The devil hates families and tries to destroy them, Pope Francis told a gathering of Charismatic Catholics in Rome on Sunday. “Families are the domestic Church where Jesus grows in the love of a married couple, in the lives of their children," the Pope said. "This is why the devil attacks the family so much.”

The Pope prayed that God protect families.

[...]

"Families are the home Church where Jesus grows," Francis said. "He grows in the spouses' love and in the children's lives. For this reason, the enemy attacks the family so much. The devil does not want it. He tries to destroy it, to prevent love from becoming free.... But married people are sinners like everyone else; they do not want to go in faith, in its fertility, in children and the faith of their children. May the Lord bless the family, and make it strong in the face of the crisis by which the devil wants to destroy it."

[link]

Pray for families.

From the Holy See press office...

FRANCIS TO THE FAITHFUL: HELP YOUR PASTORS NOT TO BE MEDIOCRE

Vatican City, 26 March 2014 (VIS) – “The Sacraments of the Holy Orders and Matrimony, two specific vocations and two great paths to the Lord” were the theme of the Holy Father's catechesis during today's general audience in St. Peter's Square. “The ministers who are chosen and consecrated for this service prolong Jesus' presence over time, and they do so with the power of the Holy Spirit in the name of God, and with love”.

“Those who are ordained are placed at the head of the community. Yes, they are at the 'head', but for Jesus this means placing their authority at the service of the community. … 'whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant and whoever wants to be first must be your slave'. … A bishop who does not serve his community does not do good; a priest or a curate who does not place himself at the service of his community does not do good, he is mistaken”.

Pope Francis emphasised that “impassioned love for the Church” is a characteristic that always derives from this sacramental union with Christ. “The bishop, the priest, love the Church in their own community, they love the Church greatly. How? How Christ loves His Church. … The spouse loves his wife as Christ loves His Church. ... The priesthood and matrimony are two Sacraments that represent the path by which people habitually reach the Lord”.

Finally, the Pope cited the words of St. Paul to Timothy when he advised him not to neglect, but rather always to revive the gift given to him. “When the ministry is not nurtured by prayer, by listening to the Word of God, with the daily celebration of the Eucharist, and also with regular confession, the authentic sense of one's own service is inevitably lost from view, along with the joy that comes from profound communion with Jesus. … The priest who does not do these things loses, over time, his union with Jesus and becomes mediocre, which is not good for the Church. Therefore, we must help bishops and priests to pray, to listen to the Word of God that is our daily bread, to celebrate the Eucharist every day and to confess regularly”.

“Access to the priesthood cannot be sold. This is an initiative the Lord takes. The Lord calls”, he added, and concluded by encouraging the young who hear this call to “cherish this invitation and pray so that it might grow and bear fruit in all the Church”.

[link]

If you want to appear wise, then predicting the future is a very silly thing to do. The future has a nasty habit of doing it's own thing and making those who tried to predict it look very silly indeed.

That said, I cannot help but note certain similarities between the current state of things and the way things were back in the 1960's as Pope Paul VI prepared to release that most lefty liberal of documents: Humanae Vitae.

It was Pope John XXIII (according to Wikipedia at any rate... what? did you think I knew this stuff off the top of my head) who established a commission to look in to issues like population control and contraception. Pope Paul VI enlarged the commission and the commission reported back to him.

By all accounts the deal was in the bag. The commission said that contraception ought to be allowed and Paul VI was expected to go ahead and allow it. It was the 1960's, Vatican II had just allowed all sorts of things. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, Pope Paul VI gave us Humanae Vitae.

Fast forward a few decades and the Church stands in a similar spot. A pre-synodal survey in place of a commission, plenty of support from high ranking churchmen and an upcoming synod at which to finally decide, once and for all, that divorce is not so bad after all.

If you read The Tablet and co you could be forgiven for thinking that this deal, like contraception before it, is in the bag. Everybody knows Pope Francis is off the cuff and flexible. He'll probably sign anything and hardly even notice. What could possibly go wrong?

