Will someone ANYONE tell Pope Francis he’s not a local Pastor Dealing with Crazy Uncles anymore?

Readability

Will someone ANYONE tell Pope Francis he's not a local Pastor Dealing with Crazy Uncles anymore?

[cap­tion id=“attachment_106338” align=“aligncenter” width=“703”] The Damned being Cast into Hell, Frans Francken 1610[/caption]

Any­one who gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.

“Who­ever causes one of these lit­tle ones who believe (in me) to sin, it would be bet­ter for him if a great mill­stone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is bet­ter for you to enter into life maimed than with two hands to go into Gehenna, 10 into the unquench­able fire.

And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is bet­ter for you to enter into life crip­pled than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Bet­ter for you to enter into the king­dom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna, where ‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.’

Mark 9:4148

I’ve been think­ing long and hard about the Fran­cis “No Hell” busi­ness and I think I’ve fig­ured it out what is going on (although I can’t take all the credit for it).

A long time ago I wrote a post about how the inter­net empow­ers “crazy uncles”

It’s not so odd that 1% of any pop­u­la­tion might be off its rocker, the prob­lem is in a coun­try of 300,000,000 that is 3 mil­lion peo­ple. Even if 110 of one per­cent is crack­ers that’s 300,000 peo­ple. To give you some per­spec­tive that’s more troops than we have in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The prob­lem is with the inter­net and social net­work­ing and the like that crazy 1% or 110 of one per­cent is sud­denly empow­ered. Instead of the crazy uncle at the fam­ily gath­er­ing that you can ignore, sud­denly he has 1000 friends that he can text to rebut and counter rebut all night. He is affirmed and empow­ered and boy is he moti­vated, because now there are thou­sands of peo­ple telling him he’s been right all along and is MUCH smarter than every­one thought.

300,0003,000,000 crazy uncles as indi­vid­u­als isn’t a big deal, but get them all writ­ing e-​mails or mak­ing phone calls and most impor­tantly AFFIRM­ING them­selves and sud­denly you have a potent eco­nomic and or polit­i­cal force. Sud­denly there is a huge mar­ket for a book or 10,000 peo­ple will­ing to pay $20 for a DVD. That’s a fair amount of change and a per­son can make a good liv­ing off of it.

In terms of the church a good exam­ple of this is one given by Father Z in one of the best posts on the sub­ject of com­mu­nion and the divorced that I’ve ever read. It begins with this question:

You wrote in a recent post, “Holy Com­mu­nion for the divorced and remar­ried (which in 99.99% of cases would be sac­ri­lege).” Can you tell me what sce­nario would per­mit your con­science to give com­mu­nion to the remar­ried? I can think of a cou­ple, per­haps; curi­ous what you’re think­ing, esp. as I teach a mar­riage class every semester.

He lays out a sce­nario where a cou­ple illic­itly mar­ried choose not to sep­a­rate for the sake of their chil­dren but are made to under­stand their sin and resolve to live as brother and sis­ter such a cou­ple CAN receive com­mu­nion but would and should avoid doing so dur­ing their mass oblig­a­tion to make sure it didn’t cause scan­dal and con­fuse peo­ple by mak­ing peo­ple think the priest is giv­ing them com­mu­nion in a state of mor­tal sin, as father puts it

Now I will track back to what I asked about Com­mu­nion at the top.

What is it that they want?

Com­mu­nion with its holy effects? Or do they want to be seen receiv­ing Communion?

Do they want the Eucharist or the “white thing” that sym­bol­izes affirmation?

In the­ory of course said cou­ple could go for com­mu­nion in pub­lic and the priest know­ing that they are not in a state of moral sin could give them com­mu­nion count­ing on the char­ity that peo­ple should have to pre­sume that both the priest and the cou­ple are act­ing in good faith. In his let­ter to the Corinthi­ans Paul explains how how such a sit­u­a­tion, using the exam­ple of meat sac­ri­ficed to idols, can lead to sin.

