Apotheoun Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) I am thankful for God that we finally have a Holy Father who comes from the Jesuit tradition. Pope Francis realizes that action takes preeminence and not dead belief. It is about doing the Good, not merely saying that you believe in the Good. It is ironic for a man who keeps calling the so-called "traditionalists" in the Roman Church (i.e., those who are attached to the "vetus ordo") Pelagians, that he constantly makes Pelagian statements of his own that reduce salvation to "doing good," when in fact it is not possible to please God without faith - as scripture teaches. Edited October 1, 2013 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Salvaion isn't "doing good"...Although if one doesn't have faith their only shot is to do good...No faith and no good pry doesn't have a pryaer.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Should a person give the benefit of the doubt when dealing with someone else that his interlocutor is being sincere? Sure, but sadly, sincerity like humility can be feigned, and that is why it is more important to look for the truth in what a person says, because people can speak the truth even if they lack many virtues. Is Jesus Christ the sole savior of the world, and is faith in Him necessary to salvation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Salvaion isn't "doing good"...Although if one doesn't have faith their only shot is to do good...No faith and no good pry doesn't have a pryaer.... Faith is necessary for salvation, and good works done through grace in faith are salvific, but good deeds done without Christ - even though they are good in their object - are not salvific. Salvation comes only through Christ. The Catholic Church condemned Pelagianism more than one thousand years ago. Edited October 1, 2013 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 A prophet is never accepted in his native place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I do wish Pope Francis would stop giving interviews. Although this one is really just the continuation of the previous interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Faith is necessary for salvation, and good works done through grace in faith are salvific, but good deeds done without Christ - even though they are good in their object - are not salvific. Salvation comes only through Christ. The Catholic Church condemned Pelagianism more than one thousand years ago. I agree with this homeboy...But an atheist doesn't have faith...Its just how it is...I hope an atheist comes to faith in this life and receives Christ free gift of eternal life....But if they don't they are better off doing a life of good and following their conscience then doing the opposite.... Edited October 1, 2013 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 the Pope is not saying he has no desire for conversion, he is speaking against preconceived attempts to convince as the method, arguing for examples as the way to inspire conversion. you can try to call that spin, but it's true, he continually calls for evangalization of peoples, he has said so a few times as pope, in fact, while simultaneously arguing against what he calls "proselytization", which in context is clearly referring to attempts to argue people into conversion rather than meet them where they are, and inspire them through example and dialogue to faith in Christ. that's not to say he's entirely right, but the fact is that Pope Francis has called for evangelization, he has called for bringing people to the Church, plain and simple. I don't like the way he's wording this particular argument because it's easy to take that argument and lose site of the fact that he's called for the evangalization of people to conversion to Christ... but such is life, Pope Francis is not perfect, nor is any Pope. to pronounce the end of Catholicism on the basis of these rather insignificant remarks is rather foolish, and in the grand scheme of salvation history, will be viewed as having been rather silly I think. Once again the Pope is so unclear in what he says that different people come away with completely different views of what it is that he is trying to say. Nevertheless, I commend you for trying to interpret his words in a Catholic manner. And I continue to try and give him the benefit of the doubt, but I admit that the more he says the more concerned I become. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) I agree with this homeboy...But an atheist doesn't have faith...Its just how it is...I hope an atheist comes to faith in this life and receives Christ free gift of eternal life....But if they don't they are better off doing a life of good and following their conscience then doing the opposite.... Catholics can certainly remain hopeful that an atheist will come to faith before his death, but if he dies without faith - something God will have to judge upon the man's passing - he will da[i][/i]mn himself. Edited October 1, 2013 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I bet you there will be more then person who was agnostic/atheist in this life in heaven...I don't wish not having Faith in God on anyone....My life without God wouldn't be worth living....It would be empty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) the Pope has said he wants to "evangelize'' people, which he defines as not going at them with the 'intention to convert' but with the intention to bring them to an encounter with Jesus and the Truth. How can you evangelize someone without the intention of converting them. Jesus began His preaching with the intention to convert people, and that is why He said: "The time is fulfilled, the kingdom of God is at hand, repent and believe in the Gospel." One other point, perhaps I missed it, but I do not remember the Pope using the word "evangelize" in his interview. Are you sure he is talking about evangelizing people? Edited October 1, 2013 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fr. Antony Maria OSB Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) I've