Vatican City, Dec 1, 2017 / 05:34 am (CNA/EWTN News).- In an encounter with interfaith leaders in Bangladesh, Pope Francis stressed the need to join together in promoting mutual respect and combating religiously-justified violence, saying this can’t achieved through mere tolerance, but requires real knowledge and trust of the other.
In a Dec. 1 meeting with interreligious leaders in Bangladesh, Pope Francis praised them for their commitment to live together in “mutual respect and goodwill” in the country, “where the right to religious freedom is a founding principle.”
The fact that they are all meeting together, he said, “stands as a subtle yet firm rebuke to those who would seek to foment division, hatred and violence in the name of religion.”
Pointing to the commitment of interfaith leaders in Bangladesh to building a culture of encounter, Francis said this goal “entails more than mere tolerance.”
“It challenges us to reach out to others in mutual trust and understanding, and so to build a unity that sees diversity not as a threat, but as a potential source of enrichment and growth,” he said, adding that it also serves as a challenge to “cultivate an openness of heart that views others as an avenue, not a barrier.”
Pope Francis with the interreligious leaders on his second day in Dhaka, Bangladesh, which is the second phase of his Nov. 27-Dec. 2 tour of Asia. He was in Burma Nov. 27-30, and will stay in Bangladesh until Dec. 2.
So far, the Pope has been outspoken on the need for peace and healing, specifically in Burma, and has stressed the importance of interfaith dialogue, praising the strides Bangladesh has made in this area.
The theme of interreligious unity has been a major talking point of the Pope’s visit to both countries, as Burma is a majority Buddhist nation and Bangladesh is majority Muslim. In Bangladesh, 86 percent of the population practices Islam. The 375,000 Catholics there represent less than 0.2 percent of the total population.
Pope Francis arrived to the interreligious encounter in a rickshaw, where he listened to testimonies from five leaders representing different religious communities in Bangladesh, including Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Anglicans and Catholics. Among the Catholics who spoke were a layman and Cardinal Patrick D’Rozario CSC, Archbishop of Dhaka, who is the first Bangladeshi cardinal, appointed by Francis in 2016.
Around 18 members of the Rohingya Muslim community were also present, including 5-year-old child. The Pope greeted them individually at the end of the event, listening as they each briefly explained their stories through an interpreter.
A largely Muslim ethnic group who reside in Burma’s Rakhine State, the Rohingya have recently faced a sharp increase in state-sponsored violence in their homeland, leading the United Nations to declare the crisis “a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”
With an increase in persecution in their home country of Burma more than 600,000 Rohingya have fled across the border to Bangladesh, where millions are in refugee camps. The crisis, which boiled over ahead of the Pope’s trip, has been a focal point of the visit.
In his speech to the interfaith leaders, Francis said there are three essential elements of the “openness of heart” that allow us to really encounter others: a door, a ladder and a path.
The door, he said, “is not an abstract theory but a lived experience” which enables one to have real dialogue, “not a mere exchange of ideas.” And going through this door requires “good will and acceptance,” he said, but stressed that this attitude is “not to be confused with indifference or reticence in expressing our most deeply held convictions.”
Pope Francis then turned to the image of the ladder, saying it is one “that reaches up to the Absolute.” By looking to this transcendent aspect of interreligious activity, he said, “we realize the need for our hearts to be purified, so that we can see all things in their truest perspective.”
Finally, he said the path they must take is one that leads “to the pursuit of goodness, justice and solidarity.”
“It leads to seeking the good of our neighbors,” he said, explaining that when religious concern for the good of others comes from an open heart, it “flows outward like a vast river, to quench the dry and parched wastelands of hatred, corruption, poverty and violence that so damage human lives, tear families apart, and disfigure the gift of creation.”
This spirit of openness, acceptance and cooperation among believers doesn’t just contribute to a culture of harmony and peace, but is “its beating heart.”
The world desperately needs this heart to beat strongly, he said, in order “to counter the virus of political corruption, destructive religious ideologies, and the temptation to turn a blind eye to the needs of the poor, refugees, persecuted minorities, and those who are most vulnerable.”
“How much, too, is such openness needed in order to reach out to the many people in our world, especially the young, who at times feel alone and bewildered as they search for meaning in life!”
Pope Francis closed his speech thanking the leaders for their efforts to promote a culture of encounter among the different religions in Bangladesh, and prayed that they would help all believers “to grow in wisdom and holiness, and to cooperate in building an ever more humane, united and peaceful world.”
