Pope Francis: rigidity is something pathological

[Michie]

A person that is both rigid and sincere conceals a "double life", lacks the freedom of God's children and needs the Lord's help, Pope says in mornings homily.

Continued below.
http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward...gidity-is-something-pathological#.WA5lM0b3bCQ

 

[LivingWordUnity]

This is a confusing message. Maybe Pope Francis' message didn't come out the way he intended, but it sounds to me like he's putting down Catholics who believe we should follow God's laws. If that's what he's saying then I strongly disagree with Pope Francis on this. No one has authority to go against the word of God.

“But Peter [the first Pope] and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised Jesus whom you killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.'” - Acts 5: 29-32

 

[Davidnic]

He has spoke often of Rigidity. Some want to take it as meaning that any loyalty to the Church or saying there are non negotiables are wrong. But that is never what he is saying. The context is that when we lack mercy in favor of being unbending we are fundamentally opposing Christ. Just like when we choose to lack any boundary in an attempt to be kind.

Rigidity has always been something the Church has counseled against. Just like being permissive and dismissive of the Truth in an effort to be "understanding"

The Pope has often preached on the two extremes...Rigidity and Relativism.

And, if we are honest with ourselves, we see these two things far more often than we see authentic expression of the faith. These two things are parodies of the Truth but claim to be the Truth.

If you want to look at it with examples...look at the woman caught in Adultery. She never once asks for forgiveness or says: "I repent" But the Lord forgives and says "Go and Sin no more." But the law demanded death. And even someone today could say...she never expressed contrition in the moments that led to the forgiveness. That would be rigidity. And we see that in the world often...people do not take the small step to forgive as a method to get the person to repent. We know the woman did repent and change...but she did not do it after repenting and getting mercy. It was mercy then repentance. At times that must happen. At times that is the light into a heart to dispel darkness. I forgive you even though you do not forgive yourself or seek forgiveness.

Relativism is far more obvious and less subtle. We see that constantly. Examples are hardly necessary since it is so constant. Relativism is what will take what the Pope says here and try to spin it as: "See, you need to abandon the idea there is one Truth and realize all ways or at least many are just as good." That is also an error.

But the Pope is not saying anything new to our faith. But he is highlighting a very serious concern in the modern world. When you follow his daily homilies you see both rigidity and relativism come up over and over and over.

And when you interact with fellow Catholics it is hard to not see the polarization between these two extremes.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

I rigidly stick by my views on relativism!

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

Relativism is what will take what the Pope says here and try to spin it as: "See, you need to abandon the idea there is one Truth and realize all ways or at least many are just as good." That is also an error.

I think a lot of us do that, me included. So I would like to maintain a ecumenical view towards other faiths and religions, a respect for different points of view. If I think I own the truth and others don't, doesn't that place me in peril of arrogance, being patronising, being inflexible? As if catholics have somehow won the Superbowl of life? And everyone else is fighting for second place? I find it very hard to think that God in his divine intelligence would plan it that way.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

"A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism," (Pope Francis)
I admit that some of us who hold more liberal Catholic views can be just as narcissistic and elitist as those of a conservative persuasion. Dismissive attitudes on either side do not help.

 

[concretecamper]

http://instagr.am/p/BLH1E4uhSc0/

 

[Davidnic]

It is not wrong to believe that God can and does save outside of the visible Church. The Church herself believes that. But we have to remember that there are non-negotiable beliefs and they are not hidden or hard to find. We do not have a monopoly of the Truth but our belief is we do have the fullness of it.

Rigidity is not holding to our Dogma and belief, it is holding to the idea of that belief often misunderstood by the rigid one, over people.

This might sound a bit odd but in rigidity the concept of truth is elevated to Godhood over God, whose very nature in both Justice and Mercy is Truth.

Relativism is where, in the name of mercy and kindness, we reject that there is a Truth.

Both Rigidity and Relativism can have far more nefarious turns as well.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

It is not wrong to believe that God can and does save outside of the visible Church. The Church herself believes that. But we have to remember that there are non-negotiable beliefs and they are not hidden or hard to find. We do not have a monopoly of the Truth but our belief is we do have the fullness of it.

Rigidity is not holding to our Dogma and belief, it is holding to the idea of that belief often misunderstood by the rigid one, over people.

This might sound a bit odd but in rigidity the concept of truth is elevated to Godhood over God, whose very nature in both Justice and Mercy is Truth.

Relativism is where, in the name of mercy and kindness, we reject that there is a Truth.

Both Rigidity and Relativism can have far more nefarious turns as well.

