Why?

[Guest JeffCR07]

CforC, God Bless!

I'm thinking perhaps it would be good for everyone if we got back to the issue, and I've been thinking about one of the things that you said in particular:

[quote]if he is intentionally not using this to appease schismatics, then it would seem he is intentionally down-playing the authority of the Papacy, which is mock humility, cf., St. Cyril of Jerusalem).[/quote]

While I am certainly no authority on the issue, I'm hoping that you might consider my two cents worth.

It seems to me that it is possible for the Holy Father to use the first person as a manner of reaching out to schismatics without, in fact, "down-playing" the authority of the papacy. We already recognize that our Holy Father is simultaneously servant and shepard, so the question is, if he comes to a person (say a schismatic) as a servant, does this necessarily negate the reality of his "shepardhood?"

Let us consider Christ for a moment. Our Lord was simultaneously fully God and fully human. What I think is significant is that Christ came to us appearing human, that we might enter into a relationship with him and thereby understand him to be God. However, that coming to us as a human did not "downplay" his divinity.

In the same way, I think the Holy Father can "come to" schismatics as a servant, that they might enter into a relationship with him and thereby understand him to be the Vicar of Christ.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[CatholicforChrist]

Jeff, thanks for the comments. That is certainly a possibility; the only real question I had (after the initial things were sorted out) is why our current Holy Father had decided to do it in light of the fact that I had not seen this in any of the Popes before him (including the ones post-Vatican II) in all the Encyclicals I had read and, subsequently, in all those that I had searched. In any event, I do not think that it is a vital issue; I was just curious as to why he had decided to do this. I agree that the Pope is both Shepherd and Servant, but I was just confused with the idea of being a servant to those who are outside the Church. It seemed to be a new thing that had not been practiced in the past, and from what I have read in the Fathers, they had had strong words against any kind of involvement or kind actions and feelings toward non-Catholics (at least and especially those in authority because they have a special vocation and it could be a great scandal to the faithful). Thanks for your comments. God bless.

[qfnol31]

I think part of it is the idea that the Church's mission is to save all souls, and he doesn't think that it would be right to continually push them away (schismatics), though I don't believe that's the reason he does this.

[Guest JeffCR07]

CforC, God Bless!

I think (and of course I cannot speak with any form of certainty) that our current Holy Father, even moreso than recent popes of the past, sees as a possibility, rather than a dream, reunification of the East and the West. We must remember that our seperated brothers in the east are indeed just that: our brothers. It is our Holy Father's special responsibility to make sure that he play the role of Father to the Prodigal Son, and not the role of the elder brother. As such, it seems to me that if our father deems it proper to run out to greet our brothers, it is not our place to argue against him, even if we cannot see the logic in such a decision.

In all honesty, there are a great many things that I wonder about, as you are here, but we should always remind ourselves that our greatest calling as members of the laity is to have faith, and that means committing ourselves entirely, both intellect and will, to the Church and, as such, to the Holy Father.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[qfnol31]

Mind and will must be given in those areas of doctrine.