divorced and remarried should make up their own mind whether to approach the altar, etc. Wonder why that is? 'Who are we to judge?'
I wonder what Father Tom would say about all this non-sense. Loyalty to Our Holy Father and Our Blessed Mother is our guide to being a Saint. Brother Al
Again, nobody reads Patheos but the rabbits comment generated worldwide headlines. When one takes the rabbit comment, combines it with the pope castigating the Italian woman having a large family by C-section, and the popes comment that three children are a good number, and the Vatican cooperation and partnership with population control/environmentalist organizations both at UN meetings and in using St. Peters to project their light show, and the pope endorsing contraception for Zika (in direct violation of Humanae Vitae) you get an overwhelming impression that all his homilies and all the Patheos spin just can't overcome.
Funny you should say that, as I just now read his very first homily as Pope and it was quite good. My post was specifically about how the Pope has taken great pains to cultivate a very specific message, and judging from the lists on why he's such a terrific Pope, it appears to be a rather bizarre message. I also watched his first papal Mass. Does he ever genuflect after the Elevation? Have the rubrics changed on that or something?
Even the Protestants have caught on to the debate this has created. Pope Francis praises Italy's leading abortion rights proponent, draws flak from church traditionalists, pro-life advocates http://www.christiantoday.com/artic....traditionalists.pro.life.advocates/80803.htm
They sure do hate us and want to shut us up. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/s...rsity-for-private-facebook-post-against-gay-m
Padre Pio The day that people lose their horror for abortion, will be the most terrible day for humanity. Abortion is not only a homicide but also a suicide. Shouldn’t we have the courage to manifest our faith before those who commit two crimes within one act?
I typed, 'Poped Francis genuflect' , into google and not one picture of him genuflecting. Then again he might have bad knees or a groin problem, or whatever, who knows?
Nope, I don't think so because I saw several pictures of him kneeling at a couple of different events.
Both Benedict and Francis are holy men – but with naturally different personal styles In response to my last blog about the style the Holy Father brings to his office – a style that seems to suggest a new, Franciscan simplicity in contrast to former papal ceremonial – Peccator has written a thoughtful post raising several issues. I take them seriously and this is my response: Peccator’s argument is that Pope Francis should not jettison past practice because “the symbols, traditions and ceremonial of the papacy belong to the office, not the personality.” He further thinks this new style “comes off as a repudiation of past popes” and that Pope Francis, though a “good man” is “not a good representation of the continuity of the centuries… which is precisely what Peter must do: preserve the Faith that has been handed down to us.” He adds, “We are in desperate need of signs that point to God’s glory” and that “man needs splendour.” I think we have to distinguish here between what is essential to the tradition and what is inessential. There is no indication that Pope Francis will depart in any way from preserving the deposit of Faith entrusted to him. Transmitting the magisterial teachings of the Church to the present generation will be his primary task, and from reading some of his past homilies as Cardinal Archbishop of Buenos Aires, his orthodoxy is clear. (If there had been any doubt on this score, the Holy Spirit would hardly have inspired his fellow cardinals to elect him.) But there are also minor and inessential traditions which have accumulated over the years and attached themselves to the papacy – and it does not rock the barque of Peter if they are put aside. I grew up when Pope Pius XII was carried through the crowds in a kind of elevated sedan chair, the sedia gestatoria, wearing the papal triple crown and flanked by ushers waving ostrich feathers. Well, despite these being seen at the time as traditional elements of the papal office, they have all vanished. The pope now travels about in a “Popemobile” and he no longer has a coronation, only an inauguration (I’m not quite sure what happened to the ostrich feathers.) There was an era when Catholic triumphalism flourished and Cardinal Nicholas Wiseman could write the hymn “Full in the panting heart of Rome” and refer to “The golden roof, the marble walls, the Vatican’s majestic halls…” This way of viewing the mother church now sounds quaint and slightly queasy; it no longer seems appropriate for these changed times except in certain ultramontane circles. To some extent the Church must be sensitive to the age it inhabits, never surrendering to the spirit of the age, but adapting its apostolate to address a changed world; the (untraditional) papal twitter account is one example of this. Further, without wanting to draw attention to his own person, each pope brings his individual “stamp”, his character and his charism to the office. Sean Fitzpatrick writes in Crisis magazine that “The last papacy dedicated to St Benedict preserved the culture of faith like St Benedict did, from deep within the fortress of sacred, solemn tradition. Now may the papacy dedicated to St Francis propagate the faith like St Francis did, in the wide landscape of joyful, jubilant creation. As Benedict XVI was precise, so now may Francis be passionate.” That is one way to make the distinction between these two very different men. It is not a choice between Benedict or Francis, or a choice between Cephas or Paul; both popes are holy, Christ-centred men – but with naturally different personal styles in embodying their office. Pope Francis broke with tradition again yesterday: he stood to receive the cardinals during his inaugural Mass when it has been customary to sit down. Does this matter? He also chose to wear a Fisherman’s Ring made of gold-plated silver, rather than the solid gold ring of his predecessor. What is wrong with that? Perhaps wearing black shoes rather than red could come to symbolise sinful humanity in need of redemption? It is early days – but in all that pertains to sacred tradition and to the worship of God I am sure Francis will have the same desire for reverence, beauty and solemnity as Benedict, and which Peccator rightly recognises as part of man’s hunger for the transcendent. And in all that pertains to Jorge Mario Bergoglio – the Argentinian who first discovered his vocation when he went to Confession, aged 17, in 1953, and who has adopted Francis of Assisi as his papal patron – he will be his own man http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/com...but-with-naturally-different-personal-styles/