In his greeting to the Pope, Cardinal D’Rozario said the religious harmony that exists in Bangladesh “is rooted in our cultural identity.” The fact that they live peacefully in a multi-religious and multi-ethnic context, he said, is a heritage “we proudly enshrine in our hearts and we feel so much pain when this sacrosanct heritage is attacked and harmony is disturbed.”
He said Bangladesh continues to “march forward” with the hope of building up humanity through integral development and care of the planet, and voiced the Church’s commitment to “cherish harmony and love peace” in the nation.
Francis was also greeted by five leaders of the different religious communities in Bangladesh, including Grand Imam and Mufti of Bangladesh, Farid Uddin Masud, on behalf of the country’s Muslim community; Swami Dhruveshananda Adhyaksha on behalf of the Hindu community, and Sanghanayaka Suddhananda Mahathero on behalf of the Buddhist community, among others.
In his greeting, Imam Masud said the world today needs compassion and love more than anything else.
“The only remedy and solution to the problem of malice, envy and fighting among nations, races and creeds lies in the compassionate love preached and practiced by the great men and women of the world,” he said, and praised Pope Francis for his “tireless efforts” on behalf of the oppressed, regardless of religion, cast or nationality.
“This is a great inspiration for all of us,” he said, and pointed specifically to the Pope’s support of the Rohingya Muslims from Burma, saying the Pope’s concern for them “will bring a positive result in regard to the attempts to ensure their human rights.”
The Muslim community in Bangladesh, he said, “pay our tribute and show respect” to Pope Francis for his attention not only to the Rohingya, but to people of all faiths, adding that the Pope’s role in promoting world peace “deserves our wholehearted respect.”
On his part, Swami Dhruveshananda Adhyaksha, representing the Hindu community, said that while the religions of those gathered may be different, “the objective is the same.”
“Just as all the rivers which originate from different sources blend into the same ocean, so all religions, though different, lead to the same beatitude,” he said, adding that “we have the duty to remain firm in the ideals we believe in, showing due respect for others.”
Likewise, Sanghanayaka Suddhananda Mahathero, Chief Patriarch of the Buddhists of Bangladesh and President of Bangladesh Bouddha Kristi Prachar Sangha, said the Pope’s visit has “ushered a new horizon of interreligious harmony among all faiths” in Bangladesh.
He said he has been moved by Francis’ “deep sense of kindness and compassion” toward the marginalized, and that the image of Pope Francis washing the feet of young African refugees is something that constantly stays in his mind.
“The Holy Father has achieved greatness,” he said, explaining that Bangladesh is committed to religious cooperation.
Affirming the sentiments of Bangladeshi resident Abdul Harmid, who in yesterday’s speech to the Pope said the country has a “zero tolerance” policy on violent interreligious conflict, the Buddhist leader said “we gather here to invoke with one voice the blessings of peace and fraternity in our country.”
After the testimonies, the encounter closed with a prayer recited by Anglican Bishop Philip Sarkar, who asked for strength to fight together against the evils of discrimination, division and corruption in Bangladesh.
“There are many people today in our world who are the victims of terrorism, conflicts, oppression and exploitation,” he said, noting that religious and ethnic minorities all over the world are suffering hatred and discrimination, and pointing to the Rohingya crisis in neighboring Burma as an example.
He prayed that world leaders and those who have authority would be guided by “wisdom and kindness” so as to wield their power in service to their people with love and attentive care.
Sarkar then pointed to the “hypocrisy and pride” each of the religions present at times display, saying “we misunderstand and hate people of other faiths and create suspicion with each other. We don’t know how to respect other religions and people of other faiths.”
He asked forgiveness for this, and prayed that God would help them to realize the depth of his love in order to “love others and live in service for others, but not judge others because of their faith or creed.”
The bishop closes his prayer asking that the interfaith leaders would be led by a spirit “of love and wisdom” in order to “show the path of true light and true life in this confused and dark world.”
[…]
Denies calling Cardinal Burke his enemy.
But not treating him as one.
What a tiny, tiny man.
He’s not treating him as his enemy. That’s slander. You, on the other hand, are treating the pope as your enemy.
Tell us, o brave “anon,” how exactly is he treating Cardinal Burke?
As Scripture instructs us, if you enter a town and the inhabitants reject the Word of God, kick off the dust from your feet and go out from that place.