Over my head David sorry. I guess I prefer more literal explanations. Catholicism for Dummies. Sometimes hardcore intellectual explanations just seem like a smoke screen for the truth. Making it so vague that we give up , sighing finally"too smart for me".

 

[Davidnic]

Over my head David sorry. I guess I prefer more literal explanations. Catholicism for Dummies. Sometimes hardcore intellectual explanations just seem like a smoke screen for the truth. Making it so vague that we give up , sighing finally"too smart for me".

Basically we do not deny there are things good and true elsewhere but they lack parts. Like, it is possible to get to a destination with a map with sections blacked out but it would not be the preferred way if you had access to a whole map. And it would be wrong to pretend that the blacked out map was preferable or just as good. The only reason the incomplete map even works is because it has parts of the whole map.

As far as rigidity, think of it as people who need the structure of things to give them a kind of arrogant importance and any hint that mercy might circumvent that structure terrifies them. Their worth is based on the rules and total strictness to them. This is the kind of thing the Pope has addressed as wrong. He does not mean the actual non negotiable of the faith. But rather the perversion of those things.

Sticking with the map analogy, in rigidity someone would insist the Map be perfect before someone was allowed to go where it led them. They would inspect the map when the person got to the destination to make sure the creases were perfect, it was folded right, there were no stains and if there was they would deny that the person should even be where the map led them. The map...not the destination becomes the important part to them. More important than the fellow traveler.

In relativism a map to a totally different destination is just as good and valid as any other. So if I was trying to get to England and someone gave me a map of Japan, Relativism would claim that map is perfectly fine for the purpose and accuse someone of being narrow minded if they insisted they needed a map to England. And if a person got to Japan using that map the relativist would insist that if you did not agree that this was England you were hardhearted since all destinations are the same.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

I thought we all needed the map to the same destination, Heaven. Does it matter how we get there? Some take the long route,(other denominations) and Catholicism I suppose is the shortest route.

 

[Davidnic]

I thought we all needed the map to the same destination, Heaven. Does it matter how we get there? Some take the long route,(other denominations) and Catholicism I suppose is the shortest route.

I think what matters is we get there...but an incomplete map has more inherent dangers of never getting there. Just like falling in love with the map over the destination.

If you are given a map by the King to His Kingdom and decide to use a different map, you run the danger of getting to the wrong place and never to the King. Rigidity would guard the map but use it in a way that misled despite having the map and Relativism would claim that other maps worked just as well. Both of those views have dangers.

 

[Davidnic]

Look at an aspect of what I do...we have reserves for courses. Books a professor puts on hold so all members of the class can use them.

In the past we have had professors give them to us and some people (not the professor) try to say well...I want students to not have coffee while they use it, or bend it a certain way ect. I want them to do XYZ to get the book. We don't do that. We do not let them destroy the book but we do not judge and watch their every move. The professor gave us the book to safeguard for them, and it is our job to get them the right book and help them with research if needed. But not to control how they interact with the book as long as they do not destroy it.

Above is Rigidity. In Rigidity someone is holding the book needed to pass the course but they are more concerned with the safety of the book. Which is good. The book needs to be safe for others to have the truth in it. But the conditions they put, that were not placed by the professor, prevent its use.

In relativism an edition missing the pages for the test or some of the tests is seen as just as good, in some cases a textbook for a totally different subject is seen a just as good.

So passing the course or getting to the map destination is the goal. But both being rigid or relative can prevent it.

 

[pdudgeon]

A person that is both rigid and sincere conceals a "double life", lacks the freedom of God's children and needs the Lord's help, Pope says in mornings homily.

Continued below.
http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward...gidity-is-something-pathological#.WA5lM0b3bCQ

oh lovely! more fodder served up for the press and the liberal church.

 

[pdudgeon]

He has spoke often of Rigidity. Some want to take it as meaning that any loyalty to the Church or saying there are non negotiables are wrong. But that is never what he is saying. The context is that when we lack mercy in favor of being unbending we are fundamentally opposing Christ. Just like when we choose to lack any boundary in an attempt to be kind.

Rigidity has always been something the Church has counseled against. Just like being permissive and dismissive of the Truth in an effort to be "understanding"

The Pope has often preached on the two extremes...Rigidity and Relativism.

And, if we are honest with ourselves, we see these two things far more often than we see authentic expression of the faith. These two things are parodies of the Truth but claim to be the Truth.

