Pope Francis Condemns too much Keeping of the Ten Commandments

[JESUS=G.O.A.T]

JESUS=G.O.A.T,

You could just present what he stated or support him in some way instead of being lazy tbh.

You want me to explain it to you rather than read it yourself, and you say I'm being lazy ?

Additionally using that logic I can say becuase so and so is the head of a church they are trustworthy religious figures. A position doesn't= religious.

The Pope is first and ordained priest in the Catholic Church. They are referred to as "religious."


The pope is seen by many as a religious figure but also by many as a political or even anti christ like figure to be extreme, and tends to participate in political matters..as well as make political statements and speeches at the white house or wherever the dude decides to go.

Actually the Pope tends to stay clear of engaging in politics.

He speaks about moral issues government leaders should follow, like supporting the poor and being pro-life, but that doesn't make him a political figure.

Also the fact he needs security is interesting... tbh and the power he has as well....

Yeah, because not long ago, Pope John Paul II was shot and there have been assassination attempts on Pope's of the past.

Security is necessary to keep crazy people from killing every Pope who goes out into public.


Jim

You want me to explain it to you rather than read it yourself, and you say I'm being lazy ?


My REsponse: We both are lazy here now that I think about it, for me it's more so a lack of interest though. I've never cared much about the pope, was just a little curious and asked a question. FOr you it's pure laziness/maybe also a lack of interest. SO I guess we can call it even here. You could easily provide a sentence answer, I could easily do a google search, but we both refuse to do so. THe irony.


The Pope is first and ordained priest in the Catholic Church. They are referred to as "religious."

My REsponse: Anyone who believes in God is considered religious today though was my point. Not sure how much weight that really carries today.

He speaks about moral issues government leaders should follow, like supporting the poor and being pro-life, but that doesn't make him a political figure.

My Response: agree to disagree



Yeah, because not long ago, Pope John Paul II was shot and there have been assassination attempts on Pope's of the past.

Security is necessary to keep crazy people from killing every Pope who goes out into public.


My REsponse: Fair enough, even historically the pope has played big roles in government and has been a widely public figure, that of course results in security.



COnclusion: See all you had to do was be this civil when you chose to reply initially... you gave me some answers here and I appreciate it.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

2 peter 2:18

Only Jesus was qualified to speak in parables for lesser beings to figure out,plain language is what is needed today.....and again the suggestion that anyone is following the commandments to well is absurd or that if they did they would somehow be a worse Christian for doing so.

Neither a Catholic or non-Catholic are "lessor beings". I agree the message is vastly clearer to someone familiar with Catholic theology, so easier to understand. Why that would be a problem given Homily's are for Catholics am not sure. It does however make the media's job of distorting that message for the rest of the world and non-Catholics. Which goes without saying they want to do.

A reflection on a Scripture, verses that were offered to early Christians as encouragement for courage, hope and living without fear, and expounding on it to relate those concepts to the modern audience is not even an example of a parable. In Protestant terms what is being done there is part of preaching. In Catholic teaching morals and truths have never been subjective. The twist the media quote is making suggests morals and truths are objective. This is clearly wrong and no Pope would ever proclaim that.

If my comments or the Pope's were actually read, it should be clear that only the media is claiming someone said we can follow the 10 commandments "too well". In fact that phrase is not even part of the Homily. Remember too what the media is commenting on is a narrative, not a translation, of a Homily given in another language.

The idea truth is objective cannot even fit with the rest of the Homily, which is an encouragement just like Saint Paul's was in his letter to the Hebrews. Earlier in the homily, expounding on "sins against memory" Pope Francis says -starting with a ref to Hebrews-

"The Letter’s author “begins with the past and exhorts us to recall: ‘Remember the former days’”. The Pope explained that these were “days of enthusiasm, of going forth in faith, when one begins to live the faith, the trials suffered”. Indeed, “Christian life is not understood, even everyday spiritual life, without memory”. And, the Pontiff continued, “not only does one not understand: one cannot live in a Christian way without the memory” of “God’s salvation in my life”, without “remembering the troubles in my life....
....
And, Francis continued, “memory is wisdom: to remember everything, the good, the not so good, the bad; many graces, many sins, the family, the personal history of each one”. Thus, “I go before God with my history; I must not cover it up, hide it: no, it is my history, before you”. Thus, “the exhortation to live a Christian life begins with this point of reference: memory”.​

