Pope Francis - What on Earth is he doing?

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Christ is risen, alleluia!

There is so much controversy and confusion surrounding polemics around the pandemic and vaccines that it is hard to find the truth. I have read reliable testimony that many of the stem cells used in research were not from aborted babies at all but were taken ethically from ordinary people... all human beings have stem cells.... There are also innumerable other controversial issues surrounding Pope Francis that he really does merit a closer look and a great deal of reflection and introspection....

It is true to say that Pope Francis is, at first view, very confusing; that is, until we realize what it is that he is actually doing.

Jesus is a human being, now risen from the dead and at the Father's "right hand" in heaven. He is also the only-begotten Son of the Father, which makes Him infinitely rich, wonderful, deep, and attractive. No single pope could ever completely represent Him. Jesus seems to have been pleased to allow his chosen popes to represent "something" of Him in each generation....

Pope Pius XII represented Jesus in his scholarly, rabbinical dimension... among other things....

Pope John XXIII represented Jesus in his human, grandfatherly dimension, but also as a reformer... among other things....

Pope Paul VI represented Jesus in his thoughtful, prayerful dimension, and as a "man rejected"... among other things....

Pope John Paul I represented Jesus in his warm attractive dimension, and as one who died young... among other things....

Pope John Paul II represented Jesus in his outgoing missionary dimension, and as a bold lover of God... among other things....

Pope Benedict XVI represented Jesus in his authentic one-on-one dimension, and as brilliant teacher... among other things....

Pope Francis is representing Jesus in his fierce dedication to sinners, the poor, the outcasts, as a fearless reformer, and as a joyful man of peace close to the ordinary people... among other things....

All these wonderful popes have been gifts of God to his Church and to humanity, bringing nobility and profound qualities of humanity to be "put on display" before all of humanity. All of them have been authentic and faithful witnesses to Jesus, "the way, the truth, and the life", adhering closely to the Word of God, the Tradition of the Faith, and the teachings of the Magisterium. I would challenge anyone to prove any of these bishops of Rome as defaulting in any of these respects. Pope Francis, in particular, is probably one of the best formed of all these popes, having been schooled as he has in Saint Ignatius of Loyola's "Rules for the Discernment of Spirits".

If you are interested, Dear Reader, I would highly recommend as the absolute best biographer and "interpreter" of Pope Francis Austen Ivereigh, who has known him personally since the time he was a bishop in Argentina. He has published three authoritative "biographies" of Pope Francis:

2014 - "The Great Reformer" Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope

2019 - "Wounded Shepherd" Pope Francis and His Struggle to Convert the Catholic Church

2020 - "Let Us Dream" The Path to a Better Future - the author is actually Pope Francis because these are all his words, but Austen worked with the Holy Father in a close dialogue to help the Pope develop this text.

You know, my genuine impression is that Pope Francis is giving us a taste of exactly what it was like for people - religious leaders as well as ordinary people - when they encountered, saw, and heard Jesus. Jesus definitely comforted the disturbed and disturbed the comfortable, much as Mother Teresa and all the saints have done in every age.

Our western world definitely has a strong bias in favour of the wealthy, influential, and powerful, which explains why such a large segment of the world population is confined irremediably to the peripheries of life. It was exactly so in Jesus' day too. As Jesus put the sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers and other "undesirables" front and centre - and why the religious leaders ground their teeth at Him; so too does Pope Francis do this. This is the principal reason why he is so hated, misunderstood, and maligned worldwide, and especially in the U.S.A., the most favoured nation on Earth with one of the greatest gaps between the wealthy and powerful and the rest of society.

When in 2004 I was on a 4-month sabbatical in Chicago, at a market at a booth I met a representative of a sort of association representing what they call the "working poor". These are people who don't want welfare and hold 1 or 2 or 3 jobs but still can't afford proper health insurance. At that time they numbered 75 million, which was around 22% of the population. I was shocked to discovery that what we take for granted here, in Canada, as a normal family home and life - in the U.S.A. for a family to live as an ordinary family here lives - the couple both need professional salaries in the six figures. This is due to the high cost of health care, among other things, such as the high cost of legal fees. People are constantly at risk of being sued by some shark out to destroy them or seize their assets. Only the poor don't need to worry too much about lawyers, but if they get sick, then they lose their homes and they're out on the street, literally. Pope Francis preaches against financial and economic interests that treat people as disposable.

Pope Francis doesn't put people from the peripheries into the centre for political reasons or to make any points. He does it because Jesus did it and calls us to do the same. When I was in seminary, our professor for the mission of the Church told us that all of our Church history, the Magisterium, the Scriptures, Canon Law, and Jesus Himself all make the same point, namely, that we cannot "be Church" without all categories of the poor and discarded in our very midst, in the very centre of us. Without them, all we can be is a variety of "country clubs" of those who are young, beautiful, talented, well established, comfortable, healthy, and successful. I was shocked, and quite frankly, this truth continues to be very shocking, and this is one of the reasons why they felt that Jesus had to be killed, He had to disappear. It is the principal reason they hate Pope Francis, though they may deny it or not even be conscious of it.