Now food will not bring us closer to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, nor are we bet­ter off if we do. But make sure that this lib­erty of yours in no way becomes a stum­bling block to the weak. If some­one sees you, with your knowl­edge, reclin­ing at table in the tem­ple of an idol, may not his con­science too, weak as it is, be “built up” to eat the meat sac­ri­ficed to idols? Thus through your knowl­edge, the weak per­son is brought to destruc­tion, the brother for whom Christ died. When you sin in this way against your broth­ers and wound their con­sciences, weak as they are, you are sin­ning against Christ.

1 Cor 8:812

Now if you are deal­ing with a small parish, and there is a busy­body or a crazy uncle who sees this, the pas­tor could explain pri­vately to a per­son scan­dal­ized by this that the cou­ple in ques­tion are work­ing with him and liv­ing as brother and sis­ter (and if they fail con­fess­ing with a firm pur­pose of res­o­lu­tion) and count on that per­son not to gos­sip about this couple’s pri­vate sit­u­a­tion or blast it out on twit­ter or face­book. Of course if he is unlucky the per­son might have already blasted this out and sud­denly not only is he deal­ing with his bishop and the local press ask­ing if he’s defy­ing the church but the cou­ple in ques­tion sud­denly have all of their busi­ness out in pub­lic mak­ing lead­ing them away from sin a com­pli­cated matter.

And that brings us to Pope Francis

A priest friend of mine one noted that the weak­ness of Pope Fran­cis is he for­gets that he not just a local pas­tor deal­ing with local issues but the Pope of the entire church whose every pro­nounce­ment is given scrutiny. This whole busi­ness about “There is no Hell” and the Vatican’s weak response to it is a great exam­ple of this.

Now Pope Fran­cis might think that this is no big deal, just a con­ver­sa­tion with an old man, John Allen describes it

The car­di­nal said he’d asked Pope Fran­cis the very same ques­tion, and here was the pope’s answer: “You know, by now he [Scal­fari] is quite old … we have to be gen­tle with him,” which is con­sis­tent with the pope’s repeated pleas to respect and cher­ish the elderly.

Francis’s Vat­i­can team, sens­ing the pope’s pref­er­ences, may have got­ten the mes­sage that when it comes to Scal­fari, nor­mally the gloves stay on.

Unfor­tu­nately he’s not just an old man Scal­fari (the elderly atheist/​communist jour­nal­ist) is the founder of a major paper that is read by thou­sands and while as Allen explains, his rep­u­ta­tion for accu­racy or the lack thereof might be well known in Italy in gen­eral and Vat­i­can cir­cles in par­tic­u­lar, Allen again:

It’s also worth remem­ber­ing that in 2015, when Scal­fari quoted Fran­cis as hav­ing said that “all the divorced and remar­ried who ask will be admit­ted” to Com­mu­nion, the then-​Vatican spokesman, Father Fed­erico Lom­bardi, added a very telling aside to the offi­cial denial.

Those who have “fol­lowed the pre­ced­ing events and work in Italy,” he said, “know the way Scal­fari writes and know these things well.”

In other words, the Vat­i­can offi­cials who approve pub­lic state­ments may have thought that it’s all been said before — for­get­ting, nat­u­rally, that the share of human­ity that’s fol­lowed the pre­ced­ing events and works in Italy is, in all hon­esty, stag­ger­ingly small.

Alas while Vat­i­can offi­cials, liv­ing in their bub­ble might think that this is no big deal in the age of the inter­net and of Drudge and a media who would like noth­ing more than to bring down the church this is gold and while Scal­fari might be an old man, don’t think for one moment that that old Com­mu­nist, Social­ist Athe­ist and Fas­cist who has spent a life­time try­ing to bring down the west and the Chris­t­ian Cul­ture that made it strong didn’t know what he was doing nor what it would do.

This brings scan­dal and dis­re­pute to the church that he rejects but it does some­thing even worse

Last night was the day when most new con­verts are received into the Church, many of them I’m sure doing so in defi­ance of the opin­ions of fam­ily and friends. How many of them, do you think, might have had sec­ond thoughts or even decided against enter­ing into full com­mu­nion because of this busi­ness, par­tic­u­larly the Vatican’s deci­sion not to make a direct unequiv­o­cal denial of these state­ments and affirm the truth of the doc­trine of the church?

Pope Fran­cis may think of this as an attempt to reach out to an old athe­ist near the end of his life in the hope of con­ver­sion is mercy and decide that the idea that the Pope has to deny con­tra­dict­ing Saints, Popes, Mar­ian Appari­tions and Christ him­self is non­sense and if Fran­cis was a local pas­tor and Scal­fari was just some old man near the end of it days he might be right about that.

But in so think­ing and doing or in this case again (amoris laeti­tia) fail­ing to clearly and unam­bigu­ously con­firm and repeat the Church’s doc­trine, unchanged for its two thou­sand years, he has man­aged to not only take the focus away from the sac­ri­fice of Christ for human­ity dur­ing Holy Week but has actu­ally brought the sac­ri­fice of Christ and the Chruch’s under­stand­ing of it into question.

This is an own goal, a gift to the ene­mies of the church on earth and for the enemy of men’s souls in eter­nity and it’s what comes of think­ing like a local pas­tor instead of the Pope of the Uni­ver­sal Church respon­si­ble for the faith of hun­dreds of millions.

Let us pray that through the grace of God that the Holy Father fig­ures this out.

The Damned being Cast into Hell, Frans Francken 1610

Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.

“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe (in me) to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed than with two hands to go into Gehenna, 10 into the unquenchable fire.

And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life crippled than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna, where ‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.’

Mark 9:41-48

I’ve been thinking long and hard about the Francis “No Hell” business and I think I’ve figured it out what is going on (although I can’t take all the credit for it).

A long time ago I wrote a post about how the internet empowers “crazy uncles”

It’s not so odd that 1% of any population might be off its rocker, the problem is in a country of 300,000,000 that is 3 million people. Even if 1/10 of one percent is crackers that’s 300,000 people. To give you some perspective that’s more troops than we have in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The problem is with the internet and social networking and the like that crazy 1% or 1/10 of one percent is suddenly empowered. Instead of the crazy uncle at the family gathering that you can ignore, suddenly he has 1000 friends that he can text to rebut and counter rebut all night. He is affirmed and empowered and boy is he motivated, because now there are thousands of people telling him he’s been right all along and is MUCH smarter than everyone thought.

300,000-3,000,000 crazy uncles as individuals isn’t a big deal, but get them all writing e-mails or making phone calls and most importantly AFFIRMING themselves and suddenly you have a potent economic and or political force. Suddenly there is a huge market for a book or 10,000 people willing to pay $20 for a DVD. That’s a fair amount of change and a person can make a good living off of it.

In terms of the church a good example of this is one given by Father Z in one of the best posts on the subject of communion and the divorced that I’ve ever read. It begins with this question:

You wrote in a recent post, “Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried (which in 99.99% of cases would be sacrilege).” Can you tell me what scenario would permit your conscience to give communion to the remarried? I can think of a couple, perhaps; curious what you’re thinking, esp. as I teach a marriage class every semester.

He lays out a scenario where a couple illicitly married choose not to separate for the sake of their children but are made to understand their sin and resolve to live as brother and sister such a couple CAN receive communion but would and should avoid doing so during their mass obligation to make sure it didn’t cause scandal and confuse people by making people think the priest is giving them communion in a state of mortal sin, as father puts it

Now I will track back to what I asked about Communion at the top.

What is it that they want?

Communion with its holy effects? Or do they want to be seen receiving Communion?

Do they want the Eucharist or the “white thing” that symbolizes affirmation?

In theory of course said couple could go for communion in public and the priest knowing that they are not in a state of moral sin could give them communion counting on the charity that people should have to presume that both the priest and the couple are acting in good faith.  In his letter to the Corinthians Paul explains how how such a situation, using the example of meat sacrificed to idols, can lead to sin.

Now food will not bring us closer to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, nor are we better off if we do.  But make sure that this liberty of yours in no way becomes a stumbling block to the weak.  If someone sees you, with your knowledge, reclining at table in the temple of an idol, may not his conscience too, weak as it is, be “built up” to eat the meat sacrificed to idols?  Thus through your knowledge, the weak person is brought to destruction, the brother for whom Christ died.  When you sin in this way against your brothers and wound their consciences, weak as they are, you are sinning against Christ.

1 Cor 8:8-12

Now if you are dealing with a small parish, and there is a busybody or a crazy uncle who sees this, the pastor could explain privately to a person scandalized by this that the couple in question are working with him and living as brother and sister (and if they fail confessing with a firm purpose of resolution) and count on that person not to gossip about this couple’s private situation or blast it out on twitter or facebook. Of course if he is unlucky the person might have already blasted this out and suddenly not only is he dealing with his bishop and the local press asking if he’s defying the church but the couple in question suddenly have all of their business out in public making leading them away from sin a complicated matter.

And that brings us to Pope Francis

A priest friend of mine one noted that the weakness of Pope Francis is he forgets that he not just a local pastor dealing with local issues but the Pope of the entire church whose every pronouncement is given scrutiny. This whole business about “There is no Hell” and the Vatican’s weak response to it is a great example of this.

Now Pope Francis might think that this is no big deal, just a conversation with an old man, John Allen describes it

The cardinal said he’d asked Pope Francis the very same question, and here was the pope’s answer: “You know, by now he [Scalfari] is quite old … we have to be gentle with him,” which is consistent with the pope’s repeated pleas to respect and cherish the elderly.

Francis’s Vatican team, sensing the pope’s preferences, may have gotten the message that when it comes to Scalfari, normally the gloves stay on.

Unfortunately he’s not just an old man Scalfari (the elderly atheist/communist journalist) is the founder of a major paper that is read by thousands and while as Allen explains, his reputation for accuracy or the lack thereof might be well known in Italy in general and Vatican circles in particular, Allen again:

It’s also worth remembering that in 2015, when Scalfari quoted Francis as having said that “all the divorced and remarried who ask will be admitted” to Communion, the then-Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, added a very telling aside to the official denial.

Those who have “followed the preceding events and work in Italy,” he said, “know the way Scalfari writes and know these things well.”

In other words, the Vatican officials who approve public statements may have thought that it’s all been said before – forgetting, naturally, that the share of humanity that’s followed the preceding events and works in Italy is, in all honesty, staggeringly small.

Alas while Vatican officials, living in their bubble might think that this is no big deal in the age of the internet and of Drudge and a media who would like nothing more than to bring down the church this is gold and while Scalfari might be an old man, don’t think for one moment that that old Communist, Socialist Atheist and Fascist who has spent a lifetime trying to bring down the west and the Christian Culture that made it strong didn’t know what he was doing nor what it would do.

This brings scandal and disrepute to the church that he rejects but it does something even worse

Last night was the day when most new converts are received into the Church, many of them I’m sure doing so in defiance of the opinions of family and friends. How many of them, do you think, might have had second thoughts or even decided against entering into full communion because of this business, particularly the Vatican’s decision not to make a direct unequivocal denial of these statements and affirm the truth of the doctrine of the church?

Pope Francis may think of this as an attempt to reach out to an old atheist near the end of his life in the hope of conversion is mercy and decide that the idea that the Pope has to deny contradicting Saints, Popes, Marian Apparitions and Christ himself is nonsense and if Francis was a local pastor and Scalfari was just some old man near the end of it days he might be right about that.

But in so thinking and doing or in this case again (amoris laetitia) failing to clearly and unambiguously confirm and repeat the Church’s doctrine, unchanged for its two thousand years, he has managed to not only take the focus away from the sacrifice of Christ for humanity during Holy Week but has actually brought the sacrifice of Christ and the Chruch’s understanding of it into question.

This is an own goal, a gift to the enemies of the church on earth and for the enemy of men’s souls in eternity and it’s what comes of thinking like a local pastor instead of the Pope of the Universal Church responsible for the faith of hundreds of millions.

Let us pray that through the grace of God that the Holy Father figures this out.