only read this interview once, and haven't thought it over a whole lot, but one of the first things that came to my mind in regard to some of the things Pope Francis said was how well this was translated into English. My Italian is terrible (aka basically non-existent), but apparently I'm not the only one who had this idea. A friend of mine posted a link to this blog talking about some translation issues for this latest interview. Here is one of the things Sr. Anne has to say: If "everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them," is the Pope saying that there is no such thing as objective truth, or objective right or wrong? This is where it is really, really helpful to know Italian: "Ciascuno di noi ha una sua visione del Bene e anche del Male. Noi dobbiamo incitarlo a procedere verso quello che lui pensa sia il Bene" is more literally (and helpfully?) translated as "Each one of us has his/her own vision of the Good or even of Evil. We must encourage him/her to move toward that which he/she sees as the Good." The Pope is not leveling the difference between truth and untruth, right and wrong: he is saying that we all have a duty to encourage people to pursue the Good, knowing that the true Good will not fail to manifest himself, even if "through a glass darkly." The full article can be found here: http://romans8v29.blogspot.com/2013/10/francis-interview-2.html Farther down, Sr. Anne links to Fr. Z's take on this interview, and I think he also makes some very good points. For example, after quoting some passages from the CCC supporting what Pope Francis said about people following their conscience: I will add believers and Catholics are obliged to follow their FORMED consciences, and those consciences are enlightened by Divine Revelation, by apostolic tradition and by the Magisterium. Once again, His Holiness is right, but within the context that he had in mind, which context is only implicitly evident in the interview because of the nature of that genre. (NazFarmer: aka interview) Could Francis be faulted for not talking about defective conscience or lack of formation of conscience, I suppose. But the Church teaches that people cannot be coerced in matters of conscience. This is a natural right as well. But the context here is non-believers. When the LCWR nuns try to cite Dignitatis humanae as an excuse to not obey, they err and err gravely. But the Pope was talking with a non-believing journalist, not LCWR nuns. Context, friends, context. Fr. Z's full article can be found here: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/10/pope-francis-interview-in-la-repubblica-or-is-this-now-my-fate/ Edited October 1, 2013 by NazFarmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) How can you evangelize someone without the intention of converting them. Jesus began His preaching with the intention to convert people, and that is why He said: "The time is fulfilled, the kingdom of God is at hand, repent and believe in the Gospel." One other point, perhaps I missed it, but I do not remember the Pope using the word "evangelize" in his interview. Are you sure he is talking about evangelizing people? Jesus didn't begin every conversation that way. Sometimes he just said, "Follow me." Sometimes he said, "I have been sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." To have a conversation is to invite someone to an exchange of ideas. If there is no possibility of people learning and changing (including yourself), then it makes the conversation pointless. But the idea of wanting to "convert" someone makes conversation impossible, it becomes just a one-sided monologue (not unlike the Jehovah's Witnesses). When someone says "I disagree with you," then sometimes the best thing is to say, "Ok, now let's eat." Not everything has to be about converting someone...and yet, in sitting down to eat with them, you are doing a lot more than talking at them. Edited October 1, 2013 by Era Might Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Also, context is important. Christ was speaking in a religious society, to Jews, and an ancient society: no modern technology, no modern assumptions, no modern history, no modern literature, no modern science, no modern media. Different contexts call for different ways of interacting. When some person today hears, "I am here to convert you," they hear, "I am here to get you to live in a religious ghetto, to think like it's the middle ages, etc. etc." Of course, it's possible for religions to develop a strong ghetto...but the church in the west certainly, at its heart, has never been about that, though at times it has lapsed into that. The church in the west has always been attentive to adaptation. It's what gave it so many different spiritualities, from St. Francis de Sales' practical advice, to St. Francis of Assisi's radical poverty. Edited October 1, 2013 by Era Might Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apteka Posted October 1, 2013 Author Share Posted October 1, 2013 Also, context is important. Christ was speaking in a religious society, to Jews, and an ancient society: no modern technology, no modern assumptions, no modern history, no modern literature, no modern science, no modern media. Different contexts call for different ways of interacting. When some person today hears, "I am here to convert you," they hear, "I am here to get you to live in a religious ghetto, to think like it's the middle ages, etc. etc." Of course, it's possible for religions to develop a strong ghetto...but the church in the west certainly, at its heart, has never been about that, though at times it has lapsed into that. The church in the west has always been attentive to adaptation. It's what gave it so many different spiritualities, from St. Francis de Sales' practical advice, to St. Francis of Assisi's radical poverty. Yes, and the Church is also reforming it's medieval dogmas, such as the transubstantiation and trinity. These doctrines are no longer applicable to the modern person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts