pope francis awesomeness

[silverwhisper]

ever since his elevation to the papacy, i've been absolutely blown away by pope francis. i'm not a christian--never mind a catholic--but i'm seriously amazed by him. i thought it would be cool to have a single thread to serve as a repository of all things related to his holiness's awesomeness. and doing it right here on lit seemed like a really, really fun idea.

this is this week's reason why he's impressing me.

ed

 

[Emerson40]

Interesting article. Refreshing to see too that there is a little bit of practicing what is being preached instead of just pontificating from the pulpit.

As head of the church, perhaps he can do more to distribute and share some of the incredible wealth the church has accrued over centuries. Just stroll through the Vatican's museum... Hey-zeus Chris-toes! They could start by returning artifacts and treasures "liberated" from other nations during the church's more formidable days of power and influence.

Not saying they need to get all pious and poor, but they could certainly curtail some of the pageantry, conspicuous consumption, and bling.



Five up high for the big guy!

http://media.tumblr.com/3d2ec9122d7e6e9e8b4f458b9e1eef87/tumblr_inline_mjmjq147ak1qz4rgp.png

 

[silverwhisper]

honestly, i think that a far more powerful weapon at the pope's disposal is that of guilt. every catholic i know tells me that guilt is kinda the big bertha in the golf bag of the church.

i think the pope's doing just dandy with that message.

ed

 

[Emerson40]

Perhaps. It could be the overuse of the guilt card (and some other archaic ideologies) that has membership dwindling in some parts of the world.

They certainly have revised they way they wield that monster club and have even left it in the bag at times, such as when playing the course with the gay and lesbian communities. Less drive for show and more working on their short game. Not great for ratings perhaps, but refreshing to watch if you're a student of the game.

 

[silverwhisper]

emerson, that was ten kinds of awesome. i don't even play, but i always appreciate a well-crafted turn of phrase. :>

ed

 

[pplwatching]

I think that the non Catholic community gets the guilt thing all wrong. I have a non Christian friend married to a Catholic husband, and she's constantly making remarks about Catholic guilt. I have never understood where she got that from, and as near as I can tell neither does her husband.

When I was growing up, I was never made to feel guilty about anything. In my twenties I was not practicing, but felt no guilt about it. As my kids grew at first I started going back to church to set an example for them and give them some sort of religious footing, but now many years later I still have never been made to feel guilty about anything.

What I can say from my personal experience is that the Catholics that I know tend to hold themselves to a higher standard. Not "by doctrine or dogma" but from something coming from inside of themselves. They tend to feel guilt when they don't feel that they are meeting their own standards, rather than because the Church is wielding a big stick. I can only really speak for myself, but I generally feel guilty when I have let myself down. That may be because I have let someone else down, but ultimately the guilt is for my own failures to do what needed to be done.

I could be the only Catholic in the world who feels this way, I don't know.

Edited to add that of course there are people who claim to be Catholic and are either not pillars of society or who feel that they are "holier than thou". I'm talking about the middle of the pack where I seem to find myself. And, edited (again) to add that I find myself liking the new pope.

 

[Eilan]

At least he's not Benedict. . .

 

[Emerson40]

I think that the non Catholic community gets the guilt thing all wrong. I have a non Christian friend married to a Catholic husband, and she's constantly making remarks about Catholic guilt. I have never understood where she got that from, and as near as I can tell neither does her husband.

When I was growing up, I was never made to feel guilty about anything. In my twenties I was not practicing, but felt no guilt about it. As my kids grew at first I started going back to church to set an example for them and give them some sort of religious footing, but now many years later I still have never been made to feel guilty about anything.

What I can say from my personal experience is that the Catholics that I know tend to hold themselves to a higher standard. Not "by doctrine or dogma" but from something coming from inside of themselves. They tend to feel guilt when they don't feel that they are meeting their own standards, rather than because the Church is wielding a big stick. I can only really speak for myself, but I generally feel guilty when I have let myself down. That may be because I have let someone else down, but ultimately the guilt is for my own failures to do what needed to be done.

I could be the only Catholic in the world who feels this way, I don't know.

Edited to add that of course there are people who claim to be Catholic and are either not pillars of society or who feel that they are "holier than thou". I'm talking about the middle of the pack where I seem to find myself. And, edited (again) to add that I find myself liking the new pope.

There are probably as many interpretations of Catholic Guilt as there are the bible.

I think the "guilt" - let's call it good guilt - you reference in your post probably had more to due with your upbringing and influences of your environment (parents, teachers, peers, socioeconomics, and yes, even religion, etc), and the values and beliefs that these each contributed to your life.