I believe that Christ is calling Cardinal Burke to kick off the dust from the Bergoglian Debacle and remove himself from that place of iniquity and faithlessness. Move on, Cardinal Burke; God has plans for you elsewhere.
Now that Ivereigh has invoked the specter of Abp. Lefebvre, I would not be surprised to learn that the revocation of Cardinal Burke’s apartment and salary proves to be a precursor to his excommunication. Jesus sought for a return of His love, not the cultivation of servile fear among the faithful. Persecution outside the Church is multiplying red martyrs, and within the white sort. God help us!
Why on earth would Francis excommunicate Burke? There is no evidence to suggest he would.
There is a Mt. Everest of evidence he is a man without ethics.
Who?
The man who initiated the first action. Francis obviously.
Because Francis panders in uncharity.
Why not excommunicate Burke? Our current pontiff does many things that have no theological justification, but do have a political purpose. Bergoglio is not a spiritual man, he is a political actor, through and through.
WPI and the spokesman of Pontiff Francis Austen Ivereigh, are the public relations arm of their emergent “paradigm-shift-apostasy-church,” men who shove Christ aside, and assert that a mere steward, a pontiff, is their law-giver.
They promote the pathology identified by Fr. Robert Imbelli, an apostate establishment called “the Decapitated Body of Christ.”
The Pope denies that he called Cardinal Burke his “enemy.” What of it? How childish. Anyone can see that Francis abuses Burke every way he knows how, and even smirks when the “poor man” is intubated. Pope Francis should give up the Christian pretense. Even the NYT reports that Francis is enemies with Burke…
At least we have forever the authentic Catholic witness and Word of God from the first Pope: “Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere love of the brethren, love one another earnestly from the heart.” (1 Peter 1:22)
So much for “Who am I to judge?” as “his enemies” appearto be the closest “friends of God”
good point
Exactly. Evidently the call to listen and accompany applies only to those who willfully defy and reject church teaching. Otherwise, it seems to be open season on the faithful.
My thoughts exactly.
Imagine a kingdom where a friend of God is denied entry to his castle.
Imagine Jesus at Matthew 7:21-23 – “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.”
Matthew 7:13-14 has Jesus pointing to the narrow way. As Francis constricts Burke’s path, so Burke’s eternal kingdom is now more apparent, clear, and bright. God is blessing Cardinal Burke. Francis is a mere instrument. As was Judas, as was Herod, as was Pilate, etc.
The dastardly act is confirmed. How can anyone be so cruel, to evict old men in mid winter [Dec 21 is a technicality, it’s cold outside].
Well, Ivereigh as is his wont has the answer. One cannot claim, as does Card Burke, to be fruit upon the true branch while the tree itself is in disagreement with Burke’s criticisms of Synodality.
If Burke’s eviction is true it can be interpreted as a clear message to the other cardinals.
No magnanimity. No dialogue. Cdl.Burke is a martyr.
I thought that the whole “enemy” bit was unbelievable coming from the Pope; it sounded cartoonish. Glad to hear it didn’t happen.
What is cartoonish is while the pope believes Cdl Burke is acting against the Church all these years he has refused to meet with him even once. Cartoonish and childlike.
How do you know it didn’t happen? A denial from the same source who blatantly lied about McCarrick and blatantly lied about Rupnik?
Having read Julie Meloni’a book The Saint Galen Mafia the way this papacy has developed is no suprise. Vatican II was loaded with Modernists,clergy,laity,biblcal scholars and theologians who were very influential in influencing the Church with their modernist understanding of reality. One example is Father Raymond Brown, whose 20 or more books on the Gospels that denied the divinity of Jesus, denied that Gospels were written by the authors, and underminded confidence in Dei Verbum. I think this what Pope Saint Paul VI meant when he said ‘the smoke of Satan has entered the temple.’
For months I have read many comments on many different posts. I had been educated by them and they have given me food for thought. I feel the criticisms are healthy and necessary. This helps dissipate the clericalism that exists in the Church But, what I have repeatedly read is the comment that one must follow Jesus and not the Pope’s actions, thoughts, pronouncements, etc. This is interesting and enlightening. What I have been taught is that the pope is the successor to Peter and that one of the strengths of our Church is that we obey and respect the pope as the Head of the Church. Myself and others on rare occasions did not agree with the great Saint John Paul II or Benedict XVI, but, we obeyed. Now, I am enlightened to find through commentators in the many posts, that I have read, that if I do not agree with the next pope who may indeed be more conservative, then I simply ignore him and follow my conscience? It is hard to obey but is one of the strengths of our Church. By the way, I am appalled at the Latin Mass bans, the blessing of certain lifestyle, etc.
