Religion
Related: About this forumPope, in candid speech, speaks of 'exodus' from the Church
Source: Reuters
By Philip Pullella
RIO DE JANEIRO | Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:30pm EDT
(Reuters) - Pope Francis, in a stunningly candid assessment of the state of the Catholic Church, said on Saturday it should look in the mirror and ask why so many people are leaving the faith of their fathers.
On the penultimate day of his trip to Brazil, Francis delivered a long address to the country's bishops in which he suggested elements of what could become a blueprint for stopping what he called an "exodus."
"I would like all of us to ask ourselves today: are we still a Church capable of warming hearts?" he said in a speech remarkable for its frankness about the hemorrhaging of the Church in many countries.
The Argentine pope, who is in Rio for a Catholic international jamboree known as World Youth Day, referred to what he called "the mystery of those who leave the Church" because they think it "can no longer offer them anything meaningful or important."
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/27/us-pope-brazil-idUSBRE96M18G20130727
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)direction he is taking.
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)and getting off their duffs and going out into the poor and preach the gospel of Jesus, about Hope and Salvation that Jesus offers to the poor and less fortunate in their mist. In other words, get out into the slums like Jesus did and not like the High Priest in his time. I say God Bless him and and may he live to be 100years old and sane.
I hope his message resonates though out the world especially here in the U.S.where some Bishops worry too much about what some order of Nuns do in social justice in helping the poor and not enough time trying to stop abortion and other issues like gay marriage and so forth.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)and my sense is that it is.
He lived it before he became pope.
Now if he could address the church's issues with LGBT people and girls/women, that would be something amazing.
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)he said "there are more important things in this world than individual rights." My heart already know what he meant.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)life long demo
(1,113 posts)But for me he still has a way to go. I feel the previous pope just about destroyed a lot of people's faith, what with the unholy priest and the pope, for me it was very difficult.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)while still in Catholic School at age 15. Think about that one, Pope Francis. Maybe it's not the messenger, but the MESSAGE?
Warpy
(111,277 posts)since John XXIII shook them up and scared them about joining the present time and the rest of us.
Exposing them as an organized pedophile ring woke a lot of people up. Their vicious war against the female half of the human race has awakened still more. Many of the remainder are going only out of habit.
They're going to need a massive cleanup starting in the Vatican if they want to survive. Unfortunately, all those conservatives for so many decades have been careful in their appointments, so this pope doesn't have a chance to do that even if he cares to.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)organization that doesn't permit couples to use any artificial means to limit the size of their families, an organization working desperately to stonewall attempts by victims of sexual abuse performed on them by its own priests to receive justice, an organization that denies the right of non-straight individuals to enjoy their sexuality.
He has not only not done one thing to change this evil quo, he continues to actively promote it.
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)This Pope has already made it crystal clear that he stands firmly behind the Church's repression of women and gays.
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)Catholic, anti Christian, and let me see...I know there is something else. Can't think of it now.
I guess you didn't hear what he said about gays, today. Paraphrasing " we are all brothers and sisters. I am not here to judge." Quite a start for being Pope for only a few months. What ever you think about him, I, truly, like this man and he will be a force for change in the Catholic Church and maybe in all of Christendom
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Sure, I heard what the pope said. This pope is fine with gays -- as long as they don't enjoy the sexual natures they were born with. Talk about repression.
Sure, this pope is fine with women -- he's fine with them dying slow, painful deaths instead of having life-saving abortions. Talk about repression.
This pope makes me sick, and the Catholic Church he leads makes me sick.
demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)demosincebirth
(12,540 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)pinto
(106,886 posts)As mentioned above, the church slammed the door on John XXIII's moves to broaden the outlook and actions of the church. Given the clear rise in attention and support being given to social equality issues, this is an opportunity for them to act not blindly react.
We'll see.
edhopper
(33,587 posts)going on in the Republican Party. They seem clueless as well.
Perhaps their message of how sex is evil (unless done by a Priest) and women are inferior no longer resonates to a lot of people in the 21st century.
Perhaps in our global world, people aren't relegated to the dominate faith in their town, city, or country, and an authoritarian, patriarchal system doesn't appeal.
msongs
(67,420 posts)I mean ignorant, not stupid. there is a difference. that is why catholic growth is highest in lower income cultures with lower education levels.
rurallib
(62,423 posts)except on rare occasions, the Catholic Church has been much more concerned with its own worldly goods than the lives of its adherents.
At least that is why I went streaking for the door.
rug
(82,333 posts)http://world.time.com/2013/07/25/slum-pope-tells-slum-residents-not-to-lose-hope/
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)Sounding like he's all for that changey-thingie, knowing it's what the gullible and the vaguely dissatisfied want to hear, but there's no substance behind it.
"clericalism, the mundane, this closing ourselves off within ourselves"? WTF does that even mean? One of the main crimes of the Catholic Church is that they refuse to keep their "faith" within themselves and their community of believers. They insist that as many aspects of it as possible be imposed on the whole world, whether it wants them or not.
This guy should have been a politician.
rug
(82,333 posts)Do you know what it is?
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)But his saying that he wants to "get rid of" it is meaningless. What would the Catholic Church look like if "clericalism" were eliminated, totally, utterly and completely? Is he saying he wants the clergy and the clerical hierarchy to have NO influence? Or is he advocating for them to have just the exactly correct amount of influence, neither more nor less? The Goldilocks approach?
Again, meaningless. Saying he wants to "get rid of" clericalism is like a politician saying he wants to get rid of money in politics.
rug
(82,333 posts)What he is saying is actually quite orthodox. Vatican II was in large part about restoring the role of laity that was absorbed by the hierarchy over centuries.
This is what he said yesterday.
- snip -
Francis' target audience is the poor and the marginalized the people that history's first pope from Latin America has highlighted on this first trip of his pontificate. He has visited one of Rio's most violent slum areas, met with juvenile offenders and drug addicts and welcomed in a place of honor 35 trash recyclers from his native Argentina.
"Let us courageously look to pastoral needs, beginning with the outskirts, with those who are farthest away, with those who do not usually go to church," he said Saturday. "They too are invited to the table of the Lord."
http://news.yahoo.com/pope-shames-brazilian-church-catholic-exodus-203429551.html
To what extent he succeeds remains to be seen. But he is dead serious about it and it is far from meaningless. Unless, of course, you're pulling on him to fail.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)and tells them, can be regarded as "dead serious". And even if he sort of, kind of meant what he said, that still doesn't mean it isn't meaningless to say he wants to get rid of "clericalism" completely.
And "pulling for him to fail"? How can he, since he's set no concrete, identifiable goals and there would be no way to determine if he'd "failed" or not? Unless you think his goal is to return the church to the way it was in the 1st century. If he'd said he wanted to reduce the influence of the clergy and increase the influence of the laity, that would be different, but that's not what he said he wants. And as you and others are so fond of pointing out, most of the laity ignore what the clerical hierarchy of the RCC tell them they should be doing anyway. So what exactly is it that he wants to "get rid of"?
rug
(82,333 posts)"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.
lie-la-lie, lie-la-lie, . . . ."
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Maybe he really can foment some change.
At least he's going to try, and that's more than we have seen in some time.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)But until he starts talking about getting rid of homophobic polices, policies against women, and REALLY addresses the pedophile priest issues, this doesn't mean shit. This is a spit in the bucket as far as problems of the church go.
Peregrine Took
(7,415 posts)saying there is really no difference between Benedict and Francis, other than some style preferences.
They wish!!!
trotsky
(49,533 posts)and yet here is the man in charge acknowledging the power such an act has on the church and its hierarchy.
rug
(82,333 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)They refuse to evolve so they will eventually become extinct.