Doctrine and reform Under Francis’ reign, the Catholic Church is going through a crucial moment and along its current trajectory, it could be tracing the main elements that will characterise it in the upcoming decades. Pope Francis has set in motion a gradual but firm reform process, which, if steered towards certain points of no return, will turn the process currently underway into an irreversible historical change. This “plan” is not based on some Bergoglian model or project. The end goal and the path towards it are simple: a return to the essential, to Jesus and his Gospel. Francis out it like this: “Christian doctrine is not a closed system incapable of generating questions, doubts, interrogatives - but is alive, knows being unsettled, enlivened. It has a face that is not rigid, it has a body that moves and grows, it has a soft flesh: it is called Jesus Christ.” (Florence, 10 November 2015). This is the true meaning of Pope Francis’ reform and if this is not perceived globally, in its entirety, it is impossible to understand Francis’ pontificate; in fact there is a risk of heading down misleading paths, making statements of minor importance; above all, there is a risk of confusing form with actual substance. Mercy and humanism The very soul of the Pope’s efforts has one name and one name alone and it unveils the highest essence of the spirit within: the Mercy of the Father “that forgives all, always”. Francis says: “In the light of this merciful Judge, our knees bend in adoration, and our hands and our feet are strengthened. We can speak of humanism only starting from the centrality of Jesus, discovering in him the traits of the authentic will of man. It is contemplating the face of Jesus died and risen that recomposes our humanity and also that which has been fragmented through the toils of life or marked by sin. We must not domesticate the power of the face of Christ. His face is the image of his transcendence. It is the misericordiae vultus. Let us allow ourselves to be looked at by him. Jesus is our humanism. Let us always be unsettled by his question: ‘who do you say that I am?’ (Mt 16:15)” (Florence, 10 November 2015). http://www.lastampa.it/2016/01/04/v...ontificate-N7CTnxAW6pU31dHHLB9zBO/pagina.html
I don't detect much respect in your comment but you might like to read the part of the homily in which the Holy Father used the phrase: Represented in the cupola of this most beautiful Cathedral is the Universal Judgment. Jesus, our light, is at the center. The inscription that one reads at the top of the fresco is “Ecce Homo.” Looking at this cupola we are attracted to the top, while we contemplate the transformation of the Christ judged by Pilate into the Christ seated on the throne of judges. An Angel brings Him the sword, but Jesus does not assume the symbols of judgment, in fact, He raises His right hand showing the signs of the Passion, because He “gave Himself as a ransom for all” (1 Timothy 2:6). “For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him” (John 3:17). In the light of this Judge of mercy, our knees bend in adoration, and our hands and our feet are reinvigorated. We can speak of a humanism only from the centrality of Jesus, discovering in Him the features of man’ authentic face. It is the contemplation of the face of Jesus dead and risen that reconstructs our humanity, also that fragmented by the toils of life or marked by sin. We must not tame the power of Christ’s face. His face is the image of His transcendence. It is the misericordiae vultus. Let us allow ourselves to be looked at by Him. Jesus is our humanism. Let us always be anxious about his question: “But who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:15). Looking at His face, what do we see? First of all the face of an “emptied” God, of a God that has assumed the condition of servant, humiliated and obedient unto death (cf. Philippians 2:7). Jesus’ face is similar to that of so many of our humiliated brothers, rendered slaves, emptied. God has assumed their face. And that face looks at us. God — who is “the Being of whom one cannot think a greater,” as Saint Anselm said, or the always greater God of Saint Ignatius of Loyola – becomes ever greater than Himself by lowering Himself. If we do not lower ourselves we will not be able to see His face. We will not see any of His fullness if we do not accept that God emptied Himself. And, therefore, we will not understand anything of Christian humanism and our words will be beautiful, cultured, refine, but they will not be words of faith. They will be words that sound empty. I do not wish to design here, in the abstract, a “new humanism,” a certain idea of man, but to present with simplicity some traits of Christian humanism, which is that of the “sentiments of Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:5). They are not abstract provisional sensations of the spirit, but represent the warm interior strength that makes us capable of living and of taking decisions. What are these sentiments? I would like to present at least three to you today. https://zenit.org/articles/text-of-pope-s-address-in-florence-on-humanism/
Q. What traits of "Christian humanism" were discarded with the bodies of the thousands of aborted babies? A. "Never mind". All the flowery sermons and fine words can't gloss over praising that woman. For the first time in my life, I dread the question "Is the Pope Catholic?". If he gives the ok to selling indulgences, will it be explained away as a good way of financing the Church's charities? I'm not looking forward to the Apostolic Exhortation in March. If he gives the nod to divorce and adultery, by inference directly contradicting the words of Jesus, it will be the last straw for me. Where will I go? Is there any Church with apostolic succession that doesn't turn a blind eye to adultery? The video depicting all religions as the same suggests that God doesn't care which path we choose, but I cling to the belief that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life and no-one can come to the Father except through Him.