If some authentic magisterial document teaches this, please tell me the source: “I have been taught… that…we obey and respect the pope as the Head of the Church.” It has been my understanding that we respect the truth and true teachings of the CHURCH. The pope is not equal to the Church.
Thanks.
As I have commented to others This was what I and others were taught in the Catholic school system years ago. I thank you for your comments. I have formed a more enlightened view of the role of the pope on these many months by reading the commentators.
It has several times occurred to me, perhaps not wholly frivolously,that the election of Cardinal Bergoglio might have been permitted so that the faithful (and not just professional theologians) might develop a more considered view of the papacy. In the past I have been an enthusiastic and wholly uncritical supporter of the reigning Pope. But I had then only just become a teenager. And the Pope was Pius XII.
meiron,
Here’s a (portion of a) Vatican I document you might be interested in:
“First dogmatic constitution on the church of Christ
Session 4 – 18 July 1870” otherwise known as “Pastor Aeternus”
From Chapter 3:
“We renew the definition of the Ecumenical Council of Florence, in virtue of which all the faithful of Christ must believe that the Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff possesses primacy over the whole world, and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and is the true Vicar of Christ, and THE HEAD OF THE WHOLE CHURCH, and Father and Teacher of all Christians; and that full power was given to him, in Blessed Peter, by Jesus Christ our Lord, to pasture, to rule, and to govern the Universal Church; as is also contained in the acts of the General Councils and in the Sacred Canons.
“Hence we teach and declare that, by the appointment of our Lord, the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other Churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchical SUBORDINATION AND TRUE OBEDIENCE, to submit, not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those that appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.
“And since, by the Divine right of Apostolic primacy, the Roman Pontiff is placed over the Universal Church, We further teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful, and that in all causes, the decision of which belongs to the Church, recourse may be had to his tribunal, and that none may re-open the judgment of the Apostolic See, for none has greater authority, nor can anyone lawfully review its judgment. Therefore, they stray from the right course who assert that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman Pontiffs to an Ecumenical Council, as if to an authority higher than that of the Roman Pontiff.
“If anyone, then, shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the Universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the Pastors and the faithful; let him be anathema.”
http://catholicplanet.org/councils/20-Pastor-Aeternus.ht
JML, The Pope is NOT the head of the Catholic Church. Where did you get this idea? I refer you to One, Jesus Christ, Who IS the Head of the Church.
This was what was taught in the Catholic school system I was in at both the elementary level and high school level. This was many years ago. I am not the only one who still believes this. I thank you for your comments to me. It helps shape my views.
In response to your question. This is what I was taught and many others in the Catholic school system where I was educated many years ago. I agree with your comment and thank you for reminding me of the fact that you stated.
Rather than fault your education, have you considered that you were not a very good student? The pope’s job is to protect the Church not destroy it. When he is busy doing damage, we are obliged to disobey. Not complicated.
JML, God bless you. We have faith in Christ who in the Spirit shows us the Father. We make the Sign of the Cross and always without any mention of any Pope. He is Christ’s vicar and only that.
Deacon Edward, with all due respect,
JML did not say anything about the Sign of the Cross.
What JML was saying was respect and obedience to the Pope as head of the Church, as taught in Catholic schools a long time ago.
Not to take away the true and divine authority from Our Lord Jesus Christ over His Church, the “Pastor Aeternus” document of Vatican One does say the Supreme Pontiff is HEAD of the Church and to him is due our respect and obedience.
“Session 4 – 18 July 1870” otherwise known as “Pastor Aeternus.”
From Chapter 3:
“…we renew the definition of the Ecumenical Council of Florence, in virtue of which all the faithful of Christ must believe that the Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff possesses primacy over the whole world, and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and is the true Vicar of Christ, and THE HEAD OF THE WHOLE CHURCH, and Father and Teacher of all Christians; and that full power was given to him, in Blessed Peter, by Jesus Christ our Lord, to pasture, to rule, and to govern the Universal Church; as is also contained in the acts of the General Councils and in the Sacred Canons.