Your comment about the folks you know holding themselves to a higher standard could just as easily apply to jews, muslims, buddhists, atheists or agnostics, if that was the circle of folks you knew and surrounded yourself with. It's probably more a character thing than a religious one.

I think the bad guilt stuff, what a good number of folks attribute to Catholic Guilt, is the guilt that some are made to feel for not being attracted to the opposite sex, having children out of wedlock, or using contraception, etc. Being told you are less-than in the eyes of whatever god or deity you worship or have faith in, unless one atones and discontinues the sin, can be a HUGE guilt contributor. It's a powerful thing to, this bad guilt. It has made parents forsake their children, kids they have raised since the moment they first sucked in that first breath of air, but because they revealed later in life that they are attracted to the same sex, or lost their virginity before they were married. And it's not just happening in marginalized or developing parts of the world. Sad, bad guilt.

I myself am a recovering Catholic )). I agree that there are those that use their Catholicism improperly, or at least practice it in a manner that best serves themselves. There are also zealots and radicals in the mix as well. And of course you could switch out Catholic with any any of the other religions - organized and self-identified - in the world and say the same thing. It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world (except for Lola).

 

[unregistered]

 

[monoblanco]

I <3 Pope Frank!

 

[bailadora]

Interesting article. Refreshing to see too that there is a little bit of practicing what is being preached instead of just pontificating from the pulpit.

As head of the church, perhaps he can do more to distribute and share some of the incredible wealth the church has accrued over centuries. Just stroll through the Vatican's museum... Hey-zeus Chris-toes! They could start by returning artifacts and treasures "liberated" from other nations during the church's more formidable days of power and influence.

Not saying they need to get all pious and poor, but they could certainly curtail some of the pageantry, conspicuous consumption, and bling.

Five up high for the big guy!

I've had similar thoughts WRT to the church. The grand cathedrals are spectacular wonders of beauty, but I can't help but wonder how many more people could have been helped if a much simpler building had gone up instead.

 

[silverwhisper]

in off the cuff remarks, pope francis takes "personal responsibility" for previous abuse by RCC clergy, pledges "we will not take one step backward regarding how we will deal with this problem. on the contrary, we have to be even stronger, because you cannot interfere with children."

ed

 

[Que]

Interesting article. Refreshing to see too that there is a little bit of practicing what is being preached instead of just pontificating from the pulpit. ~snip~

Made me giggle.

"Pontificating" (by THE Pontiff!)

...if anyone is allowed a bit of pontificating....

I'm not Catholic so I am not at all sure how I know the term, or why he is one.

 

[fire_breeze]

Made me giggle.

"Pontificating" (by THE Pontiff!)

...if anyone is allowed a bit of pontificating....

I'm not Catholic so I am not at all sure how I know the term, or why he is one.

beginning of cultural history and etymology lesson\
Pontiff: Means 'bridge builder' and was used as a term in ancient Rome for high priests of the state religion, also called the College of Pontiffs and were state advisors (essentially priest-senators).

When Ancient Christianity began to grow, like many other cults, religions and political movements, they would adopt terminology that they know. Hence, the bishop of Rome, which eventually became the seat of the religion when Christianity became more unified in the 4th C, became the Pontifex Maximus of that particular religion. Eventually, Maximus was dropped, and as English likes to drop the last syllabus in foreign titles and names, Pontifex became Pontiff.

The verb pontificating is a recent addition to the English language and dates to the 19th C. Originally, it applied to the homilies and speeches that the Pope does officially in his office. Eventually, it became to be defined as express[ing] one's opinions in a pompous and dogmatic way, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

/end of cultural history and etymology lesson.

 

[Que]

Thanks, Fire_breeze! I had a thread once about how Lit has improved my grasp of language. Seems there is very little that someone here isn't extremely conversant with.

 

[Cumference]

I really do not know how to view pope F.

Yes, he has challenged the RTC's overspending, and assumed a more modest stance not wanting to live in luxury paid by the believers. And he has set examples by not covering up for overspending priests.

But is this a modern approach, or is he just picking up some of the more fundamentalistic ideals, actually being an ascetic hardliner with a smiling face?


Regarding the pedophiles, he has assumed some responsibility for the abuse.... But before the problem is solved, he is still asking for forgiveness!

- He is not screaming about gays being excommunicated and burning in hell, he wants to embrace them.... But they should drop being actively homosexual.

- He has not talked about having female priests

- He has not approved the use of condoms, the only efficient way to prevent the spread of HIV. Abstinence is still the churchly reply.

- Dropping celibacy has not been mentioned. So they will keep having sexually frustrated priest in charge of vulnerable people.



