Pope Francis just concluded Vatican III and declared "all religions are true"!
Funny
stuff, right?
It is, I suppose, except that some people have apparently taken this
December 5, 2013, "story" quite
seriously, even though the first few lines should have set of the
spoof alarms:
For
the last six months, Catholic cardinals, bishops and theologians have
been deliberating in Vatican City, discussing the future of the
church and redefining long-held Catholic doctrines and dogmas. The
Third Vatican Council, is undoubtedly the largest and most important
since the Second Vatican Council was concluded in 1962. Pope Francis
convened the new council to “finally finish the work of the Second
Vatican Council.” While some traditionalists and conservative
reactionaries on the far right have decried these efforts, they have
delighted progressives around the world.
The
Third Vatican Council concluded today with Pope Francis announcing
that Catholicism is now a “modern and reasonable religion, which
has undergone evolutionary changes. The time has come to abandon all
intolerance. We must recognize that religious truth evolves and
changes. Truth is not absolute or set in stone. Even atheists
acknowledge the divine. Through acts of love and charity the atheist
acknowledges God as well, and redeems his own soul, becoming an
active participant in the redemption of humanity.”
I
first heard of this satirical piece, published on the Diversity
Chronicle site (which carries this
descriptive/disclaimer: "The original content on this blog is
largely satirical"), about two weeks ago.
A
friend forwarded me the link, and explained that several of his
non-Catholic friends and co-workers were touting it as real "news".
Was there, he asked, a response to this nonsense? In a better world,
it wouldn't be necessary to respond to nonsense, save uttering a loud
and long laugh. But anyone who has spent time involved in apologetics
knows that there is much nonsense to be addressed, especially when it
becomes an impediment to understanding what the Catholic Church
really teaches (and doesn't teach) and has really done (or not
done).
Jimmy
Akin, senior apologist at Catholic Answers, has addressed this bit of
nonsense in a
January 2 column for
the National
Catholic Register, pointing
out that Snopes
has posted about
it.
Since
we're on the topic of strange and surprising stories, the New
York Times recently published
a piece about
Francis, the "Radical Pope". Why is it surprising? Because
the author, Robert Calderisi, rightly points out that while Francis
has done some unusual things, he actually "represents an
essential continuity in the Roman Catholic Church’s mission.":
In
Victorian times, Pope Leo XIII (in office, 1878-1903) was also
denounced as a “socialist” when, in 1891, he issued the Catholic
Church’s first formal statement on economic and social issues. In
“Rerum Novarum,” he called for a living wage, opposed child labor
and (a little belatedly) supported the idea of trade unions. Leo’s
strong defense of private property in the same letter did not seem to
win over critics.
Even
Pius XII (1939-58) — one of the least-loved popes, thanks to the
Vatican’s ambiguous wartime role — insisted that when fighting
unjust social conditions, “Charity is not enough, for in the first
place there must be justice.” In the late 1940s, it was a future
pope (John XXIII, 1958-63) who, as the Vatican’s ambassador to
France, helped draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the
United Nations.
The
statements of Pope Francis have certainly been more spirited than we
have heard for a while — complete with exclamation marks, extremely
rare in papal documents — and he has found new images to drive his
points home. Poor people, he said recently, have been waiting a long
time for the rich man’s glass to overflow. Instead, all that seems
to happen is that the glass keeps getting larger.
In
many ways, though, he has simply been putting a personal stamp on
traditional Catholic social teaching.
He
could have also pointed out that while the Church has strongly
advocated the ownership of private property and given a qualified
endorsement of free markets, it has traditionally had, at best, a
tense relationship with capitalism (a key document in this regard is
John Paul II's "Centesimus
Annus";
see pars. 42-43, for example). And some of the more scorching
Catholic denunciations of capitalism came from the pens of orthodox
stalwarts, G.K.
Chesterton and Abp.
Fulton Sheen.
Anyhow, back to Calderisi's article:
As
a result of its work in basic health and education — and despite
its obtuse views on birth control — in the last 50 years the church
has probably lifted more people out of poverty than any other civic
institution in history.
Of
course, the Church has helped so many people not despite her
"views" on birth control, but because of her comprehensive
vision of what it means to be truly and fully human, part of which
involves a correct understanding of sexuality, procreation, and
marriage. It should also be noted that Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and
similar groups do not, in any way, help people out of poverty—not
physical poverty and certainly not spiritual poverty. But, while I
think Calderisi's article has flaws, it is a refreshing change from
the usual brainless fare served up by the Grey Lady.
That said, I rolled my eyes at his concluding sentence: "Pope Francis has renewed the hope of Catholic activists that faith and charity can go hand in hand." He might want to go back to the first encyclical of Benedict XVI, which contains passages such as this one:
That said, I rolled my eyes at his concluding sentence: "Pope Francis has renewed the hope of Catholic activists that faith and charity can go hand in hand." He might want to go back to the first encyclical of Benedict XVI, which contains passages such as this one:
Following
the example given in the parable of the Good Samaritan, Christian
charity is first of all the simple response to immediate needs and
specific situations: feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring
for and healing the sick, visiting those in prison, etc.
The
Church's charitable organizations, beginning with those
of Caritas (at
diocesan, national and international levels), ought to do everything
in their power to provide the resources and above all the personnel
needed for this work. Individuals who care for those in need must
first be professionally competent: they should be properly trained in
what to do and how to do it, and committed to continuing care.
Yet,
while professional competence is a primary, fundamental requirement,
it is not of itself sufficient. We are dealing with human beings, and
human beings always need something more than technically proper care.
They need humanity. They need heartfelt concern. Those who work for
the Church's charitable organizations must be distinguished by the
fact that they do not merely meet the needs of the moment, but they
dedicate themselves to others with heartfelt concern, enabling them
to experience the richness of their humanity.
Consequently,
in addition to their necessary professional training, these charity
workers need a “formation of the heart”: they need to be led to
that encounter with God in Christ which awakens their love and opens
their spirits to others. As a result, love of neighbour will no
longer be for them a commandment imposed, so to speak, from without,
but a consequence deriving from their faith, a faith which becomes
active through love (cf. Gal5:6).
And
so forth. Alas, memories are often short and selective, and
prejudices are abiding and unruly.
No comments:
Post a Comment