“Hence we teach and declare that, by the appointment of our Lord, the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other Churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their DUTY of hierarchical SUBORDINATION AND TRUE OBEDIENCE, to SUBMIT, not only in matters which belong to faith and morals’ but also in those that appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world…”
“And since, by the Divine right of Apostolic primacy, the Roman Pontiff is placed over the Universal Church, We further teach and declare that he is the SUPREME JUDGE of the faithful, and that in all causes, the decision of which belongs to the Church, recourse may be had to his tribunal, and that none may re-open the judgment of the Apostolic See, for none has greater authority, nor can anyone lawfully review its judgment. Therefore, they stray from the right course who assert that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman Pontiffs to an Ecumenical Council, as if to an authority higher than that of the Roman Pontiff.
If anyone, then, shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the Universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the Pastors and the faithful; let him be anathema.”
JML, you are right – just not enough. The Pope is the head of the Church on earth, i.e., Christ’s representative on earth, and as such, must protect and teach what Christ and His Church teach and do.
If the Pope announced it was ok to shoplift if you need the stuff, would it be ok just because he’s the Pope?? No. Because stealing is wrong and you know it. Jesus walked on water but Popes do NOT. In the past we have had many who had mistresses, children out of wedlock, etc. WE had a point in church history, during the Avignon Residency, where we had TWO claimants to being Pope, who each ran their own bureaucracy.So, who was telling the truth and who to listen to?? They have faults and foibles just like the rest of us. Does not Frances claim that he frequents confession?
When a Pope speaks officially on faith and morals, catholics are supposed to obey. I dont think we need to agree when he calls Joe Biden a “good catholic”. Unfortunately, this Pope has gone off the rails many times making vague unofficial comments regarding sexuality in particular, which has sewn confusion among the faithful. Catholics follow what has been Church teaching, and most informed catholics are aware when a priest, bishop or pope is going off the rails.
As I have replied to other commentator, this is what I and others were taught in the Catholic school system that we attended years ago. Your comments, like the others that I have replied to as well as past commentators I have read over these many months, have helped shaped my more enlightened view. Thank you for your comments. I do believe that we have many bishops who have gone off the rails as well as priests.
JML, you were correct all along. No further explanation is needed. God bless you.
LJ, that’s why Popes should speak rarely so that when they do the faithful sitbup and listen carefully. This Pope suffers from terminal logorrhea.
… but denied that he referred to the American prelate as his “enemy,” according to a web post by papal biographer Austen Ivereigh.
You really can’t make up this stuff. It’s a bit like saying, ‘I heard someone say you like to eat worms on toast, but I corrected him saying you love toast.’
He’s taking away what is essentially the PENSION of a old man who has dedicated his life in service to the Church and his apartment… but “I’m not his ‘enemy.'”
Jesuitical rationalization.
With “friends” like this, please don’t accompany me ….
A truly reprehensible but not surprising action from this petty and misguided tyrant. The war against the faithful continues on.
Really?? Has the Pope heard the old saying ” actions speak louder than words”??
Ivereigh: “It was conveniently in line with the traditionalist narrative of a merciless, vindictive pope who recklessly and unreasonably ‘punishes’ those who disagree with him.”
Yes. It is, isn’t it?
Does anyone believe anything Bergoglio says anymore?
Yes: Austen Ivereigh.
Bergoglio has simply adopted the Carl Olson approach to faithful Catholic writers. A bully’s Bolshevist blackguardism.
I’m sure that Mr. Olson would likewise deny that he considers faithful Catholic writers to be his “enemies.” He has certainly failed to utter one syllable, private or public, which even attempts to explain (since he cannot excuse) his unprovoked malice towards us.
Mr. Stove: I truly don’t know what I’ve done to elicit such a comment. But it’s a rather entertaining remark, so here it is. And, next time, don’t forget to ask me if I’ve stopped beating my wife. Sigh.
Mr. Olsen, Mr. Stove’s “ironometer” needs adjustment.
He also forgot to insert something snide about Trump.
BINGO on Ivereigh. For the stove, the heat was possibly turned a tad too high upon its intemperate mind, and the fire alarm failed. Pity that. Did you once reject a piece he judged as brilliant? Maybe in a sad old age he’s facing homelessness. I don’t believe you beat your wife nor are you unfair to anyone here. The stove needs a new thermometer.
Are you sure you are on the right web page? Your description of Mr. Olson and his work – with which I have disagreed from time to time – is bizarre in the extreme. If he was anything like what you maintain, you would not be commenting here.