Well... Don't be suprised this October if all the hype doesn't turn out to be a tad misplaced.

You never know...

I've read on several blogs now about St Francis' Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium and how people like me are going to be shocked, shocked I tell you!

Except of course we're not (or at least, I'm not) because we have actually seen the gospels and we do actually understand about the mercy of God, we've heard of forgiveness and we kinda noticed that Jesus seems kinda concerned about the poor.

No, I think the only people who will be suprised are the ones who the Church could change her teaching any time she likes and the only thing holding us back are those nasty people over there. The people who think that Pope Francis would churn out 47,000 words just to have a pop at traditionalists.

Personally, I'm reading this and I'm thinking "oh yeah, I could do that better, I hadn't thought of that" etc.. but if you want to really miss the point, try reading it with the assumption that any given parahgraph is aimed not at you, but at Those Nasty People Over There.

In other words.. try reading it like Austen Ivereigh..

Later (93-95) he critiques the “self-absorbed promethean neopalagianism” of self-appointed guardians of orthodoxy or traditional Catholicism who spend their time criticising fellow Catholics (“A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelising, one analyses and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying”). He also criticises those who have “an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people”

[link]

Note that Pope Francis doesn't refer to "self-appointed guardians of orthodoxy" or "traditional Catholicism" at all.. but he does warn about "carefully cultivated appearances" and "a business mentality, caught up with management, statistics, plans and evaluations whose principal beneficiary is not God’s people but the Church as an institution".

These paragraphs contain a warning for all Catholics to avoid an obsession with appearance at the expense of evangelisation and are just as much a warning to lefty Bishops Conference media quangos as they are to traditionalists.

When St Paul said "if I understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." was he speaking out against knowledge and faith? Clearly not. It's the "but have not love" part he's worried about. Similarly with Pope Francis, he's not having a pop at people who care about liturgy and doctrine - it's the "without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people" bit that matters.

Pope Francis warns that "supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism" and you can point that one at traditionalists if you like... but do Catholic Voices not claim soundness of doctrine?  Do they not engage in an authoritarian elitism? The special club of the trained and approved vs the excluded self-appointed nobodies.

I'm reading Pope Francis' words and thinking "maybe he has a point, maybe I could do some things better, I wonder if I am doing enough for the poor". Meanwhile Austen sounds like the Pharisee in the temple saying "God, I thank thee that I am not like other men".

If you want to know which part of Evangelii Gaudium really shocks me, it's this:

No one must say that they cannot be close to the poor because their own lifestyle demands more attention to other areas.

[link]

Yikes! I always thought the "busy being a dad" card could get me out of anything...

We could all be doing more for the poor, that's a given and I'm working on my own personal failings as I hope you are too, but please.. can we end the practice of using the poor as a human shield to defend heterdoxy.

Imagine a little kid chucking rocks through the church windows and smashing centuries old stained glass. A parishioner happens to be passing and says "hey! what are you doing?" to which the kid says "what are you? some kind of self appointed guardian? shouldn't you be more concerned about the poor?".

That's pretty much what is happening here.

The "Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?" card is as old as the hills. Yes, Jesus told people to care for the poor, but he also had no time anybody who would set love of the poor against love of Himself.

The poor are not a convenient tool to be used for point scoring at the service of particular ideologies within the Church, they are people and in my experience people are better served by beautiful liturgies than ugly ones and better served by the truth than by lies.

Using them as a stick to beat people who disagree with your claims that urging condom use is Catholic pastoral practice is, well, stooping pretty low.

Ches over at The Sensible Bond is keen to emphasise that he has no intention of criticising Fr Stephen Wang. Now I agree that Fr Stephen Wang is a thoroughly nice chap and his CTS pamphlets are excellent, but I have to wonder what on earth is going on in his head.

You see, Fr Stephen Wang loudly supports Catholic Voices and takes every opportunity to promote them yet falls strangely silent when Austen Ivereigh tells the world that "urging a promiscuous infected person to at least use a condom" is "Catholic pastoral practice".

What was it Pope Leo XIII said...?

to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good.

[link]

Ouch!

Yes, yes, I know, I know.. no doubt this is all part of a scheme to remain silent in the face of evil in order to try and fix things from the inside. I remember that part of the Gospels well.. the bit where Jesus kept his head down for several years in order to build up his reputation and become respectable among the pharisees. Oh wait...

Anyway, I've got distracted. I actually wanted to draw your attention to The Sensible Bond's rather excellent summary of Austen Ivereigh's recent, er, interpretation of the Papal interview.

Austen Ivereigh and his defence of the papal interview

Get over there and check it out!

First and principle building block...

"A population that does not take care of the elderly and of children and the young has no future, because it abuses both its memory and its promise”.

“As the Church, we offer a concept of the family rooted in the Book of Genesis, of the unity in the difference between man and woman, and the fruitfulness of this complementarity, and we recognise it as an asset for all, as the first natural society. … The family understood in this way remains the first and principle building block of society and of an economy on a human scale. … The consequences, positive or negative, of decisions of a principally cultural or political nature in relation to the family touch upon the various areas of the life of a society and a country”.

"[We must remember the] simple, but beautiful and courageous witness given by many families, who experience matrimony and parenthood with joy..."

[link]

Pat Archbold has it right...

The Pope is soft on Islam.

"It is true that the Muslim world is not totally mistaken when it reproaches the West of Christian tradition of moral decadence and the manipulation of human life."

Encourages Homosexuality.

"It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the church's pastors wherever it occurs."

He is focused on the poor:

"Many people today lack hope. They are perplexed by the questions that present themselves ever more urgently in a confusing world, and they are often uncertain which way to turn for answers. They see poverty and injustice and they long to find solutions. "

"Yet if we refuse to share what we have with the hungry and the poor, we make of our possessions a false god. How many voices in our materialist society tell us that happiness is to be found by acquiring as many possessions and luxuries as we can! But this is to make possessions into a false god. Instead of bringing life, they bring death."

He is overtly humble and does not embrace his office:

"The authority of the pope is not unlimited;"

"The cardinals have elected me, a simple and humble worker in the Lord's vineyard. The fact that the Lord can work and act even with insufficient means consoles me, and above all I entrust myself to your prayers."

He makes a point of extolling women and the Church.

“It is theologically and anthropologically important for woman to be at the center of Christianity. Through Mary, and the other holy women, the feminine element stands at the heart of the Christian religion.”

On those neo-pelagians that think they can earn their way to heaven through piety instead of charity:

“If in my life I fail completely to heed others, solely out of a desire to be 'devout' and to perform my 'religious duties', then my relationship with God will also grow arid. It becomes merely 'proper', but loveless.”

He cares about the environment:

“Listen to the voice of the earth...”

He even hates Capitalism:

"the prevalence of a selfish and individualistic mindset which also finds expression in an unregulated capitalism"

Oh, wait, hold on a moment... there seems to be a problem...

In the immortal words of Cher (and/or Aretha Franklin) "If you wanna know if he loves you so its in his kiss.." though when it comes to blogs and newspapers I tend to disagree. It's in the adjectives...

In one sense, the now famous ‘Who am I to judge?’ remark made by Pope Francis is the mirror opposite of Pope Benedict’s notorious observation about condoms making Aids worse.

...

Yet Cardinal Bergoglio was also, famously, a vigorous opponent of attempts to redefine marriage.

[link]

Note that Benedict's observation is "notorious" when it could have been "misunderstood" or simply "an observation" while Pope Francis' opposition to same-sex "marriage" is "vigorous" when it could easily have been "notorious" and no doubt was among those who opposed it.

Ah yes, it's the Catholic Voices again. Still, what I really wanted to draw your attention to was this line...

In Benedict’s case, the perception was that (a) condoms cure Aids but that (b) the Church rejects that obvious solution because of its dogmatic opposition to contraception even in the case of extra-marital sex. (The first, as the facts showed, is not true — at least in terms of global policy; the second was finally clarified by Pope Benedict in Light of the World: the Church’s teaching on contraception relates to marriage).

[link]

See that... "the Church’s teaching on contraception relates to marriage" They are still pushing the nonsense that "urging a promiscuous infected person to at least use a condom [...] is Catholic pastoral practice."

This despite clear statements that "the Holy See in no way endorses contraception or the use of condoms, either as a family planning measure or in HIV/AIDS prevention programmes". I'm not sure Austen and Jack care what the Holy See endorses - they are only interested in promoting the teachings they think the Church should have.

What was it Pope Francis said? "The problem is lobbying for this orientation, or lobbies of greed, political lobbies, Masonic lobbies, so many lobbies. This is the most serious problem for me.

Catholic Voices is not at the service of the Church. Catholic Voices is a lobby. Austen and Jack are used car salesmen selling nonsense.

They even look like used car salesmen.

A couple of days ago I reviewed what I referred to as "the Pope Francis book" probably because the official title "On Heaven and Earth" is simply not very descriptive or even very memorable. Yesterday I looked at some of Cardinal Bergoglio's thoughts on the liturgy while today I'm looking at Cardinal Bergoglio's thoughts on power in the Church.

I should make clear that these are the words of Cardinal Bergoglio before he was elected Pope. These words do not carry any sort of Papal authority. I reproduce them here because they offer an insight in to the thoughts of the man who became Pope Francis.

Cardinal Bergoglio tells us a joke. It's not a very funny joke, in fact, I only know it's a joke because he says so...

A very intelligent Jesuit told this joke: There was a person who came running asking for help. Who was pursuing him? Was it an assassin? A thief? No ... a mediocre person with power. It is true, how sad for the people that are under a mediocre leader, who thinks too highly of himself. When a mediocre person thinks too highly of himself and gets just a little power, I am sorry for those under him.

[On Heaven and Earth - Chapter 19 - On Politics and Power (p149)]

Perhaps bit about the "very intelligent Jesuit" is supposed to be the joke? Ha ha. See what I did there...

Joking aside, these comments are very interesting in light of the sort of men we know hold a lot of the power in the Church and how Cardinal Bergoglio might look upon those men if, say, he were to become Pope.

Often when one speaks of mediocre leaders in the Church on is told to be charitable and the charity is always for the mediocre leader. Always "the poor man tries his best, it's mean to criticise him" and so on.. never "I am sorry for those under him". Cardinal Bergoglio's concern is pointed in the right direction.

So what does he think mediocre leaders should do...?

Authority comes from above; now how it is used is another thing. It gives me goose bumps when I read the Book of Kings because there are only a few just men in the eyes of the Lord, but the vast majority are not. When one reads the things that our religious kings did, he feels like pulling his hair out. They even killed: the holy king, David, is not only an adulterer but also, to cover up what he did, he commands that the spouse of the woman be killed. But he has humility, when he is rebuked by the prophet Nathan, he recognizes that he has sinned and asks for forgiveness. He moved aside and told the Lord to bring someone to replace him.

[On Heaven and Earth - Chapter 19 - On Politics and Power (p149-150)]

"He moved aside and told the Lord to bring someone to replace him."

There it is - there is Cardinal Bergoglio's answer to the mediocre leader. Have humility, be rebuked, ask forgiveness and then move aside. We know that Pope Benedict may have quietly removed two or three Bishops per month. One wonders if Cardinal Bergoglio will continue along similar lines.

there are ambitions in the men of the Church; there is, sadly, the sin of careerism. We are humans and we tempt ourselves; we have to be very alert to take care of the anointing that we received because it is a gift from God. The circles of power, those that existed and exist in the Church, are a result of our human condition. But at some point, one stops being the one chosen to serve and becomes the one that chooses to live as he wishes, and his intentions are contaminated by his own flawed character.

