Mystical mystification…

Before I begin, I think my reader [sic] should know that part of what drives me to keep “discerning” the true face and voice of Pope Francis in the light of Biblical Tradition is that for many years I grappled with a vocation to the Jesuit order. When I consider Pope Francis, therefore, and when I discern troubling aspects of him, I am in a very real sense considering the kind of Jesuit I might have become. Back on my old blog I maintained a “Jesuit Honor Roll,” in large measure to give myself hope at the time that entering the Society was a defensibly wise move for me. (Three guesses who the last Jesuit is that I added to the list before letting it drift away seven years ago!) I ended up choosing the connubial life, but I still have a very soft spot in my heart for classical Jesuits. As such, when I pursue our Jesuit Pope in these seemingly interminable writings of mine, it might be best for you to see me as trying to exorcise the Ghost of Jesuit Future that I may have become.

But enough about me.

To business.

+ + +

Theme music for this post: “Mysty Mountain Flop”

In my post yesterday I mentioned a new “off the cuff” gem that I learned of in the “airplane interview“:

This is important: a theology of sin. Many times I think of Saint Peter.  He committed one of the worst sins, that is he denied Christ, and even with this sin they made him Pope.

[Questo è importante: una teologia del peccato. Tante volte penso a San Pietro: ha fatto uno dei peggiori peccati, che è rinnegare Cristo, e con questo peccato lo hanno fatto Papa.]

Rube that I am, all this time I thought Jesus Christ confirmed Peter as Pope. Who is “they” in Francis’s mind? He sounds exactly like a fundamentalist Christian (or, if you like, an atheist) taking a jab at how “they” just “make saints” in the Catholic Church. Are we hearing the voice of the neo-Jesuit, post-Tridentine Bergoglio betraying a subliminal belief that all the old-fashioned Catholic hierarchy stuff is just human politics by another name?

For the proper “context” we should recall a related gem from the Scalfari encounter:

“[W]hen I meet a clericalist, I suddenly become anti-clerical. Clericalism should not have anything to do with Christianity. St. Paul, who was the first to speak to the Gentiles, the pagans, to believers in other religions, was the first to teach us that. … St. Paul is the one who laid down the cornerstones of our religion and our creed.”

Ohhh, I get it now. If St. Paul, the rabid anti-clericalist, was open to other religions and “laid down the cornerstones” of the Catholic religion, how much more tenuous a link to the divine will there is in the decision “they” made to make Peter the Pope. Our Pope of the Open Mic seems to be saying that, y’know, just like some guys made him Pope earlier this year, some other guys made Peter Pope just a few years before that.

Fuhgeddaboutit!

What’s that you say? I’m being rash again?

Well, actually, no, I’m not. I’ve long since passed the window for making rash judgments. I’ve detected what I think is an ongoing pattern and an underlying system of assumptions in “Our Francis of the Interviews,” and I feel behooved to draw upon our Biblical Tradition to explain why it’s wrongheaded of so many conformist Catholics to stop at the letter of his off-the-cuff malapapalisms, thinking such blunders are worthy of the Pope’s duty as our teacher. If it’s the prerogative of Pope Francis to use words in an idiosyncratic and allusive way, then it’s the duty of faithful Catholics everywhere to interpret his words in––well, it’s actually a painfully open question what are the best lenses to use for parsing all of the Pope’s oracles.

[Yes, I have looked at the original Italian (San Paolo è quello che mise i cardini della nostra religione e del nostro credo), as well as the Spanish (San Pablo es quien puso las bases de nuestra religión y de nuestro credo), and, while I’ve henceforth chosen to use the Vatican’s official translations for my codgitations, the English translation on this point (St Paul is the one who put the hinges on our religion and our creed) is so questionable compared to the version I’ve used from La Repubblica as to be irrelevant.