To be honest, I'm not impressed.

In some respects I'm hopeful, in other amused..... But certainly not impressed.



Should he make real reforms, he would probably "accidentally slip in the bathtub".

 

[GrrlFriday]

I found it a saddening that his meeting with Philomena Lee seemed to coincide with the release of a UN report about the Vatican's handling of child sexual abuse.

 

[lovecraft68]

Another figurehead fraud leading the bloodiest religion in history.

He can play humble all he wants those creepy perverted ancient child molesting cardinals chose him for a reason.

 

[Cumference]

........
He can play humble all he wants those creepy perverted ancient child molesting cardinals chose him for a reason.

Exactly!

He is not sent by GAWD, he is elected/selected by whatever faction having the upper hand.

 

[silverwhisper]

cumference: large, old institutions make changes at a glacial pace. any change at all is progress compared to what the RCC has been doing for centuries. this is about as good as RCC reform gets without causing wholesale revolt.

by no means is this thread suggesting that there isn't light years of growth. there very obviously is a screaming, desperate need for reform. hell, i'm an atheist.

but some of what i'm hearing is fucking stupid. selling off entire cathedrals? that's just plain ignorant.

francis has only started his papacy. we'll hopefully have many years more to see of what he actually does.

ed

 

[Que]

I don't think that any faith should bow to pressure to "modernize" or bow to popular concerns. Whatever the tenants of the faith are should remain constant I would think...or else have some scholarly or revelatory reason to alter it's foundation.

I don't see anyone suggesting to the descendants of Ismail that they modernize and have lesbian Imams for example.

What I believe is that if there is a God, He would of course speak to all of his children that seek His counsel.

The differences in Religions can be accounted for by how His followers hear His voice. He is going to speak to them in the language and culture familiar to them and give guidance to live better lives here, and I would assume in an afterlife.

How that guidance is heard, interpreted, and passed down is subject to the whims and vagaries of mortal communication with all it's attendant misunderstandings. Who among us really understands on any given day even what your spouse of 20 years actually means?

So with that in mind there are plenty of universal principles for righteous living that crosses all cultures and religions. Start there. To suggest that everything advocated by any particular religion, and more egregious still- that there is no value in any religion is the worst kind of ignorance. The willful kind.

My view is that every major religion piously followed has more to commend it than to detract from it. There are more similarities than differences. Believing in a moral framework for your choices does no harm, and might well bring the benefits promised.

 

[Not His Toy]

I am a pretty lapsed Catholic so other than some headlines I haven't paid much attention...perhaps I should?

 

[Cumference]

?...Whatever the tenants of the faith are should remain constant I would think...or else have some scholarly or revelatory reason to alter it's foundation.

That is the fundamentalist/literalist way to look at it.
Most religions have however adapted quite skillfully to a changing world.
If you look historically at the bible, there has been a lot of rewriting, creative editing and "lost in translation" going on.
And if you try to live by the word of the bible, you will end up in jail before you know it.
(There is an impressive list of "kill people that...." in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. And they are still valid, according to Jesus himself in Matthew 5:17

The Fulfillment of the Law
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

A lot of christians will say, that by being born without original sin, the law of Moses is fulfilled, and we can forget about it.... But J does not agree)

The differences in Religions can be accounted for by how His followers hear His voice. He is going to speak to them in the language and culture familiar to them and give guidance to live better lives here, and I would assume in an afterlife.

Followed by:

So with that in mind there are plenty of universal principles for righteous living that crosses all cultures and religions.

Supposing that there are some basic principles for how you should behave as a social, intelligent but by nature quite aggressive animal?
Ockham's Razors just sliced of Skydaddy.

The funny thing is, that we have to invent gods, and that we need the threat of "You will burn/freeze/drown in hell forever after if you do not....." Instead of just "the smart way of doing this is as follows...."

My view is that every major religion piously followed has more to commend it than to detract from it. There are more similarities than differences. Believing in a moral framework for your choices does no harm, and might well bring the benefits promised

Oh tell us about it!

Where do you find anybody more pious?
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/taliban-execution-272x300.jpg

The Talibs are really some of the few people in the world, really doing what The Book tells them to. They are not nice, soft and adapting their ways to the rest of the world.
http://calvarychapelabuse.com/wordp...day-example-of-old-testament-law-and-justice/

 

[Cumference]

But the biggest enigma IMHO still is:

Why did Pope Benny jump ship?

Men of power normally do not do that without a very god reason.

 

[silverwhisper]

cumference quoth:
most religions have however adapted quite skillfully to a changing world.

and by comparison you are thinking of...?

ed