To be honest, I have no answer for it other than to say that, fortunately, we are not bound by his personal, non-infallible opinions, even if they cause widespread scandal in the Church and the world, and even the first pope, St. Peter, fell into apostasy, but ultimately repented. We can pray for the same from the current pope.
Thank you for your prayers, Lauren. Thankfully, as Catholics, we believe that the purpose of the pope - to ensure fidelity to Tradition - will be preserved even if he fails personally, but he still needs our prayers and yours.
I would caution anyone from asserting Pope Francis said something heretical, and furthermore, hold it.
The official translation from the Vatican, which may serve as more of a clarification, follows the sentiment of Lumen Gentium paragraph 16. It’s important to remember every translation is an interpretation of the interpreter—the original one may have been an intent to paint the Holy Father poorly. I think it’s important in charity to give Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt too. Folks may call it Popesplaining—BUT I would simply ask them when the frequency of the imprecision of their own speech may ever be frequent. The difference being none of us have a world sized magnifying glass over any of us.
As an added comment, the initial translation from the Vatican has recently been changed to more accurately reflect the Pope's original Italian words, both the quoted statement and the rest of his comments, the original Vatican version having toned down the full meaning of his words.
Whatever he said (now and throughout his pontificate), the scandal it might cause and the danger for his soul, as Catholics we can at least know that a pope can never officially teach error, so our faith is inviolable. This is a great consolation.
No problem. I just think of how many times I’ve been talking to people & I’m not clear & then they say “wait are you saying?”
I’m horrified & say “not at all!”
Perhaps, the official translation from the Vatican is technically a clarification—remember they didn’t have to make it.
Lumen Gentium 16 says, “Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.”
That’s not too far from what the Vatican translation expressing that folks are “trying to reach God.”
Kaleb says they’ve changed it again, so I’ll need to look it up because my screen shots are out dated, but maybe he can link it before I can sit down to look it up.
"All religions are paths to God. I will use an analogy, they are like different languages that express the divine. But God is for everyone, and therefore, we are all God’s children. “But my God is more important than yours!”. Is this true? There is only one God, and religions are like languages, paths to reach God. Some Sikh, some Muslim, some Hindu, some Christian. Understood?"
That’s not what LG 16 states & I would say it doesn’t pass the First Corinthians 10 test. St. Paul speaking, contrasting the participation of Christ’s sacrifice with the Eucharist, with sacrifice & worship of pagan gods. Paul refers to these gods & ritual participating as “drink the cup of demons.”
My concern is with the Pope’s language here is a diminished view of the source & summit of our faith—the Eucharist.
It's a diminished view of the faith in general. It is essentially religious indifferentism and relativism. It also repeats the common error that everyone is a child of God, even though this is only possible through baptismal participation in the sonship of Christ. How many people will remain in false or even demonic religions because of his words?
Unfortunately, this isn't the first time he's said things like this. I try to give him the benefit of the doubt, as I know you do, but this statement is blatantly heretical. If anyone but him said it everyone would be quick to condemn it. Hopefully the bishops will confront him on this, though I seriously doubt it.
To be honest, I have no answer for it other than to say that, fortunately, we are not bound by his personal, non-infallible opinions, even if they cause widespread scandal in the Church and the world, and even the first pope, St. Peter, fell into apostasy, but ultimately repented. We can pray for the same from the current pope.
Thank you for your prayers, Lauren. Thankfully, as Catholics, we believe that the purpose of the pope - to ensure fidelity to Tradition - will be preserved even if he fails personally, but he still needs our prayers and yours.
I would caution anyone from asserting Pope Francis said something heretical, and furthermore, hold it.
The official translation from the Vatican, which may serve as more of a clarification, follows the sentiment of Lumen Gentium paragraph 16. It’s important to remember every translation is an interpretation of the interpreter—the original one may have been an intent to paint the Holy Father poorly. I think it’s important in charity to give Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt too. Folks may call it Popesplaining—BUT I would simply ask them when the frequency of the imprecision of their own speech may ever be frequent. The difference being none of us have a world sized magnifying glass over any of us.
As an added comment, the initial translation from the Vatican has recently been changed to more accurately reflect the Pope's original Italian words, both the quoted statement and the rest of his comments, the original Vatican version having toned down the full meaning of his words.
Whatever he said (now and throughout his pontificate), the scandal it might cause and the danger for his soul, as Catholics we can at least know that a pope can never officially teach error, so our faith is inviolable. This is a great consolation.
No problem. I just think of how many times I’ve been talking to people & I’m not clear & then they say “wait are you saying?”
I’m horrified & say “not at all!”
Perhaps, the official translation from the Vatican is technically a clarification—remember they didn’t have to make it.
Lumen Gentium 16 says, “Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.”
That’s not too far from what the Vatican translation expressing that folks are “trying to reach God.”
Kaleb says they’ve changed it again, so I’ll need to look it up because my screen shots are out dated, but maybe he can link it before I can sit down to look it up.
Here is the fuller corrected text in question:
"All religions are paths to God. I will use an analogy, they are like different languages that express the divine. But God is for everyone, and therefore, we are all God’s children. “But my God is more important than yours!”. Is this true? There is only one God, and religions are like languages, paths to reach God. Some Sikh, some Muslim, some Hindu, some Christian. Understood?"
And link: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2024/september/documents/20240913-singapore-giovani.html
That’s not what LG 16 states & I would say it doesn’t pass the First Corinthians 10 test. St. Paul speaking, contrasting the participation of Christ’s sacrifice with the Eucharist, with sacrifice & worship of pagan gods. Paul refers to these gods & ritual participating as “drink the cup of demons.”
My concern is with the Pope’s language here is a diminished view of the source & summit of our faith—the Eucharist.
It's a diminished view of the faith in general. It is essentially religious indifferentism and relativism. It also repeats the common error that everyone is a child of God, even though this is only possible through baptismal participation in the sonship of Christ. How many people will remain in false or even demonic religions because of his words?
Unfortunately, this isn't the first time he's said things like this. I try to give him the benefit of the doubt, as I know you do, but this statement is blatantly heretical. If anyone but him said it everyone would be quick to condemn it. Hopefully the bishops will confront him on this, though I seriously doubt it.