Pope Francis (can We Have A Sensible Discussion?)

[PhuturePriest]

well the ring is actually a very part of the clear identity thing. His ring will be destroyed when his reign is over. It makes no difference whether it is silver or gold, but it is uniquely his. And it is traditional for Franciscans to use silver.

 

Actually I am kind of amused at upset over the offertory being omitted because that is when a lot of the fru-fru stuff can happen in a bad liturgy. Dancing nuns bringing up incense, etc.  The EF does not have an offertory procession.

 

Bazinga.

[Apotheoun]

well the ring is actually a very part of the clear identity thing. His ring will be destroyed when his reign is over. It makes no difference whether it is silver or gold, but it is uniquely his. And it is traditional for Franciscans to use silver.

 

Actually I am kind of amused at upset over the offertory being omitted because that is when a lot of the fru-fru stuff can happen in a bad liturgy. Dancing nuns bringing up incense, etc.  The EF does not have an offertory procession.

I'm not upset about the offertory, or even about the ring. Nevertheless, I can sympathize with traditional Roman Catholics who take papal customs seriously.  :)

[PhuturePriest]

Actually wearing the ring would be more important than wearing the clothes, because like with the sacrament of marriage, a woman rarely wears her wedding dress again.

 

But why not dump all the papal traditions? Why only some of them?

 

I'm all for tradition. I loved Pope Benedict XVI and how traditional he was, and how he brought some traditions back. But when you make tradition more important than anything else, problems happen. It's not like he's deciding not to wear a ring. He's still wearing a ring specially made for him, and it's still going to be destroyed just like the rest of them. It's not going to be a five dollar mood ring, it's going to be freakin' silver. Stop taking offenses at everything he does and perhaps trust that the Holy Spirit knows better than we do.

[Apotheoun]

Bazinga.

Why is the pope continuing some traditions, while getting rid of others, and how does altering traditional practices safeguard those very practices?

 

Isn't the pope is supposed to be the primary guardian of tradition in the Roman Church?

Edited March 18, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Noel's angel]

The bottom line, NA, is that when you look for reasons to discredit the Pope, the faithful at phatmass are not likely to support and/or agree with you. It's their right to not agree and to engage you in discussion on a public message board.

Further, I would expect that if you really wanted a healthy discussion about the implications of the Pope's recent actions, you would not post one- or two-line posts citing things he's done contrary to tradition, but explain why you have an issue with it and what significance you think this has in regards to the universal Church.

I may not agree with Apotheoun, but at least he's providing logical, respectful, significant reasons for his disagreements.

 
I may not like the Pope, but one thing you cannot accuse me of is being unfaithful to him. I said at the start of the thread that this would be a place for everyone to note their hopes and fears. That is what I have done. I noted in my first post that I fear he is lowering the office of Pope to meet his own private standards. Following on from that, my posts have sown examples of why I think this.

[franciscanheart]

He makes the same kinds of points Martin Luther made.  :shocking:
 
Why not just dump all the papal traditions and signs of authority? Why only get rid of some of them or alter some to make them more modern? Just dump them all and be done with it.

You sound rather dramatic. I think that's the biggest problem with this discussion. I can understand the idea that you really do feel a sense of emergency about this, some level of importance that the rest of us don't see. But when you relate the pope to Martin Luther? It comes off as a bit ... dramatic. And emotional. Unnecessarily critical of a man who has simply shirked material, unnecessary non-requirements.

Does his taking of a gold-plated silver ring and not wearing red shoes and a cape really have that great of an implication? Perhaps in some's eyes it does. Clearly for you and NA, this is way bigger a deal than what the rest of us consider more important things. I am actually proud of him for leaving behind some of those things. I don't find I have any less respect for him or that he's taken away from his office in any way. There's plenty of gold surrounding his person, I don't think it matters if his ring isn't pure gold.

I also think my franciscan heart leads me to feel very differently about many things in the Church. I don't say that in pride, just as a statement of fact. My priorities and views on living life are very different than some others, clearly.

[Noel's angel]

I'm all for tradition. I loved Pope Benedict XVI and how traditional he was, and how he brought some traditions back. But when you make tradition more important than anything else, problems happen. It's not like he's deciding not to wear a ring. He's still wearing a ring specially made for him, and it's still going to be destroyed just like the rest of them. It's not going to be a five dollar mood ring, it's going to be freakin' silver. Stop taking offenses at everything he does and perhaps trust that the Holy Spirit knows better than we do.

 

As far as I am aware, the ring WAS NOT made specially for the occasion of his installation as Pope.