If you want to look at it with examples...look at the woman caught in Adultery. She never once asks for forgiveness or says: "I repent" But the Lord forgives and says "Go and Sin no more." But the law demanded death. And even someone today could say...she never expressed contrition in the moments that led to the forgiveness. That would be rigidity. And we see that in the world often...people do not take the small step to forgive as a method to get the person to repent. We know the woman did repent and change...but she did not do it after repenting and getting mercy. It was mercy then repentance. At times that must happen. At times that is the light into a heart to dispel darkness. I forgive you even though you do not forgive yourself or seek forgiveness.

Relativism is far more obvious and less subtle. We see that constantly. Examples are hardly necessary since it is so constant. Relativism is what will take what the Pope says here and try to spin it as: "See, you need to abandon the idea there is one Truth and realize all ways or at least many are just as good." That is also an error.

But the Pope is not saying anything new to our faith. But he is highlighting a very serious concern in the modern world. When you follow his daily homilies you see both rigidity and relativism come up over and over and over.

And when you interact with fellow Catholics it is hard to not see the polarization between these two extremes.

and in these days there should be a polarization evident.
if there isn't then everyone would be going to H...in a handbasket.

 

[pdudgeon]

I think a lot of us do that, me included. So I would like to maintain a ecumenical view towards other faiths and religions, a respect for different points of view. If I think I own the truth and others don't, doesn't that place me in peril of arrogance, being patronising, being inflexible? As if catholics have somehow won the Superbowl of life? And everyone else is fighting for second place? I find it very hard to think that God in his divine intelligence would plan it that way.

the alternative is to hold the Truth and to spread that Truth abroad.
that's NOT ecumenicism.

Holding the Truth and spreadding it abroad is what Jesus trained His disciples to do.
it is confronting error and offering what is true in it's place.
it is what gives life in place of confusion,
truth in place of error,
hope in place of doubt,
and comfort in place of despair.

and that is evangelization.

 

[MikeK]

He has spoke often of Rigidity. Some want to take it as meaning that any loyalty to the Church or saying there are non negotiables are wrong. But that is never what he is saying. The context is that when we lack mercy in favor of being unbending we are fundamentally opposing Christ. Just like when we choose to lack any boundary in an attempt to be kind.

Rigidity has always been something the Church has counseled against. Just like being permissive and dismissive of the Truth in an effort to be "understanding"

The Pope has often preached on the two extremes...Rigidity and Relativism.

And, if we are honest with ourselves, we see these two things far more often than we see authentic expression of the faith. These two things are parodies of the Truth but claim to be the Truth.

If you want to look at it with examples...look at the woman caught in Adultery. She never once asks for forgiveness or says: "I repent" But the Lord forgives and says "Go and Sin no more." But the law demanded death. And even someone today could say...she never expressed contrition in the moments that led to the forgiveness. That would be rigidity. And we see that in the world often...people do not take the small step to forgive as a method to get the person to repent. We know the woman did repent and change...but she did not do it after repenting and getting mercy. It was mercy then repentance. At times that must happen. At times that is the light into a heart to dispel darkness. I forgive you even though you do not forgive yourself or seek forgiveness.

Relativism is far more obvious and less subtle. We see that constantly. Examples are hardly necessary since it is so constant. Relativism is what will take what the Pope says here and try to spin it as: "See, you need to abandon the idea there is one Truth and realize all ways or at least many are just as good." That is also an error.

But the Pope is not saying anything new to our faith. But he is highlighting a very serious concern in the modern world. When you follow his daily homilies you see both rigidity and relativism come up over and over and over.

And when you interact with fellow Catholics it is hard to not see the polarization between these two extremes.

Spot on as usual. there is nothing alarming in the Pope's statement or sentiment. Err on the side of charity and mercy.

 

[MoonlessNight]

I find it very hard to think that God in his divine intelligence would plan it that way.

The alternative is to believe that God founded a Church, but intentionally did not make the best Church.

 

[pdudgeon]

The alternative is to believe that God founded a Church, but intentionally did not make the best Church.

agreed. The bible tells us that everything God did was good.
and that everything satan does is bad, in an effort to wean us away from God.

so why not belong to the Church that was created by God, and in doing so, strive to bring Him glory. It's well worth the effort not just for ourselves but for those around us as well.

 

[s_gunter]

Spot on as usual. there is nothing alarming in the Pope's statement or sentiment. Err on the side of charity and mercy.

Exactly as Christ did. Matthew 12:1-13

Rigidity would have been to deny food and healing on the Sabbath, when work is forbidden. Mercy was breaking the Sabbath law for good purposes (it is good to feed the hungry and heal the ill, even on the Sabbath).