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +  

Is the Pope a heretic, or are we Pharisees, Sadducees, Chief Priests, Scribes, or Lawyers?

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Is the Pope a heretic, or are we Pharisees, Sadducees, Chief Priests, Scribes, or Lawyers?

Thanks be to God for Catholic TV and Radio

Like many Roman Catholics I have been pleased to watch programs on EWTN and Salt + Light. I was in seminary when in 1981 Mother Angelica listened to the Holy Spirit and boldly had the first TV and Radio studio built. It was seen as a remarkable act of God and an act of mercy for his Church and for all his children, the people of our time. 

Who are we to accuse this particularly fine Pope of heresy?

To my dismay, and that of many, perhaps countless R.C. Christians, there are now some who in the name of reporting news are joining voices that accuse Pope Francis of heresy. A number of analysts suspect that the primary motive of these accusations – which have been shadowing Pope Francis almost from the start of his pontificate – is that certain people don’t like the Pope’s call and efforts at reform in the Church. 

Is this a contemporary echo of what happened to Jesus?

The more I reflect on this and pray about it, the more apparent it seems to me that Pope Francis is being offered by our Lord Jesus an opportunity to suffer what He also suffered during his short 3-year mission on Earth. Jesus tried to reform the Temple’s practice of cluttering up the “Court of the Gentiles” with merchants selling sacrificial animals and bankers changing currencies. The Court of the Gentiles was part of the Temple intended by God to be a place where interested Gentiles could come for conversation with Jews about God.

Jesus’ efforts to reform the faith of Israel included reminding people about God’s mercy towards sinners, and to remind people that not doing any work to honour God on the Sabbath Day did not excuse anyone from the duty of performing works of mercy towards those who presented themselves in their need on that day.

Jesus’ reform met with severe criticism, unjust arrest, and false accusations, trumped up charges, unjust condemnation, incarceration, torture, and execution. It is obvious that Pope Francis is not the innocent and holy Son of God, but he is a good, just, and righteous man, a true believer, a devout Catholic Christian, a holy priest, an exemplary bishop with a long commitment to pastoral care of all the faithful and a predilection for the poor, and now, finally, an exemplary pope. 

Who were the Pharisees, Sadducees, Chief Priests, Scribes, and Lawyers who accused and executed Jesus?

First of all, they were all men. Second, they were men of privilege, because they enjoyed the highest of all privileges obtainable in their society: education, wealth, and position of influence. Third, in principle, they belonged to the ruling classes, which exist to cultivate order and harmony by their service to their society.

What balance exists between privilege and responsibility, wealth and the common good, power and service? 

Such privileges come with social obligations towards the rest of the population who, through no fault of their own, have little or no access to any or all of those privileges. Those who accumulate to themselves the lion’s share of a society’s resources cannot escape from the truth that all the resources of Planet Earth belong to all for the common good of humanity as a species. Privilege enjoyed without responsibility towards the rest of society could define despotism. Wealth enjoyed without assuring public services could define tyranny. Power wielded without serving the common good could define totalitarianism.  

How could men convinced of their righteousness and religious devotion be so wrong?

The Pharisees, Sadducees, Chief Priests, Scribes, and Lawyers who arrested, accused, and executed Jesus were to all appearances prominent men, religiously devout, and dedicated to their religion and its faith practice. How could they be so wrong about Jesus? How could they fail to see what was obvious to ordinary people, namely, that Jesus was a good and righteous man, a holy man, yes, and possibly even the Son of God? 

The only explanation I can see is that they were unwilling or unable to be self-critical. They were convinced of their perfect record in obeying all of God’s laws, prescriptions, and observances. Jesus had to remind them that they were forgetting the heart of God’s Law which is mercy. They didn’t buy it. They wanted everyone to be clearly identified as the sinners that they were, in accord with all their external failures to perfectly observe all the religious laws and prescriptions. They were mad as hell that Jesus accused them right back of interior sinful intentions and desires, because their good reputation mattered more to them than God’s judgement. Jesus took them to task for their hardness of heart and unwillingness to alleviate the people’s burdens.

How can people be so convinced that Pope Francis is a heretic? What is bothering them so much about him?

Frankly, after having read so many texts by those who accuse Pope Francis, and listening to a few people I know who feel the same way, I can only conclude that in our own day we have – without realizing it – slipped into the hard heartedness and hard headedness of the Pharisees, Sadducees, Chief Priests, Scribes, and Lawyers who arrested, accused, and executed Jesus. 

We / they want it to be very clear who the “sinners” are, so that we can be clearly distinguished from “them”. Those who don’t like Pope Francis, or are angry with him, or despise him or some of his statements and his attitudes towards “them”: those who identify as LGBT etc., or any other issue distasteful to them, disagree with his efforts to reform the Church. They believe the Church is fine the way it is and doesn’t need reform.

How can we who are convinced of our righteousness and religious devotion be so wrong?

Surprisingly, or shockingly, I believe that we could characterize what happened to the religious leaders in Jesus’ day and is happening to the critics of Pope Francis as “vestigial adolescence”. One of the defining characteristics of adolescence – as a child emerges from childhood and begins to notice all that is wrong with the world which they are inheriting from the generations of adults who have gone before them – is shock at the mess they see and anger at the deficiencies in the inheritance we are bequeathing to them. 

When an adolescent gets stuck in that shock and anger – which are perfectly normal reactions to an abnormal situation – the shock and anger compel them to rebellion and misbehaviour which can harden into juvenile delinquency. By definition, a juvenile delinquent is an adolescent who is angry at the world, sees everything that is wrong with the world, but has no sense of personal fault or responsibility. The delinquent’s eyes are exclusively focused on all that is wrong “out there”, but unable to be aware of anything that might be wrong “in here”, that is, within me. If I cannot admit anything that is wrong with me, by the same token I am unable to appreciate anything that is right and good with me. This is a different kind of hardness of heart. 

The advent and development of a new professional field: that of the psychoeducator

If you search “psychoeducation” on the web, there are indications that this professional was developed around 1980 and much is made of developments in Germany. However, in the French society of Québec, Canada, in 1940 a priest founded Boscoville, inspired by the American “Boys’ Town”, and in the 1950’s and 1960’s they developed the process of re-education into a process of awareness raising and responsibility. Today there is a postgraduate degree in psychoeducation which produces licenses psychoeducators who participate in the province’s health and social services. 

The primary discovery during those decades of development was that when an interested person who accompanied a delinquent took interest in whatever good they were doing – rather than constantly harping on all that they had done wrong – in trying to speak about the good they had done, the delinquents began to exist in their own eyes. From that point on, they could begin to choose to take responsibility for their own life, and by the same token, had less need to blame the rest of society or to find fault with others. 

It is a well established principle in the Christian life that the best way to avoid becoming obsessed with the faults of others is to assiduously examine one’s own conscience and regularly confess one’s own faults and work on replacing bad habits with habits of virtue. 

Why are some Catholics / Christians critical of others rather than “walk humbly with their God”? (Micah 6:8)

Eurasia and the Middle East – a heritage of empires

This part of the world went through successive empires, invasions, wars, and eventually the development of nations. Human nature being what it is, the various peoples accumulated experiences of domination and exploitation by monarchs and invading tribes. At times they enjoyed benevolent rulers, but it didn’t last. Some nations developed empires of their own: the Ottomans, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Holland. They in turn expanded, conquered, and exploited other peoples. 

The Americas

The European nations and empires set their sights on the “new world” and some settlers came to escape the tyrannies they had known there. Unfortunately, the settlement of the Americas collided with native peoples, and the general policy practiced by the settlers in effect carried out the results found in genocide. The native peoples of the Americas were, more or less completely, wiped out or subjugated in destructive ways.

The United States of America

Most prominent among American states is the U.S.A. which has taken the name of “America” to itself. From the beginning, those who developed this nation have taken a posture of superiority towards all others with whom they have had dealings. They took over much of the Spanish colonies in the south and west, and even so far as the Philippines. Through various policies over the centuries they have exerted such influence and power over other states in the Americas; that few if any have enjoyed similar freedom to develop their own forms of government and effectively care for their own populations. Holding other nations back or assuring that they are ruled by dictators or governments willing to do American bidding is seen as a duty to assure “American interests”. 

It is increasingly becoming apparent to American citizens that government policies pursued in the name of “American interests” are not necessarily oriented towards the common good of citizens, but rather towards the good of the largest and most influential corporations. In other words, more and more of the resources in the land are at the service of profiting the very small minority of people who own those corporations. There are too many documentaries to be counted that report the American countryside resembles more and more a third world or undeveloped society. Companies exploit an area for profit and abandon it when it suits them.

The legal system, the health system, large corporations, and the military industrial complex are extremely efficient at assuring their own interests and development; while citizens experience that increasingly none of these players have any interest in the well being or development of citizens, families, or communities. This dimension of America is deeply infected by the virus of profit and greed that excludes the common good. We could call the virus “American capitalism”. 

Canada

Like the U.S.A., in World War II Canada had the impression of standing on a higher moral ground than the people of Europe, where the war was principally being fought. However, we were not very hospitable to Jewish refugees trying to find a safe haven from the Nazi death camps. We didn’t object very strongly to the bombing of civilians in Germany and other nations. We weren’t overly sad at the atomic bombing of civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but only too glad that those atrocities may have accelerated an end to the war.

The death of western civilization

Sadly and embarrassingly, Canada is now on the forefront of those championing “open season” on humanity: abortion on demand, euthanasia increasingly on demand, and what will be next? When a society no longer acknowledges the existence of a Creator, God, let alone any responsibility of gratitude and worship towards the Divine Being; it is a very short step for human beings to begin behaving as though they were god, exercising with reckless abandon power over life and death. What we found so abhorrent in Hitler we now embrace with hardly a qualm of conscience. 

Is there any remaining sense of the common good on the Earth?

One reason that America, Canada, European nations, Japan, China, India, and many nations have at some point been great and retain a capacity to be great nations is the existence within them of great people. Human beings attain greatness when they develop depth of conscience and greatness of spirit, which becomes manifest in their positive contributions to their own society and to other societies.

