Pope Francis. The first pope from the Americas.
So the waiting is over, and yet not. By some, our new pope is seen as the anti-Benedict. I know too little of him to comment on that.
I shall wait and see. It is reported that in Beunos Aires, Summorum Pontificum has not been implemented. It may be more accurate to say that SP has been blocked there. Again, I have too little data.
I shall wait and see. I am nervous. I had a favorite for whose election I prayed. This is not he.
I think we can learn much from the appointments he will make to the Curia. I shall pray for him, and for those appointments. Our Pope Emeritus Benedict sacrificed himself to clean out the Curia.
Although Pope Francis is being reported as a "compassionate conservative", I have not found much to support that view. And he was in the Curia under Pope Benedict. Was he among those who Benedict felt compelled to remove?
I shall wait and see.
Update:
It seems that many who consider themselves traditional are beside themselves.
Likewise the liberals.
The office changes the man. I pray for good works by Pope Francis.
I repeat: I shall wait and see.
I took the confirmation name Pius, believing we cannot be fully formed in our faith without the teachings of Pope St. Pius V, venerable Pope Pius IX, Pope St. Pius X, Pope Pius XI, and Pope Pius XII.
“Everyone should have the right to freely express their own view, which the Catholic church decisively recognized at Vatican II and still does today. This doesn’t mean, however, that every opinion must be recognized as Catholic.” -- then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in a 1979 homily
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Monday, March 4, 2013
What passes for ethics...
I was shocked and appalled this morning, to read that ethicists in Australia have satisfied themselves there is a case for "post-birth abortion". Infanticide, if we're going to be honest.
You can read of it here.
This is what comes of divorcing ethics and morals from faith. Holy Mother Church is steadfast in her teachings; public policy, on the other hand, shifts with cultural "values". Or in this case, apparently, no value.
When religion is banished form the public square, this is what we must expect. We cannot rely on common sense, nor on an innate sense of what is right. Clearly, there are those among us who can make a case for almost anything being "right". And that's just wrong!
You can read of it here.
This is what comes of divorcing ethics and morals from faith. Holy Mother Church is steadfast in her teachings; public policy, on the other hand, shifts with cultural "values". Or in this case, apparently, no value.
When religion is banished form the public square, this is what we must expect. We cannot rely on common sense, nor on an innate sense of what is right. Clearly, there are those among us who can make a case for almost anything being "right". And that's just wrong!
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Exploring charity
We hear so much now about the need for charity, especially toward the poor. But we are now seeing the poor in the United States defined in such a way that nearly half the population is poor. And this, in a time when our elected government is spending at unheard of rates, and has failed for four years even to produce a budget.
Charity is essential to our faith. However, I find nothing in scripture to suggest that our call to charity can be fulfilled by a government taking money from us, and redirecting it, much of it to no benefit of the the poor.
Further, while we do not often hear of it in a homily, there is responsibility. We are responsible to help the poor, thus engaging in charity. We are responsible to love our neighbors; we are responsible to turn away from sin. We are also responsible not to spend what we do not have.
On the other hand, one of the deadly sins is sloth, yet we often see examples of sloth among those who remain perennially on welfare, and also on drugs or alcohol. No, it's not always the case, but it is a significant percentage, and is highly resistant to change.
Do we not fail in our responsibility when we tolerate the destructive acts of government, which forces us to finance abortion? Do we not fail in the deepest meaning of charity when we do not remove the opportunity which allows anyone to spend a life on drugs? And can we not see that in every sermon, Jesus was preaching responsibility?
And where is our love when we condone or even support heresy? And we do that, friends, when we support the notion that "social justice" trumps the teachings of the Church.
Charity is essential to our faith. However, I find nothing in scripture to suggest that our call to charity can be fulfilled by a government taking money from us, and redirecting it, much of it to no benefit of the the poor.
Further, while we do not often hear of it in a homily, there is responsibility. We are responsible to help the poor, thus engaging in charity. We are responsible to love our neighbors; we are responsible to turn away from sin. We are also responsible not to spend what we do not have.
On the other hand, one of the deadly sins is sloth, yet we often see examples of sloth among those who remain perennially on welfare, and also on drugs or alcohol. No, it's not always the case, but it is a significant percentage, and is highly resistant to change.
Do we not fail in our responsibility when we tolerate the destructive acts of government, which forces us to finance abortion? Do we not fail in the deepest meaning of charity when we do not remove the opportunity which allows anyone to spend a life on drugs? And can we not see that in every sermon, Jesus was preaching responsibility?
And where is our love when we condone or even support heresy? And we do that, friends, when we support the notion that "social justice" trumps the teachings of the Church.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)