[Apotheoun]

I'm all for tradition. I loved Pope Benedict XVI and how traditional he was, and how he brought some traditions back. But when you make tradition more important than anything else, problems happen. It's not like he's deciding not to wear a ring. He's still wearing a ring specially made for him, and it's still going to be destroyed just like the rest of them. It's not going to be a five dollar mood ring, it's going to be freakin' silver. Stop taking offenses at everything he does and perhaps trust that the Holy Spirit knows better than we do.

You do see why Orthodox Christians see the Roman Church and Protestantism as two sides of the same coin - Right? Did you read the comment by the Orthodox priest about the pope being able to arbitrarily change the liturgy? That could not happen in Eastern Orthodoxy, because hierarchs are servants of liturgical tradition, not the creators of it.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Apotheoun

[PhuturePriest]

I may not like the Pope, but one thing you cannot accuse me of is being unfaithful to him. I said at the start of the thread that this would be a place for everyone to note their hopes and fears. That is what I have done. I noted in my first post that I fear he is lowering the office of Pope to meet his own private standards. Following on from that, my posts have sown examples of why I think this. 

 

You're wrong: This has not been a thread for people to post their hopes and fears. This has been a thread for people (Namely you) to post your fears and judgements on the Pope and his decisions on traditions (Traditions with a lower-case 't' and not an upper-case 'T').

[PhuturePriest]

You sound rather dramatic. I think that's the biggest problem with this discussion. I can understand the idea that you really do feel a sense of emergency about this, some level of importance that the rest of us don't see. But when you relate the pope to Martin Luther? It comes off as a bit ... dramatic. And emotional. Unnecessarily critical of a man who has simply shirked material, unnecessary non-requirements.

Does his taking of a gold-plated silver ring and not wearing red shoes and a cape really have that great of an implication? Perhaps in some's eyes it does. Clearly for you and NA, this is way bigger a deal than what the rest of us consider more important things. I am actually proud of him for leaving behind some of those things. I don't find I have any less respect for him or that he's taken away from his office in any way. There's plenty of gold surrounding his person, I don't think it matters if his ring isn't pure gold.

I also think my franciscan heart leads me to feel very differently about many things in the Church. I don't say that in pride, just as a statement of fact. My priorities and views on living life are very different than some others, clearly.

 

He didn't say the Pope makes the same arguments as Martin Luther. He said I did. I was offended at first, but now I find it kind of funny. :hehe:

[franciscanheart]

I'm not upset about the offertory, or even about the ring. Nevertheless, I can sympathize with traditional Roman Catholics who take papal customs seriously.  :)

Are you suggesting the rest of us don't? :huh:
 

I may not like the Pope, but one thing you cannot accuse me of is being unfaithful to him. I said at the start of the thread that this would be a place for everyone to note their hopes and fears. That is what I have done. I noted in my first post that I fear he is lowering the office of Pope to meet his own private standards. Following on from that, my posts have sown examples of why I think this.

I'm sorry, I don't see where I accused you of being unfaithful.

[Noel's angel]

You're wrong: This has not been a thread for people to post their hopes and fears. This has been a thread for people (Namely you) to post your fears and judgements on the Pope and his decisions on traditions (Traditions with a lower-case 't' and not an upper-case 'T').

 

I'm wrong about my own intentions? Right...

 

Would you like to mention some hopes you have? (I have already mentioned some things that made me hopeful about his Papacy).

[Apotheoun]

He didn't say the Pope makes the same arguments as Martin Luther. He said I did. I was offended at first, but now I find it kind of funny. :hehe:

I guess, when it serves your purposes you are for tradition, like in the thread where I pointed out the traditional transliteration of the term ἐπισκόπους into English as bishop should be normative, but when it does not suit your purpose tradition is dispensable.  :hehe2:

Edited March 18, 2013 by Apotheoun

[PhuturePriest]

I guess, when it serves your purposes you are for tradition, like in the thread where I pointed out the traditional transliteration of the term ἐπισκόπους into English as bishop should be normative, but when it does not suit your purpose tradition is dispensable.  :hehe2:

 

It used to be tradition for Catholics to not eat anything at all on days of fasting. It was also tradition for Catholics to make public confessions rather than private ones. After we upgraded to private, you could only confess your sins to the bishops, not a regular priest. Should we go back to those as well, simply in the name of tradition?

[Apotheoun]

Are you suggesting the rest of us don't? :huh:
 

My apologies I did not know that you were distressed by the fact that the pope has chosen not to have a unique ring created as a sign of his pontificate. Again my apologies if I misunderstood your viewpoint, and thank you for the correction.