Malice? There are plenty of comments here that set my blood boiling, and I know I can be headstrong, but I try to utter a quick prayer and say to myself how would the kind, even temperament of Carl Olson handle it.
Who has thoroughly discredited himself in the eyes of the faithful. No one of merit listens to him any more than they do Francis. The Vatican has become an echo chamber with a cross affixed.
Touché!
Unlike others on this site, I try to apply Hanlon’s razor when the pope does something questionable. “Never attribute malice to something explained by neglect, ignorance, or incompetence”. I try to tell myself that he is coming from a spirit of humility and that he genuinely believes his actions will benefit the church. Like he genuinely wants to help same sex attracted people conquer their fleshly desires by being more welcoming. Or that he actually believes suppressing the tlm will bring more unity. I don’t necessarily agree with those ideas but I try to believe that he is acting in good faith. Only wish more people could be like me.
“Only wish more people could be like me.”
So, you’ll be confessing the sin of pride soon?
Douay-Rheims Bible Luke 18:11
The Pharisee standing, prayed thus with himself: O God, I give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, as also is this publican.
Critical thinking is evidence based, ultimately, and rests on the facts. I don’t mean to be disrespectful here, but there is simply no empirical evidence whatsoever to support your belief that Francis is acting in good faith. In fact, the cold hard facts point in the opposite direction, and it is more appropriate to assume the worst than to give him the benefit of the doubt at this point. His actions have spoken clearly and consistently, and actions reveal the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
Are you suggesting that he’s just plain stupid?
So you desire to see nothing narcissistic in blatant cold-blooded cynical manipulation? We went through many years of Catholic nihilism in the post VII era where moral theologians made the entire enterprise of moral theology a sophist exercise of a war on God given guilt. The infantile hippie culture of the sixties that said feeling guilty was the primary evil dominated what passed for a moral theology that revived proportionalism and consequentialism to rationalize immorality until JPII largely discredited such thought with his masterful book length encyclical, The Splendor of Truth. Now we have a moral sophist like Francis abusing the concept of “discernment” as a catchword for moral subjectivity. In Amoris Laetitia he tells us a man can “discern” that in his concrete circumstances, God just might be asking him to be happy with his new wife. No mention is made about an absence of mercy towards the abandoned family. This is the essence of his narcissistic thought. A desire to be celebrated by sinners in love with their sins at the expense of the tragic consequences to the victims of sin, immorality which any Christian should understand as his “obligation to judge”. Self-aggrandizement in thought and deed is not the Christian life.
To write “Ivereigh is the author of two hagiographic biographies of Pope Francis” is both inaccurate and clearly uniformed. Both biographies are the most thorough accounts of this pope’s life, formation and subsequent theological perspectives that he has brought to his leadership of the church, however one agrees or disagrees with it. Such ad hominem attacks are not only unwarranted but betray a lack of balance in a matter that one expects informed judgement and fair presentation.
Whom do you believe you are fooling? The Ivereigh “biographies” are comically written, breathless, fanboy treatises that conflict with countless personal testimonies, such as those of fellow Argentinian prelates and ordinary Catholics in Buenos Aires who suffered under Bergoglio’s authoritarian hubris, indifference, and dishonesty. They also clearly conflict with everything that has transpired in Rome over the past decade. Just stop. You sound completely ridiculous.
Maybe, F.X., you’re referring to someone other than Francis.
What’s disturbing is the silence of fellow cardinals , bishops and clergy.
What’s disturbing is the silence from fellow cardinals and clergy
Argentinians – both laity and clergy- know precisely who Bergoglio is. This is why he has never returned to Argentina.
Bingo. He is absolutely hated in Argentina.
Really, I know people in Pennsylvania who despise him.
I recently became aware of a young man who is apostatizing because he finds Francis and his politicization of the Petrine Office to be dispositive proof against Church indefectibility.
I hope you can show him the Church is the truthful word of God that never changes ragardless of corrupt witnesses.
The report came from an anonymous source.
The denial was coursed through Ivereigh.
Such fun!
Just an average garden variety Catholic here……
A) if this account is true I don’t think the Pope thought it through.
B) I am not a fan of his because he has a clear pattern of getting involved in activist politics ( global warming, lgbtqrst, etc etc).
I wish he could find a way to recenter himself and the church to saving souls and lives. He should have long ago been smack dab in the fight for peace in Ukraine. He never stepped foot in Ireland during the abortion battle that legalized abortion. Same for Ireland’s gay marriage referendum.