There is no concept of having many sins if there are not objective truths we can sin against. The 10 commandments are all objective truths, actually part of the natural law. Suggesting we follow natural law too well, makes it subjective by suggesting we could do it "too well". IF that were so then our "memories" would have "fewer sins" rather than "many sins". We cannot "go before God" and not be attempting to 'hide" our memory of ALL our sins if we say morals and truths are subjective. So there is not way to mesh what is being said here about not hiding from our sins, with the false idea the 10 commandments are subjective, which is clearly what the media is suggesting by inserting "too well" into the Pope's mouth.

So suggesting the narrative of his summary at the end implies we follow those commandments "too well" is not just wrong, it is folly. Those truths are either objective or not, no equivocation is present here in this. Truth is truth and has never been seen as subjective by the Church, not even a little bit (too well). The statement of the Pope being twisted here is like several in the Gospels that can be paraphrased "I have a followed all the commandments" to which the Lord replied essentially "yes, true that you have, but" and that conjunctive pause was to allow reference to how they were living their life, which He proceeded to tell them or give them task to demonstrate.

You cannot look at the translated at what is essentially a "yes but" here and assume something without reading the rest of the translation. Again am certainly without even being able to read the native language that it is probably much clearer

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

One can be too scrupulous which can lead to many problems!

Can one be too moral? Too Christlike?

Granted it did get Jesus in a world of hurt...

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

The Ten Commandments were not given for self righteous justification. They were given to protect the people and to show that it is impossible to be fully righteous as humans.

They were the "bar". God set the bar to show what is necessary to be pure and accepted as righteous. However, nobody has ever been able to meet this "bar", excepting Christ.

Thus, these commandments stand as a blatant beacon to light the failure of every human to meet the mark and be worthy of everlasting life,.... on their own.

I'm glad you ended with ..."on their own".

In Christ, we are able to overcome because He Justified (cleansed) us through His blood and Sanctifies us daily through His Grace if we humble ourselves and repent.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

The Pope is head of the Catholic Church, he is a religious figure, not a political figure.

Jim

Actually, he's both... church and state combined.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

One can be too scrupulous which can lead to many problems!

like fear of living as Christians should - gee where did hear that

So to avoid legalism and scrupulosity, Francis pushes antinominianism instead of grace. It is a shame and a sham. He could have done MUCH better to find the correct balance between Matthew 5:17-19, Matthew 5:48, and Paul's insistence on justification by faith (not salvation through obedience to the Jewish Law which is patently impossible).

.
I have said and the Pope in this Homily has said nothing about legalism or "scrupulosity". The correct topic for either understanding or talking about what the Pope said would be Pusillanimty. the definition of pusillanimity
which is, like the people written to in Hebrews, being timidly or cowardly, in this case in a Christian life.
Living a Christian life not timidly or cowardly has nothing to do with legalism or being overly scrupulous. Nor does it pertain to a question of whether the natural law is objective or not.
Call a spade a spade and stop following everything the media says without question.

Look they even make it appear like this is a "statement" in defense against his alleged "critics" supposedly angry about some imagined change in the Church's position on divorce which most in the media want the Pope to be supporting. So they change the message given to one that supports that narrative - which I suppose might be consider "antinominalism" lawlessness, but that was not the message of this homily - so none of the allegations are even true. It was a Homily on an Apostles encouragement of Christians to be bold and bright in their lives and that we are not able to to do that if we are sinning against memory, courage, patience and hope - pusillanimity.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Actually, he's both... church and state combined.

Uhm, no he's not a political figure.

He doesn't run for office nor does he get re-elected.

He doesn't speak on political issues, but matters of faith and morals.