Poland

Citizens of Poland have with great effort maintained a collective sense of identity and survived very harsh and destructive regimes. Many of their citizens have shown greatness, and now they must meet the challenge of a form of capitalism that focuses primarily on personal profit without due consideration for the common good. They must now contend, like most nations on the Earth at this time, with the virus “American capitalism”. 

Africa and Latin America

The nations and peoples of Africa and Latin America have been exploited by the ancient empires of Greece, Babylon, Chaldea, Syria, Assyria, Egypt, Rome, and others. These were replaced by the Arabic Empire which came to be known later as Islam, the best known and longest lasting version of which was the Ottoman Empire. In turn it was displaced by the European empires and now by the American Empire. For a time they were caught in the cold war between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. With the fall of the former, there now is only the latter. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the American empire – particularly through its transnational corporations – is greatly interfering in the development of nations and their ability to look after the proper interests of their own peoples.  

Japan

The Japanese have long been impressive as a people. Their rise from medieval society and poverty at the end of World War II into an economic powerhouse and highly developed, educated, and sophisticated society has been truly remarkable. The whole world has been impressed with their response as a society to natural or other disasters, at which time their whole society mobilizes as though a single man. Their practice of wearing masks in public transit in order to avoid spreading respiratory infections is very impressive. However, not even the Japanese have been able to resist the virus of “American capitalism”. They are having so few children that their whole population is tipping into old age. Their development has not been without fear for the future. 

China

We westerners have been effectively brainwashed into seeing only the harsh violence of the communist revolution when we consider China and its people. As a child I was deformed with stories of missionaries tortured and killed. The narrative given to us came from our own societies which had been formed by their own interests as empires of exploitation and conquest. When missionaries came from European nations to the Americas – as they did to Asia, Africa, and Oceania – they travelled on the same boats that brought soldiers on a mission of conquest and exploitation.

The Communist Revolution in China had as its first goal the elimination of outside empires and their policies of conquest and subjection for exploitation. Only recently have I discovered that 80% of Chinese in China today self identify as Han. They are an almost completely homogeneous people and their language is Mandarin. Their current rapid progress is due to the hybrid development of capitalism and private ownership and enterprise with a central government operating according to communist principles. 

The Basque economic revolution

One of my most astounding discoveries in the past year has been to hear and read about a different form of capitalism that not only exists but is thriving in our world. In 1956 a Roman Catholic priest encouraged his unemployed and impoverished people not to wait for capitalists to come and invest in creating jobs for them but to go ahead and do it for themselves. Well, they did. Today, the Mondragon Corporation includes over 100 companies entirely owned and operated by the workers themselves. 

Workers evaluate supervisors instead of the other way around. Profits are not siphoned off for the benefit of a handful of owners or share holders, because the workers all have equal shares in the company and together they operate develop it. They set up their own university to assure the development of cooperation as a more beneficial form of capitalism, more beneficial for the whole of society, because the corporation reinvests in the nation in which its owners, the workers, dwell. The corporation pays its fair share of taxes, rather than seeking refuge in foreign tax havens.

Mondragon Corporation reinvests 10% of profits into education, 45% into research and development, and 45% into the worker / owners’ pension funds; where until they retire they are reinvested into the Corporation’s ongoing development and growth. The highest paid worker earns not more than 5 to 6 times the least paid worker, unlike American corporations where the difference is more like 300 times more. Is the success of Mondragon due to the strong sense of collective identity enjoyed by the Basques? Can others emulate and reproduce their success? Can cooperation co-exist with American capitalism and, in time, even replace it? 

Are we any longer capable of recognizing goodness, righteousness, and mercy, or of practicing them?

We are descendants and products of genocidal empires and plutocracies. We modern homo sapiens are ever more convinced of our superiority and inversely willing to recognize any external authority. To put it in a Roman Catholic context, the Pope cannot possibly be infallible because everyone else already is. While it is shocking to see TV reporters and commentators taking what appears to be glee in insinuating if not outright accusing Pope Francis of heresy; it is not surprising, and it is disappointing. 

Because of our political en economic heritage, but especially because of our human nature, we are almost incapable of recognizing authentic goodness, true righteousness, and divine mercy when we see them. It appears that we have very little appetite for practicing such virtuous attitudes and behaviours. However, the situation is not without hope, because it is merely further evidence that we stand in need of a Saviour. Thanks be to God that He has given us One: Jesus, his only-begotten Son, for whose coming once again we now have the privilege of preparing through yet another Advent Season.

Blessed Advent to you and your family!

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to help spread the contributions of a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +  

Controversy and confusion over Pope Francis & "Amoris Laetitia" Part 1 - Many are uncomfortable with God's mercy and prefer to "lay down the law".

