Interview With Pope Francis In America Magazine

[PhuturePriest]

There are Orthodox who are ecumenically minded, and there are Orthodox who are not interested in ecumenism. In that sense they are probably a lot like Roman Catholics. I am sure some Roman Catholics would love to see communion restored with the Orthodox, but there are no doubt others who do not care one way or the other, and there are probably large numbers of Roman Catholics who do not even know that Eastern Orthodoxy exists. I just hope that Pope Francis speaks off-the-cuff less, because every time he does I have Orthodox friends who contact me and ask me what the heck is going on. 

 

Apotheoun, did the Orthodox ever act like they were ready to enter full communion when Pope Benedict was in charge? He made it a priority to try and have them enter full communion with them as he did with the SSPX, and both eventually decided it just wasn't worth the hassle. They both decided if we didn't bend on crucial teachings, then it simply wasn't going to happen. We can't do what we can't do. At some point, they need to humble themselves and come to a decision to enter full communion. There's nothing in terms of doctrine we can do, so they won't be satisfied with us, and unfortunately will probably not enter full communion. I wish they would, because the Orthodox are really awesome people (Not to mention their freakin' awesome clothes), but the things they take issue with are things we can't change.

[Apteka]

Hopefully.  It's called polyamory, btw.  

 

No, I meant polyandry, but thanks for chiming in!

[Basilisa Marie]

There's a difference, though. Those who criticize the Church on its stance against gay marriage do so because they believe it violates the rights of gay people (including non-Catholics). It shouldn't matter too much how the Pope addresses the issue. To explain this situation more accurately, we would need to slightly modify your example. Everything would stay the same except in this case you're requesting money, you have a gun in your hand, and there isn't a road trip. It doesn't matter if you ask nicely or not, you're still violating the rights of the other people. 

 

Right, but if you can get rid of some of the hostile barriers between you, you can start softening people's hearts.  Plenty of people thought that Benedict was a hypocritical evil Emperor (nothing could be farther from the truth).  But now, a lot of people think that Francis has integrity and actually lives what he's talking about, so they're more likely to hear what he has to say.  

 

Personal example: I pretty much despise Michael Voris's way of presenting his message, more or less. So I'm majorly prejudiced against anything he says, even if what he says turns out to be true. I'm going to hold all of it suspect unless I can get it verified by a third party.  Now, if somehow my own personal prejudicial barriers against him were broken down, I'll probably still disagree with some of what he has to say, but I'll be more open to listening.   That's the sort of thing I'm talking about. 

[4588686]

No, I meant polyandry, but thanks for chiming in!

 

 

Polyamory encompasses all of those.  

[PhuturePriest]

It may be the fault of the media? It most assuredly is the media that fixates on these particular moral issues, and it can even be seen in entertainment programs and not just the news. Almost every show has to have its token lesbian or gay couple these days. Who is obsessing? The Church? I don't think so, and yet Pope Francis said that it is the Church that is obsessing about these things. I cannot express in words how terribly disappointed I was to see the Bishop of Rome say that.

 

Let the media obsess all they want. Us playing along with their obsession has done us no favors. Preach the Gospel in its entirety, and people will see us in a different light.

[Apteka]

Apotheoun, did the Orthodox ever act like they were ready to enter full communion when Pope Benedict was in charge? He made it a priority to try and have them enter full communion with them as he did with the SSPX, and both eventually decided it just wasn't worth the hassle. They both decided if we didn't bend on crucial teachings, then it simply wasn't going to happen. We can't do what we can't do. At some point, they need to humble themselves and come to a decision to enter full communion. There's nothing in terms of doctrine we can do, so they won't be satisfied with us, and unfortunately will probably not enter full communion. I wish they would, because the Orthodox are really amesome people (Not to mention their freakin' amesome clothes), but the things they take issue with are things we can't change.