[On Heaven and Earth - Chapter 19 - On Politics and Power (p150)]

Circles of power? Would that be magic circles? Oh stop...

At any rate, I can't help thinking that Cardinal Bergoglio is a man who knows how things are and, because he feels compassions for those "under" a "mediocre person" might actually feel compelled to do something about it.

Yesterday I reviewed what I referred to as "the Pope Francis book" probably because the official title "On Heaven and Earth" is simply not very descriptive or even very memorable. I should make clear that these are the words of Cardinal Bergoglio before he was elected Pope. These words do not carry any sort of Papal authority. I reproduce them here because they offer an insight in to the thoughts of the man who became Pope Francis.

While the book carries precious few insights in to Pope Francis' liturgical views, there is a chapter entitled "On Prayer" which contains two brief passages that I find very interesting. The first deals with Cardinal Bergoglio's discomfort about liturgical acts turning in to social events...

When liturgical acts slide in to social events, they lose force. A good example is the celebration of marriage, which in some
cases might lead someone to ask what is religious about that ceremony, because the minister preaches values, but many people are tuned in to a different frequency. They get married because they want God's blessing, but that desire seems hidden and does not become visible. In some churches - and I do not know how to cure it, honestly - in the weddings there seems to be a ferocious competition between the bridesmaids and the bride, for example with regards to the fashion or the dress. These ladies do not perform any religious act; they go to show off. This weighs on my conscience. As pastor, I am allowing it and I am not sure how to stop it. I give the example of weddings because it is where this issue is most evident.

[On Heaven and Earth - Chapter 7 - On Prayer (p56)]

For a moment, I thought I was reading Fr Ray Blake's blog - he writes along these lines from time to time.

I find this very comforting - that Pope Francis might be looking at the Church and worrying about the way "liturgical acts slide in to social events", that he worries about "how to stop it". I wonder how this concern about people coming to Church "to show off" might apply to Papal liturgies?

A few pages later Cardinal Bergolio gives us a clue...

It is true that among the faithful there are those who have not only killed intellectually or physically, but also who have killed indirectly through the poor use of resources by paying unjust wages. In public they may form welfare societies, but they do not pay their employees a wage corresponding to their work or they hire them "under the table." That is hypocrisy, that is the schizophrenia that I was referring to. To be certain, we know their resumes, we know that they pretend to be Catholics, but they have the indecent attitudes of those who never repent. That is why, in certain situations, I do not give communion myself; I stay back and let the ministers give it because I do not want those people to come to me for the photo op. One could deny communion to a public sinner who has not repented, but it is very difficult to check such things. Receiving communion means receiving the body of the Lord, with the awareness that together we constitute a community. But if a man, rather than uniting the people to God, warps the lives of many people, he cannot receive communion; it would be a complete contradiction. Those cases of spiritual hypocrisy occur in many people who hide within the Church and do not live according to the justice that God proclaims. They do not show repentance either. This is what we commonly call living a double life.

[On Heaven and Earth - Chapter 7 - On Prayer (p64)]

"those who never repent" he says "they do not show repentance" - when was the last time you heard a liberal talking about repentance? Pope Francis is no liberal.

"we know that they pretend to be Catholics" he says, that is why "in certain situations, I do not give communion myself; I stay back". This is exactly what has been happening in Rome? Pope Francis has been staying back, not allowing the "photo op" because he suspects that many who come only "pretend to be Catholics".

This idea of a Bishop who looks upon his people and says to himself that he doesn't like the way they are living their lives. Who "judges" them. Who tries to think up ways to get them to change. Who talks about "repentence". Is this not what sheperds are supposed to do? If this is what Pope Francis is all about, then I'm loving it.

I only hope some of it rubs off on England and Wales.