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

There is no denying that currently in the Roman Catholic Church there has come to light some disagreement - even at the highest levels among bishops and cardinals - over some of Pope Francis' writing, speaking, and teaching. Since Pope Francis' election I've been observing how people tend to divide in how they understand or feel about Pope Francis, his words, actions, attitudes, teaching, speaking, writing, and demeanor. This was already happening before "Amoris Laetitia" and only increasing with time. Given popular support for Pope Francis, however, it was difficult for those who, for various reasons, opposed him to do so openly, or at least, without substantial grounds. This has changed.

They are treating Pope Francis as Jesus was treated and for the same reasons 

Previously, a year or two before "Amoris Laetitia" came out, a thought occurred to me that what was happening around Pope Francis resembled what first happened around Jesus. Not only that, but I remembered Jesus' warning that the very same that was happening to Him would also happen to all who follow Him and try to carry out the mission with which He was entrusting them, and now, us.

Jesus stated He did not come to change or abolish the law but to fulfill it, that is, assure that it was effective in accomplishing its purpose, which is, namely, to bring his people back to God. Jesus accused the Pharisees and Sadducees, lawyers and scribes, and Temple priests of not only not doing that, but He actually accused them of making it even more difficult for his people to return to the Lord. They set insurmountable obstacles that only the wealthy and powerful could hope to accomplish, with all their servants bearing the brunt for them, of all the legally and meticulously defined burdens.

He accused them of being only superficially concerned with God's law, while simultaneously being far away from the heart of the law, which, Jesus reminded them, was about the love of God and of neighbor. He even gave them a little "shock therapy" with his parable of the tax collector and the Pharisee who both went in to pray. Jesus did not show the tax collector as finally repentant and definitively turning away from all sin, but only as humble in his confession and plea for mercy. Nevertheless, He said, the tax collector went away justified while the "ritually pure" Pharisee did not. Luke 18:9-14

The rigid demand to clearly label who "the sinners" are....

In the current confusion and controversy over the issue of whether people in irregular marriage situations or situations of adultery, it seems to me that among all those who participate in or contribute to the discussion and writing, very few if any are focusing on Jesus' own diagnosis of what was going on in all of the opposition He was facing in his time. It seems to me that what is actually happening now is directly related to the trouble Jesus stirred up. I believe Jesus would say to us that we are more concerned with the keeping of the law than we are with the return of sinners to God's mercy.

Just after the call of Matthew, tax collectors and sinners sat at dinner with Jesus and his disciples and the Pharisees challenged "his disciples: 'Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?' But when he heard this, he said, 'Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' For I have come to call not the righteous but sinners.'" Matthew 9:10-13 In addition the evangelists give abundant testimony to Jesus' inclination to forgive sins and pardon sinners, even when that is not what they asked for, but only a healing or deliverance.

In each instance, Jesus read the minds and hearts of people, because, although "many believed in his name because they saw the signs that he was doing... Jesus on his part would not entrust himself to them because he know all people and needed no one to testify about anyone; for he himself knew what was in everyone." John 2:23-25 Jesus, like the Father, distinguishes between those who are superficially coming to God and those who are coming with their whole heart, those who have an appetite for signs from those who hunger and thirst for truth, justice, and mercy, those who want to be considered pure from those who truly long to be pure.

Jesus taught the truth openly but also showed mercy to sinners, to real people.... 

There was no contradiction in Jesus publicly teaching the truth while receiving people in such a way that He risked giving impression that in practice He eased the repentance of sinners and kept the company even of those sinners not yet ready to repent. He wanted everyone to come to know the love of the Father; so that the time for them to return to the Father might be hastened. Jesus' inclination was to teach the truth publicly, while at the same time, He extended the divine mercy to individuals as He came across them, one at a time. Later He instructed the twelve and then the seventy-two to go out and do the same. "'Freely you have received; freely give.'" Matthew 10:8

In the face of the religious and secular culture of his time, and in light also of his opposition, Jesus warned all who heard him against casting judgements. "'Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgement you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.'" Then He gives the well known image of criticizing a neighbor for having a speck in his eye all the while having a plank in our own, hindering our sight. Jesus tells us to see to and look after our own soul first, always first, and to approach others as He does, with humility, respect, kindness, and understanding; which is love.

Pope Francis has spoken and written frequently about the inclination of some to take refuge behind the letter of the law, to assure at all times that the Church never tires of dogmatically repeating moral teaching and continually dictates the application of that teaching in all instances, lest there be allowed to linger any doubts in the minds and hearts of people. Whenever Pope Francis addresses clerics, both bishops and priests, he keeps calling on us to get close enough to the faithful to "acquire the smell of the sheep", that is, not to fear to "get dirty" as a result of getting close enough to them to be troubled by their troubles, to be moved to weep with those who weep, and to be lifted up to laugh with those who laugh.

What does it mean to be a "true Christian"? 

In his letter to the Romans, chapter 12, verses 9ff, St Paul describes the "marks of the true Christian", including that we should "rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep." v. 12 We accept generally that St Paul was correctly interpreting Jesus' complaint regarding "this generation. It is like children sitting in the market-places and calling to one another. 'We played the flute for you, and you did not dance; we wailed, and you did not mourn.'" Matthew 11:16-17 People criticized both John the Baptist and Jesus, because of the hardness of their hearts. They were not moved by John to repent and they would not let Jesus lift them up to the loving and merciful view of the Father. In rejecting Jesus they were rejecting the one who sent Him. Luke 10:16

We can't have it both ways. We can't take shelter behind the fortress of "the law" and at the same time mingle with the sheep in the hope of leading them to proper pasture. Jesus used the image of sheep intentionally, we are sure. They are strong willed and follow their nose, which leads them constantly into trouble whenever the shepherd gets distracted to takes a snooze. Jesus urged shepherds not to beat the sheep but to carry them tenderly. I believe that Pope Francis is telling all of us, in no uncertain terms, that we must put aside the era of dogmatic formulations and wholesale condemnations and "get dirty", get closer to the sheep and identify with them and, by winning their trust through mercy, succeed in leading them - some more quickly but others by degrees - to pasture.

If Pope Francis continues to ignore the challenge wrapped in respectability by by such words, attitudes, and actions as the "Dubia", with all due respect to the esteemed authors of those texts; it seems clear that he is ignoring it for the same reasons Jesus chose to have as little to do as possible with the Pharisees and other religious leaders and influential people. Jesus knew that as long as they persisted in their legalistic mindset they would never understand nor accept Him nor what He was saying and doing. He knew that, in the end, they would commit deicide. God simply exceeds our human categories and parameters, but we keep trying to "tame" Him and "squeeze" Him into our nice, neat, little categories. We keep doing that because we are afraid and we need to find reassurance of our own likelihood to be saved by clearly defining all those who will be damned.

More recently Pope Francis has said that he believes those who insist on demanding clearer formulations in the interest of the well being of the faithful are in fact more likely to be hiding behind that respectable facade to conceal their own need for clarity, and they are doing that because, fundamentally, we human beings stopped trusting in God. Isn't that what happened with the original sin? Since then we prefer our own opinions and judgements and are loath to accept those of the Lord. We don't want to wait to let God sort it all out, we want to sort it out ourselves, and we want to do it now.

Since the beginning, it comes down to God's will vs our personal opinions or preferences.... 

So what is really going on here, in this controversy and confusion over chapter 8 of "Amoris Laetitia"? I believe that it is a contest between the divine view and the human view. The divine view got Jesus killed, and it seems now likely that it may obtain the destruction - in one form or another - of Pope Francis; in which case he will have the joy of sharing in Jesus' passion to the very bitter end. There can never be compromise or accommodation between these two views, the divine and the human. Either we persist in our limited human view and continue to kill God in the souls of people or else we humble ourselves and get with God's program and follow the lead of the Good Shepherd. It has to be one or the other, we cannot have both, and having it our way only leads to death for ourselves and as many as we lead away from the Good Shepherd's voice.

While all of us in the comfort of our homes, studies, offices, churches, rectories, computer screens and keyboards, and all other "fortresses" continue to add fuel to this confusion and controversy; in the meantime people are suffering the ravages of our secular age, often with no one willing to stop and care like the "good Samaritan". People carry the wounds of neglected parenting while both their parents worked and abandoned the full time burden of forming, humanizing, and loving their children. In other instances, separated and divorced parents oversee damage done to their children while they struggled to "find happiness". The true litany of woes is only becoming longer and more complex as civilization as we know it disintegrates all around us.

In "Laudato Si" Pope Francis dared to formulate a judgement on our society, which many believe to be God's own judgement, that our social apparatus, ways of doing, institutions, attitudes, and way of life is almost entirely articulated around the absolute value given to "the dollar" or whatever currency is local; while the human person in all its dignity and rights is made subservient. From the beginning the Creator intended it to be the other way around, but we resist even the remote possibility of this truth, let alone doing anything to change it. This is one of the facets of what original sin looks like in our own day. Until the end of the world we will never be able to escape struggling with it, against it, but God wants us to do it with his help and following his guidance.

It is good to be "disturbed" by the Gospel, because Jesus is "disturbing".... 

However we are all, myself included, collectively and personally squirming, I believe, when we hear what Pope Francis says, read what he writes, and see what he does. I believe we would not be much more troubled if Jesus came and walked among us again in Person. We are not much better than his contemporaries were, even if we would prefer to think better of ourselves than the religious leaders of Judea. The longer we continue to resist trusting Pope Francis, the longer we refuse to pay attention to the "whole perspective" of what he is saying, writing, and doing, the longer we will continue to crucify Christ all over again, and we do it for the very same reasons they did it the first time. To be fair though, now we can sincerely believe that we have the best interests of the faithful at heart by insisting that no one in the circumstances of adultery should approach the sacraments, ever. We can be sincere but quite wrong.

It is not a coincidence that Pope Francis gave us the "Jubilee Year of Mercy". How is it that we fail to take this into consideration, as in 'been there, done that'? Why do we so resist taking on ourselves the characteristics of God's own divine mercy? I believe we are fundamentally afraid to entrust ourselves, our lives, our Church, our society, and our world to God. We believe He will mess it up. So we take refuge behind Jesus' reiteration of the Genesis revelation about marriage in the face of challenges regarding divorce. We ensconce ourselves firmly in Jesus' own teaching about adultery and who commits it. Then we go on to ignore his shepherd's attitude and behavior in caring for the sheep and the lambs. We do it because we are uncomfortable to hold both at the same time. We don't want to wait for God to judge when it is time. We want to cast judgement now.

I believe that many in the Church have still not accepted as genuine and as pastoral inspirations from the Holy Spirit such declarations by Pope Francis as:

"our church doors should be open" - the Eucharist "is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak" - "God save us from a worldly Church with superficial spiritual and pastoral trappings" - "This I ask you: be shepherds, with the 'odour of the sheep', make it real, as shepherds among your flock, fishers of men. True enough, the so-called crisis of priestly identity threatens us all and adds to the broader cultural crisis; but if we can resist its onslaught, we will be able to put out in the name of the Lord and cast our nets." (Chrism Mass homily March 28, 2013) - "the Church is called to be a 'field hospital' with doors wide open" Cf full quote following...

Homily of Pope Francis in the Vatican Basilica on October 4th, 2015 at the Holy Mass for the opening of the XIV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops.

"And the Church is called to carry out her mission in charity, not pointing a finger in judgment of others, but – faithful to her nature as a mother – conscious of her duty to seek out and care for hurting couples with the balm of acceptance and mercy; to be a "field hospital" with doors wide open to whoever knocks in search of help and support; even more, to reach out to others with true love, to walk with our fellow men and women who suffer, to include them and guide them to the wellspring of salvation.

A Church which teaches and defends fundamental values, while not forgetting that "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mk 2:27); and that Jesus also said: "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners" (Mk 2:17). A Church which teaches authentic love, which is capable of taking loneliness away, without neglecting her mission to be a good Samaritan to wounded humanity." 

I understand Pope Francis to be calling us away from shoving a burdensome moral code incessantly at people so as to instead go back to proclaiming the essentials of God's mercy as Jesus did. Then, as people encounter God's mercy, He will manifest his sovereignty in their lives and set his light in them and, in his time but not our time, they will see that light and feel moved to amend their ways. That will be for them the day of salvation, which is always God's day and not our own.

This is a good shepherd's approach, not beating the sheep into submission - as all too often we have as Church done in the past (think only of the Spanish Inquisition which some people apparently would want restored in our day). A bad shepherd uses elements of the Gospel as a club to coerce submission (as we accuse of radical Muslims trying to do); but a good shepherd proposes the good news for what it fundamentally is: God loves us so much He sent his Son among us, to live our life and suffer our death, to get our attention and win our hearts, minds, and souls; so that we may freely, humbly, and gratefully respond to his outpouring of divine life for us.

In conclusion, are we going to see an "easy fix" anytime soon? I don't think so. However we must all of us face the real issue at hand, namely, will we humble ourselves to pay attention to what God is doing in our time through the person and ministry of Pope Francis, or will we continue to fortify our fortresses and press to clear definitions of the law; as did the religious leaders of Jesus' day who in the end put Him to death? Do we secretly covet the removal of Pope Francis? This is a question that each of us must answer.

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to help spread the contributions of a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +  

Pope Francis vs critics = mercy vs legalism - People have trouble holding to both the truth and mercy as God has always done towards us.

My purpose in these posts is to bring a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

April 8, 2016 Pope Francis released the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris Laetitia", "The joy of love experienced by families...".

This past Fall some cardinals have challenged Pope Francis to clarify what appears to them, and undoubtedly to others, some confusion over his formulations which could be seen to contradict all previous teaching by the Church on moral questions, most notably whether people separated or divorced and currently in a new marital situation might be admitted to the sacraments of Reconciliation and Holy Communion.

Whatever discussion and confusion may have already existed seems to have been exacerbated by the open publication in November by these cardinals of the text they had previously sent privately to Pope Francis and to which he did not respond. The open discussions from any and all points of view have since proliferated all over the web and social media.

Are all those engaging in these quasi public discussions stating that all of us are to be permitted only one way of treating these questions, that is, by theological discourse, allowing us to utter only clear and categorical statements about morality, such as are to be found in university classrooms?

Are then such categorical dogmatic statements to be the only approach to human beings, regardless of the venue or situation, such as was the practice of the Pharisees in Jesus' day? The logical outcome is that we take upon ourselves the prerogative of God the only true judge and we push this dogmatic discourse to its logical conclusion and pass judgment on each and every human being in any and all possible human life situations, said judgment to be summarily declared on the sole basis of such dogmatic definitions? Then we would no longer recognize God as the only just judge by taking judgment on ourselves, as did the Pharisees who felt quite perfectly justified in carrying out the prescriptions of the Torah in stoning anyone found in any situation of objectively grave sin.

Theoretical or theological discourses on moral issues are one thing, but the treatment of real human beings in the course of daily living is quite another.

If we are not to go the way of the Pharisees, who were quite content to condemn anyone who "stepped out of line" - showing no sign of compassion or of any feeling whatsoever besides the smug satisfaction of "nailing the sinner" - but instead are to follow Jesus' example and teaching; how are we then to understand his ready association with commonly recognized "public sinners"?

His practice of not passing judgment on anyone had as its only exception to contradict the Pharisees when they were on the point of executing the accused while challenging his authority. Jesus did say to that one woman and to a few others "go and sin no more" but He did not make a practice of going around passing judgment of even simply saying "go and sin no more" to everyone. Rather, he left people to their own devices, free will, and conscience to come to righteousness in natural course, asking only that people follow the great commandment of love. About judgement He said "judge not lest you be judged".

I don't necessarily agree with what the bishops of Malta have done, but then again I am not familiar with what pastoral challenges they are trying to address. What I do wonder about is what is this "itch" that people increasingly seem to have to day for wanting nothing but categorical definitions and, in extension, the clear condemnation of all those who don't appear to abide by or fit those definitions? Are people so afraid of employing their own conscience that they need to rely primarily on the universal application of clear dogmatic declarations?

I seem to recall that this is what constituted medieval society: clear definitions of right and wrong, summary judgment of anyone accused of not fitting in, and rapid execution or other punishment of those found guilty. In such a society it was highly possible for people to be externally observant of morality while within they cultivated all manner of evil, and for others to be caught in flagrant error while harboring within them an otherwise innocent and loving spirit and life. This was not much different from the Pharisaical outlook of Jesus' day.

Even in the Old Testament, the Jewish Scriptures, as it is to be found in the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel in chapter 18, when the Lord reveals his own approach and attitude that it is not until the final moment that a soul reveals its true and inherent malice or justice. God does not judge by appearances or by external circumstances - are we have such an appetite to do - but He rather looks at the heart.

The Scriptures are clear about God's justice and clear denunciation of evil and sin, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the Scriptures are replete with God's declarations of patience and mercy towards sinners; lest any be lost. But then again we humans tolerate with great difficulty any semblance of ambiguity and much prefer to drag people to the guillotine. I recall that since the French Revolution the criminal code in France holds guilty anyone accused by simple virtue of their being accused, putting the burden of proof on the accused to demonstrate their innocence. If unable to do so, however innocent they may be, they are submitted to the full rigor of the law.

The new trend in the Catholic Church seems to be to want to bring this French legalism into the life and practice of the Church. I shudder at the thought of it.

We can always rely on our Church and its magisterium to teach with clarity what Jesus taught, but we also look to her to teach and to practice the mercy that Jesus introduced and for which He was killed. We are inclined to forget how difficult it was the first time for Jesus to introduce mercy in a society which could only tolerate legalism. Not much has changed it seems, and as the opposition to Pope Francis demonstrates, it is just as difficult now as then to try to introduce God's own attitude of mercy with justice or justice with mercy in our own day.

We thankfully still grasp the difference between dogma and revelation, between acts of magisterium and the Sacred Scriptures, between words of the Church and the Word of God. It is only right and reasonable to agree on this point. Jesus' teaching was and is clear.

What cannot be so clear is how we bring one person at a time to hear and grasp Jesus' teaching and then apply it to their own lived situation in the free exercise of their own will and conscience as opposed to us, or whoever is in dialogue with them, coming down hard on them with a categorical definition of sin and declaration that they are in that sin now.

Are we to talk to people as judge, jury, and executioner, or are we to walk with them as fellow sinners on the journey towards holiness and do what we can so that they can begin to perceive the light that is shining on the face of Jesus and freely choose to walk, to take steps, towards that light?

When we talk with others, this personal discourse takes place in a matter of minutes or perhaps extended over some days or weeks. God's dealings with each of us stretch out over our lifetimes. Who are we to force people to digest compressed in a short time what we ourselves have experienced as God's patience and learned as God's truth over our lifetime?

This then is no longer public discourse but the new evangelization. Part of this universal effort is about the need for the Church to present to the world both a clear rendering for today of what Jesus always teaches, on the one hand, and on the other hand, a clear statement for today of what Jesus brought as a practical and personal introduction to the mercy of God, which He incarnates.

The discourses of truth and mercy are clearly very different while being complementary and both necessary because they are essential parts of the one reality of the life given to us by God to live as his children and not as orphans or pagans or the damned. We cannot squeeze one discourse into the methods or timing of the other without doing irreparable harm to real, live, breathing human beings, sinners all; as are we ourselves.

It seems that the difficult coexistence of these two discourses is a primary cause of the ambivalence, tension, and even in some cases hysteria which we observe happening in this worldwide discourse over human sexuality, marriage, and family which has been going on since before Venerable Pope Paul VI released his Encyclical "Humanae Vitae" - "The transmission of human life...."

----------------------------------------------------------------

My purpose in these posts is to help spread the contributions of a variety of Christian and other writers in a desire to share significant writings that in my estimation contribute to the common good and directly or indirectly give glory to God and extend the Lord's work of salvation to all of humanity. G.S.

----------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004-2021 All rights reserved Fr. Gilles Surprenant, Associate Priest of Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montreal  QC
© 2004-2021 Tous droits réservés Abbé Gilles Surprenant, Prêtre Associé de Madonna House Apostolate & Poustinik, Montréal QC 

+ + + + + + + + + + + +