Why is the Pope so Popular?

Relevant Magazine ^ | 6/13/13 | Chris Nye

[marshmallow]

The secret of success that has brought Pope Francis into good graces with evangelicals.

Last Friday morning, the newly elected pope met with Jesuit students of all ages. In a brief Q&A session, a little girl asked Francis if he wanted to be the pope. He made a few jokes before getting serious and flatly saying, “I didn’t want to be pope.”

Ever since his election, Pope Francis has taken a series of actions that seem to be very, well, un-popelike: He used public transportation as a cardinal, he lives in smaller quarters than he could and he asked for a blessing before giving a blessing to the crowd which gathered in St. Peter’s square on the day of his election.

What is stranger than Pope Francis’ actions has been evangelicals’ reactions. Never before has a pope become so widely accepted by Protestants and evangelicals. In a recent Op-Ed for Christianity Today, Timothy George called the new pope, “Our Francis, Too.”

The pope is popular with evangelicals not because he’s doing what they already do, but rather because he is doing what they are not doing but wish to begin doing.

As you look at the stories surrounding the new pope, it’s very difficult to dislike him. Through his actions and his profound, visible humility, Pope Francis has demonstrated a Christ-like character, not only Christ-like rhetoric. And this has brought him respect across the spectrum of Christianity.

[D-fendr]

It’s part of the Mass Propers for Lent. One of the prayers for Good Friday.

Of course one may pray for atheists or offer special intentions for them at other times.

[jimmyo57]

My apologies! Forget Benedict, getting old!

[caww]

<....”Christianity Today” is last place you’d go to pick up on the pulse of evangelical opinion.”....>

You are sooooo right about that!

[caww]

Nope...he’s not mine. Though I think he’s doing more to clear out the junk in the Vatican. I respect anyone who goes after the bad guys....he seems to be willing to do that.

[ansel12]

Although technically not a babyboomer

You might be taking this boomer thing entirely too seriously. There isn't some universal, global, genetic mutation related to being born from 1946 to 1964.

Francis was born in 1936, in Argentina, where by law the President and vice-president of the nation had to be members of the Catholic denomination, and he was teaching high school (in Argentina) by 1964, I don't think that he has anything to do with being a "boomer".

[piusv]

I also have concerns about some things he has said; sometimes things he doesn’t say/leaves out.

For example, his “Atheists are Redeemed” homily was unclear on whether atheists are *saved* by failing to mention more about the Church’s teaching on their salvation and by calling them children of God of the *first class*. It’s no wonder that so many didn’t get what he was saying.

And I’m Catholic. Of course, other Catholics take issue with my concerns and I wouldn’t be able to make these comments on certain Catholic websites, but it is how I feel. I wish he would stick with stronger homilies that make it very clear that he is Pope of the Catholic Church, not the “Wishy Washy Church of Nice”.

I don’t want a “popular” Pope.

[piusv]

And did you know that the Vatican official (Fr. Rosica) who “clarified” his comments called “original sin” *so-called* original sin.

Um, since when is original sin a question? Since when is it no longer a Church truth?

[cuban leaf]

If you have no enemies, you’re not doing anything. ;-)

[piusv]

EXACTAMUNDO.

[NKP_Vet]

“I’ve just taken his comments one at a time. Some were so contrary to the message of the bible”

You mean like feeding the poor and not thinking you are better than someone else? Yea, really revolutionary thoughts there. Can’t find them anywhere in the Bible.

[NKP_Vet]

The Pope interpretation of Grace and what is said about Athiests being redeemed was exactly what the scriptures teach.

http://www.catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=51106

[sasportas]

You really want to know, eh? Methinks you ask to much. Just a backhanded way of pushing Roman Catholicism.

To those of us who do believe the Papacy is an impostor form of Christianity, masquerading as the original church, this Pope means nothing at all. Zilch. I could care less what this Pope or any other Pope does or says.

[melsec]

Thank-you for the compliment. I have yet to get to Perth even though a few nieces live there - hopefully next year. I am continually surprised when I hear how many freepers have lived in Oz for some part of their lives - I wish you’all would have stayed. You boys would be handy in a fight. :)

Blessings

Mel

[Mrs. Don-o]

There are two kinds of people:

People who say there are two kinds of people, and people who don't.

[MinuteGal]

Folks that I know respect and like the Pope personally but some are holding back from full throttle till they see if he's going to go into that progressive "social justice" stuff that they get antsy about.

This hesitance includes me....Missouri Synod Lutheran.

Leni

[Mrs. Don-o]

Piusv, I get enough of the "Hermeneutic of Suspicion" from LCWR--- I don't need to see it here.

There's no way on God's good green Earth that Fr. Thomas Rosica is calling Original Sin into question. Only somebody who hasn't got a clue about his many solid, orthodox Catholic writings could say that.

If he said "so-called Original Sin," he undoubtedly meant "Original Sin, so called because it was the first sin committed by our first parents," or something along those lines. I say "undoubtedly" because to cast doubt upon a foundational doctrine would contradict all the rest of his theological work for the past 30 years.

Here's a recent article by Fr. Rosica (Link), explaining and defending both the doctrine of Original Sin and the doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception.

I caution you against Rash Judgment, partly because I am prone to it and must tend to my "rashes" pretty regularly.

'K?

[piusv]

Maybe I am wrong, but based on what he wrote as part of his explanation of the Pope's words and Church teaching on salvation, I still remain concerned:

As Christians, we believe that God is always reaching out to humanity in love. This means that every man or woman, whatever their situation, can be saved. Even non-Christians can respond to this saving action of the Spirit. No person is excluded from salvation simply because of so-called original sin; one can only lose their salvation through serious personal sin of their own account.

I still say that this last sentence is questionable. At the very least, you have got to admit that this kind of clarification does not....clarify. It only creates more confusion.

Also, I keep seeing you refer to "Hermeneutic of Suspicion" from LCWR. What are you talking about and what is the LCWR?

[Mrs. Don-o]

First, sorry for not spelling out my reference. It's LCWR, Leadership Conference of Women Religious --- the canonical organization that has been in the news alot because they are under doctrinal scrutiny due to their departures from Catholic faith and morals. They are heavily under the influence of some feminist academic theologians like the late Monika Hellwig, who adopted the term "Hermeneutics of Suspicion" to argue that every statement of the Magisterium is assumed to be made in bad faith, until proven otherwise.

In other words, they assume Ecclesia is probably wrong, probably motivated by a desire to manipulate, to assert power of others, to put down women, etc. etc.

One sees this "Hemeneutic of Suspicion" on the feminist Left; also (with different key words) from the other direction(s) as well. The whole thing is an offense against justice.

It's past my bedtime and I'm supposed to be up for an early Mass tomorrow. Let me just close by saying that if an eminent person like the Pope makes a state which does not fully express the Veritatis Splendor, we should assume in charity that it is a matter of confusing expression, and not a matter of latent heresy.

I hope we would treat each other with such basic charity and justice. It's hard, though. Boy, do I know that.

[piusv]

Well, I would say that I do think it unfair to say that someone who is questioning something the clergy has said means that that person automatically assumes it was made in bad faith (and to equate it with the LCWR who apparently thinks EVERYTHING they say is made in bad faith).

As much as I would rather not feel the way that I do, I can't help but notice the confusion in so many statements made by our leaders, not to mention their actions (such as continuing to allow pro-abort politicians to receive communion). I am sick and tired of seeing (and hearing) these sorts of things from (some of) our leaders. I am sick and tired of seeing nothing done about it (as in our Popes not doing anything about it). And when unclear things are said and supposedly clarified, they are not. More and more I see why traditionalists take issue with Vatican II and its supposed "fruits".

When Cardinal Kasper makes statements that say the VII documents were written in such a way as to "compromise", is it any wonder why there is such a mess? If unclear statements were made in the actual documents intentionally to satisfy both the minority side and the majority side, is it really all that surprising that we would still have unclear statements when trying to explain Church teaching as a result of those documents?

Unfortunately, since I can not show my true feelings on another website I tend to unload here. For that I am sorry to those who dislike it. I am just so tired of having to keep my mouth shut about this. I wasn't always like this. I used to think those that talked/felt like me were wrong. I always defended the Church. Not so much anymore. I am truly beginning to see what they have been saying all along. It is so frustrating because I know there is NOTHING I can do about it. I have to pray that God will straighten the mess out eventually (I just hope I live to see it).

In the mean time, I have finally found a priest in my diocese that actually celebrates a reverent Novus Ordo Mass and also offers the Latin Mass once a month. He is not afraid to say the tough, unpopular, non-wishy washy stuff in the pulpit or in the confessional. For that I thank God immensely.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Yes, thank God for that priest.

We are training our pastor in that direction!