Hi

The pope took the title of Pontifex Maximus, as the former Roman Emperors held. The "greatest bridge builder" between the "idol" gods and man. He is both a political and religious leader and seeks total dominance as his blasphemous titles proclaim. And being a Jesuit, if studied, should tell you he is definitely involved in politics

Pontifex Maximus is Latin for greatest among College of Pontiffs

But here's what the Catholic Encyclopedia says;

Pontiff
The terms Pontifex Maximus, Summus Pontifex, were doubtless originally employed with reference to the Jewish high-priest, whose place the Christian bishops were regarded as holding each in his own diocese (Epistle of Clement 40). As regards the title Pontifex Maximus, especially in its application to the pope, there was further a reminiscence of the dignity attached to that title in pagan Rome. Tertullian, as has already been said, uses the phrase of Pope Callistus. Though his words are ironical, they probably indicate that Catholics already applied it to the pope. But here too the terms were once less narrowly restricted in their use. Pontifex summus was used of the bishop of some notable see in relation to those of less importance. Hilary of Arles (d. 449) is so styled by Eucherius of Lyons (P.L., L, 773), and Lanfranc is termed "primas et pontifex summus" by his biographer, Milo Crispin (P.L., CL, 10). Pope Nicholas I is termed "summus pontifex et universalis papa" by his legate Arsenius (Hardouin "Conc.", V, 280), and subsequent examples are common. After the eleventh century it appears to be only used of the popes.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Pope

In other words, it was Pagan Rome which attached the title, to the Pope, who was Bishop of Rome, head of the Catholic Church. Roman Emperors were not titled Pontifex. The term Maximus is merely Latin for Greatest, but the term has to be understood in the context for which it is used.

Jim

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Don't act like a jerk, please. He did not have to answer you.

Answer: Like it or not, every (famous) religious figure is also a political figure because fame causes people to listen to their political, aesthetic, and all their opinions... not just their religious views. Me, I don't think the Pope is qualified to be a political authority and we should ignore his political opinions.

He's a head of state... purely political. He spoke at the joint session of Congress... political (with a theological bent). There is an exchange of ambassadors with hundreds of countries... totally politcal.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Isn't he mainly a political figure rather then religious figure anyway though? If so I'm not surprised by this statement

No. Not to Catholics anyway.
What should not surprise people would be the media wanting to lie about and distort the statements of someone defending Christianity globally. Ever since Pope Francis election many in the media have wanted to portray him as being "on their side", and especially "progressive". As theologians do not even speak in the same terms. So it is rather easy to take something like the Church's defense of "social justice" and twist into something it is not. So they want to believe Pope Francis is a "progressive" in the political understanding of that word. They want to believe he thinks truths and morals are subjective. So they twist a homily encouraging Christians to boldly live a Christian a life without fear into something it is not so that it fits their narrative.

 

[geiroffenberg]

The pope’s remarks were made during a homily in the Casa Santa Marta where he lives in the Vatican. They appear to be in response to criticism for his support for giving the Eucharist to those who are living in adulterous second “marriages,”

Well, in relationship to giving sinners the communion, the pope definitly has a point. If anyone abuses the law commandments to condemn and refuse the freely given grace of god, then they really need a papal reprimad.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

This Pope is scary....If I were catholic, I would be very concerned for the foundation of my church organization.

I am Catholic and what I am afraid of is the sentiments being expressed by some here. I have no fear for any foundation. Why would a blatantly false attack on the Church and the Pope create fear in a Catholic that understands what is going on here and what the Pope actually said?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

po·lit·i·cal
pəˈlidək(ə)l/
adjective

1. relating to the government or the public affairs of a country.
   "a period of political and economic stability"
   synonyms: governmental, government, constitutional, ministerial, parliamentary, diplomatic, legislative, administrative, bureaucratic; More
   
   
   • relating to the ideas or strategies of a particular party or group in politics.
     "a decision taken for purely political reasons"
     synonyms: politically active, party; More
     
     
   • interested in or active in politics.
     "I'm not very political"

The Pope, although head of the Vatican City State, it is the state of the Catholic Church, which is a religion not a political institution.

Jim

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Yes I would agree that trying to keep the commandments is not enough to make us righteous but that the blood of Christ and His ever present Spirit that is dwelling within us does. That said, let us not forget that Jesus certainly loved and delighted in those who loved the commandments. And His indwelling Spirit within us should delight us as well. Jesus not only completely kept them all Himself, but loved to see people being obedient to them.


Perhaps if the rich young man had put the commandment's values of first loving the Lord his God with his whole hear and not being caught up in coveting the riches of this world over the riches of God, he may have followed Jesus that day. It was the offer of a lifetime to be sure. That, however, does not detract from the fact that Jesus had great love for the man, especially seeing that he obeyed the half He had began with.

So yes, I believe that we are deemed righteous because Christ lives in us, providing sanctifying grace.

We are then being drawn ever closer to His true Heart day by day, as we progress in Him and draw our life from Him. As His living waters rise up in us then we are being purified by His Holy presence within us. O' to grace how great a debtor Lord I'm inclined to be.

We have the living Christ within us so necessarily by His example avoid sin, crucifying sin's desire to have us and embracing the love of Christ over our thought life that we may follow Him and obey.

We are taught in Christ as we hear in our inner man and put off the former things

Do Not Grieve the Holy Spirit by whom we are sealed

Yes, again I'm convinced by His grace just how great a debtor Lord I'm inclined to be.
The song/prayer is true in it's ask to take our hearts. Lord, take and seal them, seal them for Thy courts above

Lastly the Work of the Holy Spirit through us necessarily prompts us to identify sin and sin's consequences to the world. The Work of the Holy Spirit as attested to His disciples in His farewell address to them in the upper room:

So I think it is error for one to de-emphasize the commandments if God's Holy Spirit functions to identify sin in the world. It is also grave error if we do not identifying our true source of righteous comes through Christ alone.
Neither should be neglected as we engage our world and make disciples and restore life to those through the work of Christ in us.
In Christ, Pat

It is an error to "de-emphasize" the commandments. An error Pope Francis cannot be shown to making in the Homily he is quoted from in the OP article.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

You could just present what he stated or support him in some way instead of being lazy tbh.

.

Actually I did way back.

But let me summarize again for you.

The Pope is talking as Jesus did, about those who follow the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law.

He's not telling people to not follow the Ten Commandments. The accusation of this in the OP article is false.

Again, read the document.

Jim

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I think what Francis is saying is what Jesus was saying here:

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!" ~ Matthew 23:23-24

Yes, justice, mercy and faithfulness would be part of boldly living a Christian life without fear. To be timid and living in fear is what Pope Francis was speaking against, just like Saint Paul was in the verse from Hebrews, which this Homily (sermon) is based on/expounded from.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Anyway, I see why it was an error to get involved in a thread like this.

Unsubscribing.

God Bless
Jim

 

[JESUS=G.O.A.T]

Actually I did way back.

But let me summarize again for you.

The Pope is talking as Jesus did, about those who follow the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law.

He's not telling people to not follow the Ten Commandments. The accusation of this in the OP article is false.

Again, read the document.

Jim

I wasn't on the post way back so prob missed it.

Also you seem confused...I never stated I agreed with the OP... it could explain why you responded the way you did initially.


IN fact I asked a question I didn't make an statement which you eventually answered. SO again thanks

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Can one be too moral? Too Christlike?

Granted it did get Jesus in a world of hurt...

No, but what does that question have to do with anything the Pope actually said in this Homily (sermon)?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Uhm, no he's not a political figure.

Wikipedia
The office of the pope is the papacy. His ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the Diocese of Rome, is often called "the Holy See"[5] or "the Apostolic See", the latter name being based upon the belief that the Bishop of Rome is the successor of Peter the Apostle.[6] The pope is considered one of the world's most powerful people because of his diplomatic and cultural influence.[7][8][9] He is also head of state of Vatican City,[10] a sovereign city-state entirely enclaved within the Italian capital city of Rome.

10."Vatican City State – State and Government". Vaticanstate.va. Retrieved 11 August 2010.

He doesn't run for office nor does he get re-elected.

Not a prerequisite for being a head of state.

He doesn't speak on political issues, but matters of faith and morals.

The two are sometimes the same as you know...
Why would a religious leader be aloud to speak to a joint session of Congress if his message was not to influence the politics of the US? No other religious leader has ever had the same opportunity... and for good reason.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

No, but what does that question have to do with anything the Pope actually said in this Homily (sermon)?

I was responding to GRU...