www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Things Worse Or Better Under Pope Francis?

Things like this:
children's Mass in superhero robes [now.msn.com] continue to happen in the RCC. Do you think they will get better or worse under Pope Francis?

The way he sounds right now, I'd say once he's officially installed, we shall see what kinds of changes he wishes to implement in the Church. Right now, I'm hoping the changes he provides will be for the better, and to make the Church more inviting to those in society. With all the secularism in the world, I'm praying that Pope Francis will indeed be the answer to combat the problems, and to bring those faithful back to the Church on a more regular basis.

His Holiness has not, in the recent past, insisted on liturgy that is not ridiculous. Nonetheless, the kind of frivolous young people who might go in for that kind of nonsense don't come to church anymore, let alone seek ordination, and the perpetrators of the worst liturgical idiocy are now mainly retired or dead. From this we may draw hope.

It appears that Pope Francis is known for doing the following:
Argentine Evangelicals Say Bergoglio as Pope Francis Is 'Answer to Our Prayers' [christianitytoday.com]

There are many stories on the Internet of Pope Francis when he was Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio kneeling to receive the imposition of hands from Evangelical "ministers".

I wonder if he is going to be reformer in the "Spirit of Vatican II" manner. It appears that as Cardinal he ignored Pope Benedict's motu proprio for the Latin church to celebrate the Pre-Vatican II Mass. It is also noteworthy that many Jesuits aren't thought of as being the most strick to Catholic theology.

That the Pope perceives spiritual benefit in the prayers of clergy of other faiths does not seem to me to be an indication of anything other than the humility to acknowledge that there is good in all peoples and that spiritually good persons abound in other religions, as well as our own.

Personally, I have no doubt that I would be spiritually enriched and truly blessed were our beloved friend and brother, Pastor Thomas, to lay hands on and pray a blessing on me - and I'm far from being a syncretist.

Many years,

Neil

I'll say this, I'd feel more comfortable holding hands with those Protestant pastors who blessed him than with the sorts of Catholics who are freely throwing stones at him, lately.

For us who are taught to see Christ in each person.....who would refuse the prayers or blessing from Christ?

There's maybe a bit of false equivalence in your statement there; prayers are not blessings. Lay people have no place blessing priests. This isn't a kooky kind of RC legalism. The Orthodox would never stand for it either.

Really? What about a priest who has a lay monk for his spiritual father? What about a priest asking for the blessing of his biological father? No place? Really?

I'll certainly take anyone's prayers!

Laying on of hands seems to imply authority to me, though. My Latin Catholic parents pray that way - I only let them do it because ... they're my parents. I suppose even in my thirties they do still count as authorities over me.

I didn't really notice this until I asked a Protestant to pray with me about a problem. He laid a hand on me and prayed over me. He meant well ... but on my end it was weird. In charity, I presume I don't understand his "spiritual dialect."

Let's say that, like in my anecdote, Pope Francis only expected the prayer and not the laying on of hands. Knowing that everything the pope does is a signifier to the faithful, does he ask the Protestant to stop? That would be awkward, at the very least.

It's an interesting question. The answer is above my pay grade, though.

Oh, sorry, was that what we're talking about, or did you just dredge up some obscure and inapplicable situation and try to apply it?

Who are you, and what have you done with Stuart?

As someone who grew up in very low-church, evangelical circles, I assure you that the laying on of hands is not understood as a sign of authority over the person upon whom hands are being placed-and certainly not in any sort of Catholic/Orthodox sense. If people understood the theological significance this has in the particular sort of Protestant context in which in took place, they wouldn't be raising hell over it--except, of course, those who want to be critical simply for the hell of it. The sort of Protestants who engage in this type of practice generally see no difference in a lay person doing this and one of their ministers doing this. It simply doesn't represent an act of special authority given only to the ordained.

This would seem to be the point and the problem. One of the first things I read from our new Pope was a most impressive consideration on the necessity of preaching Christ and His cross without regard for even the most serious human consequences. I don't know how to square this with a little comfortable play acting with a Protestant idea that apostolic authority is a fiction. It is a virtuous and Christian thing to greet and serve the poor where they are found. It is another to make-believe that their poverty doesn't really exist.

In the days since Pope Francis' election, I have been alarmed by the searching for negative things to pin on our Holy Father, but I have been almost as alarmed by the excuse-making that I have seen in response.

The correct response here isn't to make excuses. It's to say "Obviously bishops shouldn't be accepting blessings from Protestant ministers. It confuses people. That was a lapse" and have done with it.

I just saw the 60 minutes profile of the Pope and the Church ... of course they could not stop themselves from trying to create controversy - showcasing Nuns on the Bus as the cause du jour.

The piece they did reflects the knee jerk criticisms brought up by Anthanasius ... it's amazing how quickly they start up.

No where did I hear (maybe I did not listen) how much Hope and Evangelical Fervor the entire Latin Catholic Church feels right now - and the impact that will have.

Genuine question, what's confusing about it? Maybe I'm not thinking hard enough.