 

The problem with the Roman church is that it's not steadfast. Sure, the SSPX and Orthodox might find security in Benedict, but what of a future successor? The Church is like a bipolar patient off it's Librium.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

But if we were to present the Faith with charity and explain that it is not taking their rights away, they wouldn't see it as holding a gun up to them rather than us offering a lifestyle choice (In secular terms) that is greater than the one they are living.

Lol, but see I don't think it works that way. Your explanation demands that people accept a whole different world view that, in many cases, is extremely alien to them. Let's pretend you're a hippie and don't believe in free market capitalism and money (keep in mind that this view would be as crazy to you as your religious views would be to a nonreligious person). Now back to the gun example... If you were to explain with charity that you're not taking their rights away, they wouldn't see it as holding a gun up to them rather than you offering them a lifestyle choice (in secular terms) that is greater than the one they are living. 

The language used to address these issues shouldn't make a big difference. It should be more concerning to Catholics if the Pope has the exact same position on gay marriage as his predecessor, only because his comment comes off as a disingenuous and manipulative rhetorical gambit. Some might see it as a loving approach. I think it's too political for my liking. But I could be completely off. 

Edited September 21, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[Apteka]

Let the media obsess all they want. Us playing along with their obsession has done us no favors. Preach the Gospel in its entirety, and people will see us in a different light.

 

I have no idea what any of these people are talking about. They seem to suggest the Church has not taught the faith properly, and that Francis is offering some sort of new approach. It's still unclear what that is exactly. Does it mean whenever the issue of abortion comes up, a person will have to make a 30  minute synopsis on the Gospel, Catholicism, and nature of man? Or does it mean that we simply wont talk about abortion because we're regulating these to lesser issues? "Oh, you believe in abortion? Well, I disagree, but let's not fuss over it. Let's focus on curing cancer instead!"

[Apteka]

It shouldn't matter how one says something. It should be more concerning to Catholics if the Pope has the exact same position, only because it comes off as disingenuous and manipulative to use such tactics when discussing such big issues. Some might see it as a loving approach. I think it's too political for my liking. 

 

"No catch, only great things about this here vehicle!"

 

[Apotheoun]

Apotheoun, did the Orthodox ever act like they were ready to enter full communion when Pope Benedict was in charge? He made it a priority to try and have them enter full communion with them as he did with the SSPX, and both eventually decided it just wasn't worth the hassle. They both decided if we didn't bend on crucial teachings, then it simply wasn't going to happen. We can't do what we can't do. At some point, they need to humble themselves and come to a decision to enter full communion. There's nothing in terms of doctrine we can do, so they won't be satisfied with us, and unfortunately will probably not enter full communion. I wish they would, because the Orthodox are really amesome people (Not to mention their freakin' amesome clothes), but the things they take issue with are things we can't change.

No. But my more traditional Orthodox friends did seem to respect the dignified way in which he celebrated the liturgy and his unwavering devotion to the moral norm. 

 

Most Orthodox reject the Vatican I notion of papal supremacy and see the idea of universal jurisdiction and pontifical infallibility as obstacles to the restoration of communion. That said, my Russian Orthodox friends have agreed with Metropolitan Hilarion who has talked for several years about an alliance between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church in defense of the family and of moral values (e.g., opposition to abortion, euthanasia, contraception, and "gay marriage"), but recent events have made some of them question whether the Roman Catholic Church is going to continue to teach against these immoral things. Pope Francis is confusing a lot of people outside the Catholic Church, which is why I wish he would focus more on reforming the Curia and focus less on putting himself in the media spotlight with magazine interviews and press conferences.

Edited September 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[PhuturePriest]

I have no idea what any of these people are talking about. They seem to suggest the Church has not taught the faith properly, and that Francis is offering some sort of new approach. It's still unclear what that is exactly. Does it mean whenever the issue of abortion comes up, a person will have to make a 30  minute synopsis on the Gospel, Catholicism, and nature of man? Or does it mean that we simply wont talk about abortion because we're regulating these to lesser issues? "Oh, you believe in abortion? Well, I disagree, but let's not fuss over it. Let's focus on curing cancer instead!"

 

It's not about teaching something differently. We are teaching what we have been teaching for 2000 years. It's a matter of teaching it in a relevant and effective way.

[PhuturePriest]

No. But my more traditional Orthodox friends did seem to respect the dignified way in which he celebrated the liturgy and his unwavering devotion to the moral norm. 

 

Most Orthodox reject the Vatican I notion of papal supremacy and see the idea of universal jurisdiction and pontifical infallibility as obstacles to the restoration of communion. That said, my Russian Orthodox friends have agreed with Metropolitan Hilarion who has talked for several years about an alliance between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church in defense of the family and of moral values (e.g., opposition to abortion, euthanasia, contraception, and "gay marriage"), but recent events have made some of them question whether the Roman Catholic Church is going to continue to teach against these immoral things. Pope Francis is confusing a lot of people outside the Catholic Church, which is why I wish he would focus more on reforming the Curia and focus less on putting himself in the media spotlight with magazine interviews and press conferences.

 

I understand what you are saying. I do sincerely want the Orthodox to come into full communion, and I understand that it is frustrating to maybe see setbacks in making that happen. But Pope Francis has never renounced these beliefs, and he's never said anything that implied that. The media is twisting his words. When you look at the full interviews, you find nothing the media claimed he said was actually true. I would recommend telling your Orthodox friends to simply read the full interview and not listen to the media's spin of it.

[Apteka]

It's not about teaching something differently. We are teaching what we have been teaching for 2000 years. It's a matter of teaching it in a relevant and effective way.

 

:detective:

 

Hasn't the Church been doing this since the Second Vatican Council? Be specific about the differences between Francis' supposed new approach and what the Church has been doing for the past sixty years.

Edited September 21, 2013 by Apteka

[Apotheoun]

It's not about teaching something differently. We are teaching what we have been teaching for 2000 years. It's a matter of teaching it in a relevant and effective way.

I don't know about you, but in my 25 years as a Catholic I have never once heard a homily on the immorality of contraception. There was a priest who was very pro-life in the 1990s at a parish near my house and he did talk about abortion from time to time. As far as the third topic mentioned by Pope Francis is concerned, I have only heard it mentioned twice in a homily at Church and both times the reference was positive. The priest at St. Isidore's Church in central Contra Costa spoke several years ago on the Feast of the Holy Family about "the beauty of family in all its many forms." He then went on to clarify what he meant by talking about gay, lesbian, transgendered, divorced, and single parent families. I do not think that the Roman Catholic Church has been obsessed on these issues, but it has responded when necessary to what is going on in our culture.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

Right, but if you can get rid of some of the hostile barriers between you, you can start softening people's hearts.  Plenty of people thought that Benedict was a hypocritical evil Emperor (nothing could be farther from the truth).  But now, a lot of people think that Francis has integrity and actually lives what he's talking about, so they're more likely to hear what he has to say.  

 

Personal example: I pretty much despise Michael Voris's way of presenting his message, more or less. So I'm majorly prejudiced against anything he says, even if what he says turns out to be true. I'm going to hold all of it suspect unless I can get it verified by a third party.  Now, if somehow my own personal prejudicial barriers against him were broken down, I'll probably still disagree with some of what he has to say, but I'll be more open to listening.   That's the sort of thing I'm talking about. 

I agree with you. The Pope has a very good image. He has done a great job of maintaining that image in interviews and written public statements. That's what is concerning me. When he says things that at best fluff up controversial beliefs and at worst appear contrary to Church teachings even to devout Catholics, it brings up a lot of questions. I believe one of three things is going on here: 

1. He's intending to reform the Church's stance on some issues.
2. He has a problem understanding how people will interpret his statements. 
3. He's a good politician.

I'm against the idea of fluffing up beliefs to outsiders that are morally opposed to them. There's a difference between honestly discussing one's beliefs with love and discussing controversial beliefs like a politician.

Edited September 21, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl