Pope Francis wants 'poor Church for the poor'

[Christknight104]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21812545

Pope Francis has said he wants "a poor Church, for the poor" following his election as head of the world's 1.2bn Catholics on Wednesday.

He said he chose the name Francis after 12-13th Century St Francis of Assisi, who represented "poverty and peace".

He urged journalists to get to know the Church with its "virtues and sins" and to share its focus on "truth, goodness and beauty".

Pope Francis takes over from Benedict XVI, who abdicated last month.

The former Argentine cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, 76, was the surprise choice of cardinals meeting in Rome to choose a new head of the Church.

In his first audience at the Vatican, he said Jesus Christ and not the Pope was the centre of the Church, which he stressed was "spiritual not political" in nature.

He said the Holy Spirit had inspired the resignation of Benedict XVI and guided the cardinals choosing him as the next pontiff.

The Pope said he had been inspired to take the name Francis by a Brazilian colleague who embraced him and whispered "don't forget the poor" when it was announced that he had been elected Pope.

He said he immediately thought of St Francis of Assisi, the Italian founder of the Franciscan Order who was devoted to the poor.

As well as representing poverty and peace, he said St Francis "loved and looked after" creation - and he noted that humanity was "not having a good relationship with nature at the moment".

St Francis of Assisi is said to have loved animals as his "brothers and sisters" and even to have preached to birds.



Humour

There had been speculation that Pope Francis - who was a member of the Jesuit order - had chosen his name in honour of St Francis Xavier, a 16th Century Jesuit missionary in Asia. But he said this was not the case.

The new Pope's style is very different to that of his predecessor, BBC Vatican correspondent David Willey says.

He talks in simple, easy to understand terms about ethical values and shows a remarkable sense of humour, our correspondent says.

Earlier, the Vatican said Pope Francis would visit his predecessor Pope emeritus Benedict next week.

Pope Benedict, 85, became the first Pope in 600 years to abdicate last month when he said old age and health meant he could no longer continue in the job.

[tmw89]

Like I said earlier, in the big thread... some fun times are ahead for all of us.

[PatrickG]

Like I said earlier, in the big thread... some fun times are ahead for all of us.

Our Lady of La Salette, ora pro nobis!

[Monsieur Dupin]

These are all necessarily bad things?

[EcceQuamBonum]

These are all necessarily bad things?

The statement seems to be preparing us for a drastic reduction in the temporal power of the Church, a Marxist-inflected form of Puritanism that spurns worldly beauty and its goods in favor of "holiness" and the spiritual and not appearing to be rich while there are many poor.  We're being set up to accept more readily a false dichotomy between the grandeur that Holy Mother Church owes to God in worship and Her obligations to the poor, which are not only not irreconcilable but mutually dependent.  So, yes, I think there are a number of necessarily bad things in the background of Francis's statements today, things which will begin to move to the foreground in the coming weeks and months, I predict.

[MrsKriddels]

Yes, let's sell the treasures of the Church, or put them away in closets, so that no one can see them. 

It's amusing that many of the same people who favor funding programs for the arts support bland, "humble" liturgies. It's ok for the poor to see ugly art so that they are never uplifted by any of it. One might think it would be an act of charity to build a beautiful chapel in the middle of some of the worst slums on earth, where the traditional Mass is celebrated, so that the poor can see, hear, smell something beautiful in their lives.  But no, let's never remind the poor there is something higher and more beautiful than this life.  Let's never remind anyone of that.

Sent from my phone

[Der Kaiser]

JANSENISM

[tmw89]

Yes, let's sell the treasures of the Church, or put them away in closets, so that no one can see them. 

It's amusing that many of the same people who favor funding programs for the arts support bland, "humble" liturgies. It's ok for the poor to see ugly art so that they are never uplifted by any of it. One might think it would be an act of charity to build a beautiful chapel in the middle of some of the worst slums on earth, where the traditional Mass is celebrated, so that the poor can see, hear, smell something beautiful in their lives.  But no, let's never remind the poor there is something higher and more beautiful than this life.  Let's never remind anyone of that.

Don't forget, the same people are also prone to refer to the TLM as - and I quote - "the Mass of the ignorant."

Wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard it in person.

[PatrickG]

These are all necessarily bad things?

The statement seems to be preparing us for a drastic reduction in the temporal power of the Church, a Marxist-inflected form of Puritanism that spurns worldly beauty and its goods in favor of "holiness" and the spiritual and not appearing to be rich while there are many poor.  We're being set up to accept more readily a false dichotomy between the grandeur that Holy Mother Church owes to God in worship and Her obligations to the poor, which are not only not irreconcilable but mutually dependent.  So, yes, I think there are a number of necessarily bad things in the background of Francis's statements today, things which will begin to move to the foreground in the coming weeks and months, I predict.

Yes, let's sell the treasures of the Church, or put them away in closets, so that no one can see them. 

It's amusing that many of the same people who favor funding programs for the arts support bland, "humble" liturgies. It's ok for the poor to see ugly art so that they are never uplifted by any of it. One might think it would be an act of charity to build a beautiful chapel in the middle of some of the worst slums on earth, where the traditional Mass is celebrated, so that the poor can see, hear, smell something beautiful in their lives.  But no, let's never remind the poor there is something higher and more beautiful than this life.  Let's never remind anyone of that.

Sent from my phone

JANSENISM

All of these are excellent and entirely true.

[EcceQuamBonum]

Don't forget, the same people are also prone to refer to the TLM as - and I quote - "the Mass of the ignorant."

Wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard it in person.

And we're supposedly the elitists...


Also, MrsKriddels, that was a spot-on post.  Thank you!

[MrsKriddels]

Don't forget, the same people are also prone to refer to the TLM as - and I quote - "the Mass of the ignorant."

Wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard it in person.

Why?  Because no one speaks Latin natively anymore?  Because it's unintelligible for most people?

Well, I have something to say about that.  I'm hearing-impaired.  English, my native tongue, in a setting like a church, is pretty much unintelligible to me.  I went to Novus Ordo for a year, twice weekly, before I was able to understand what was going on, in the sense of understanding everything the priest said.  Yet I knew what was happening, because I had read what the Mass is, and the general order of the parts of Mass, as any Catholic should know. 

Honestly, in light of not being able to understand the words, the traditional Mass had an edge over NO, because in everything else, it seemed much more like an act of worship.  NO looks and feels (as it's generally practiced here) like a bad concert, with some guy at the front talking to everyone a lot. 

Sorry to derail the thread a bit, but that's a peeve of mine, being told by someone they can't understand what's going on at a TLM, and that's why they prefer NO.

[OCLittleFlower]

Yes, let's sell the treasures of the Church, or put them away in closets, so that no one can see them. 

It's amusing that many of the same people who favor funding programs for the arts support bland, "humble" liturgies. It's ok for the poor to see ugly art so that they are never uplifted by any of it. One might think it would be an act of charity to build a beautiful chapel in the middle of some of the worst slums on earth, where the traditional Mass is celebrated, so that the poor can see, hear, smell something beautiful in their lives.  But no, let's never remind the poor there is something higher and more beautiful than this life.  Let's never remind anyone of that.

Sent from my phone

This post makes me want to cry.

The beauty of the Traditional Mass, of stained glass windows and a wonderful choir, has gotten me through some tough times.  And I don't have it nearly as tough as some -- I can't even imagine how awful it would be to live a truly difficult life and be denied the beauty that the Church should, and used to, provide.

[Cesar_Augustus]

Yes, let's sell the treasures of the Church, or put them away in closets, so that no one can see them. 

It's amusing that many of the same people who favor funding programs for the arts support bland, "humble" liturgies. It's ok for the poor to see ugly art so that they are never uplifted by any of it. One might think it would be an act of charity to build a beautiful chapel in the middle of some of the worst slums on earth, where the traditional Mass is celebrated, so that the poor can see, hear, smell something beautiful in their lives.  But no, let's never remind the poor there is something higher and more beautiful than this life.  Let's never remind anyone of that.

Sent from my phone

Sometimes I think that liberals with such thinking are just a form of bourgeois people that want to see the poor stay in their place, without any semblance of beauty and inspiration in their lives.

Many poor places have some beautiful Churches, because the inhabitants put all their efforts into having the best place for the worship of God.

[Pheo]

Sometimes I think that liberals with such thinking are just a form of bourgeois people that want to see the poor stay in their place, without any semblance of beauty and inspiration in their lives.

Many poor places have some beautiful Churches, because the inhabitants put all their efforts into having the best place for the worship of God.

I find it really difficult to fathom the arrogance of people who argue for selling off the Church's material assets.  Although they always come behind the Faith in order of importance, so many of our ancestors gave everything they had to make sure that we would have beautiful places of worship - worthy for proclaiming the glory of God.

Modern men always seem to think they know better.  But when I look around at the modern world...I don't get that.

[Mr. Mysterious]

These are all necessarily bad things?

The statement seems to be preparing us for a drastic reduction in the temporal power of the Church, a Marxist-inflected form of Puritanism that spurns worldly beauty and its goods in favor of "holiness" and the spiritual and not appearing to be rich while there are many poor.  We're being set up to accept more readily a false dichotomy between the grandeur that Holy Mother Church owes to God in worship and Her obligations to the poor, which are not only not irreconcilable but mutually dependent.  So, yes, I think there are a number of necessarily bad things in the background of Francis's statements today, things which will begin to move to the foreground in the coming weeks and months, I predict.

This is part and parcel of the "the Church is getting back to the First Century" attitude many people in the post conciliar Church have, from liturgy right on down to the interior trappings of many modern churches. That famous quote from Pope Pius XII comes to mind:

"I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past."