And while I’m on the subject: the idea that we should ignore the exact words used by the Pope, and should instead just give a high five to the most orthodox interpretation that some clever soft-ultramontanist blogger can forge out of them, almost makes me dizzy with rage. I am a philosopher. I am a student and teacher of foreign languages. I adhere to a Faith in which the difference between homoousios and homoiousios is the difference between truth and falsity, between Heaven and Hell. The Vatican has posted these interviews on its website as official pronouncements of Pope Francis to the Church and to the world, so you can damn well expect this Catholic to heed the actual words that come from our Pope. I will not rest until I express the few remaining codgitations I have on these malapapalisms or until the source of the malapapalisms is retracted or crucially qualified, whichever happens first. (For my money, it will be the former.)]

I know, I know, it’s probably just me, as always, but verbal slippage like this offers glimpses into a mind that often amazes me with its subtle yet decisive divergence from traditional biblical teaching (a divergence which we’ll see again in our brief discussion of the Martha/Mary Matrix, later). I’m not being a Protestant by holding this (if the soft ultramontanists are to be believed) impeccable Christian witness up to the light of the Bible and often finding disturbing discrepancies.

On the contrary.

Abiding by the Scriptures in their fullness is the most Catholic thing I can do.

And so, let us consider who “they” are that made Peter Pope and who laid down the cornerstones of our religion.

Matthew 16 –– [18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. [19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

I Corinthians 3 –– [10] According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and another man is building upon it. Let each man take care how he builds upon it. [11] For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 2 –– [19] So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [20] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.

I Peter 2 –– [4] Come to him, to that living stone, rejected by men but in God’s sight chosen and precious; [5] and like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. [6] For it stands in scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and he who believes in him will not be put to shame.”

You get the idea.

I am not trying to skewer the Pope on an infelicitous word or two (much less when he’s speaking “off the cuff”––when isn’t he?). I am taking seriously the background, training, assumptions and implications nested in some of the Pope’s most infamous (or celebrated, depending) head-scratchers. The Pope’s background and training are South-American neo-Jesuit, in an order that has become infamous (or famous, again, depending) for its widespread defection from papal loyalty. Francis admits this in his own sly way when he says to Scalfari:

Remember that Carlo Maria Martini, who was very dear to you and to me, belonged to the [Jesuit] Order. The Jesuits were and still are a leaven — not the only one but perhaps the most effective [!] — of catholicity [oh, neo-Jesuits are an effective leaven, all right, just not of Catholicism––more like of catholicity qua universalism]: through culture, teaching, missionary witness, loyalty to the Pope. But Ignatius, who founded the Society, was also a reformer and a mystic, especially a mystic”.

“But…especially a mystic.”

That’s an essential key for unlocking Pope Francis. I don’t think it’s the essential key, as another longish post intends to explain, but “the primacy of the mystical” is certainly an essential key. Consider something else he said to Spadaro:

Only in narrative form do you discern, not in a philosophical or theological explanation, which allows you rather to discuss. The style of the Society is … shaped … by discernment, which of course presupposes discussion as part of the process. The mystical dimension of discernment never defines its edges and does not complete the thought. The Jesuit must be a person whose thought is incomplete, in the sense of open-ended thinking. There have been periods in the Society in which Jesuits have lived in [a distorted] environment of closed and rigid thought, more instructive-ascetic than mystical….

Regardless what else Ignatius may have been in reality––zealous proselytizer, staunch clericalist, moral absolutist, triumphalistic and anti-ecumenical Roman Catholic––he was a mystic.

So there.

Come to think of it, though…

Who else might have been a mystic in Francis’s eyes?

Why, Francis’s “prophetic” (NCR), progressive, Jesuit mentor, Carlo Maria Martini (Wikipedia)!

Rule #13 For Thinking With The Church: “If [the Church] shall have defined anything to be black which to our eyes appears to be white, we ought in like manner––wait a minute, who are they to judge? Clericalism sux, bro!”

.

In closing, I highly recommend you read the NCR story linked just above: the “prophetic” Martini seems to have gotten in Pope Francis the Pope he would have wanted. In other words, I don’t what the opposite of “rolling in his grave” is, but, whatever it is, Martini’s doing it.

Also, if you read that Wiki link about Martini, notice his pastoral wisdom when he says that clerics should not publicly voice highly complex objections to the Church’s moral teaching in order to avoid “the risk of promoting an irresponsible attitude”. I pray that Pope Francis starts practicing his mentor’s prophetic prudence, not the least because the Pope is an even more influential clerical voice than Martini ever thought he might have been.

More to come soon.

About The Codgitator (a cadgertator)

Catholic convert. Quasi-Zorbatic. Freelance interpreter, translator, and web marketer. Former ESL teacher in Taiwan (2003-2012) and former public high school teacher (2012-2014). Married father of three. Multilingual, would-be scholar, and fairly consistent fitness monkey. My research interests include: the interface of religion and science, the history and philosophy of science and technology, ancient and medieval philosophy, and cognitive neuroscience. Please pray for me.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Mystical mystification…

  1. Pingback: Just say the right thing… | FideCogitActio : omnis per gratiam

  2. Pingback: The battle within… (part 1) | FideCogitActio : omnis per gratiam

  3. Pingback: The F1 F/X Files… | FideCogitActio : omnis per gratiam

  4. Pingback: The F1 F/X redux… | FideCogitActio : omnis per gratiam

  5. Pingback: Fixed prayers fix prayer… | F(ide)C(ogit)A(ctio) : omnis per gratiam. C.S.S.M.L. + N.D.S.M.D. + V.R.S. N.S.M.V. S.M.Q.L. I.V.B.

  6. Pingback: I’m not dead yet… | FideCogitActio : "Omnis per gratiam"

  7. Pingback: Stocking stuffers… | FideCogitActio : "Omnis per gratiam"

  8. Pingback: So, let me get this straight… | FideCogitActio : "Omnis per gratiam" fidescogitactio @ gmail . com

  9. Marie says:

    Francis “just call me George” is not even a validly ordained priest, He IS AN APOSTATE AND HERETIC. A HERETIC CANNOT BE A CATHOLIC AND BELIEVE ME HE IS NO CATHOLIC AND NEITHER ARE YOU. Why? Because you are in the putrid false church that DARES to call itself catholic. It should call itself what it is: A DELIBERATELY HIJACKED DEMONIC ORGANIZATION THAT DOES NOT WANT TO NOR IS CATHOLIC WHOSE SOLE PURPOSE IS TO DESTROY THE TRUE FAITH WHICH IS ALIVE AND WELL MAY I ADD ELSEWHERE.

  10. O, Marie, Marie; Loud n’ proud!! That’s the ticket. If you have a fund raiser for your, whatever-it-is, let me know. I kidnapped, Babe; remember that cute lil’ pig from the movie of the same name? I have her squirreled away on a farm in Vermont, but, just give me the word and I’ll have her butchered and we’ll barbecue,Babe, for your fund raiser.

    You sound radical and IANS is about convinced you have the answer….(to what IANS is not sure)

  11. Marie says:

    Your response demonstrates that you have an empty skull and you know nothing about the TRUE FAITH. I am not LOUD AND PROUD. I AM TRUE TO OUR LORD AND I AM PROUD THAT HE CALLED ME OUT OF THE WHORE OF BABYLON…. THE FALSE CATHOLIC CHURCH THE CHURCH IN ECLIPSE, AND YOU EMPTY HEADED FOOLS THAT DON’T HAVE A CLUE AS TO WHAT IS GOING ON.

  12. Marie. What false sect are you now a member of (Jehovah’s Witnesses)?

    So, it is your considered opinion that Jesus established His Church to fool Christians when what He was really doing was instituting the first universal dating service that matched-up Catholic men with the whore of Babylon.

    The Holy Ghost had you in mind when He inspired Paul to write this in second Timothy;

    For of these sort are they who creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, who are led away with divers desires: [7] Ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth

    Saint John Chrysostom on these verses;

    Do you see them employing the artifice of that old deceiver, the weapons which the devil used against Adam? “Entering into houses,” he says. Observe how he shows their impudence by this expression, their dishonorable ways, their deceitfulness. “Leading captive silly women,” so that he who is easy to be deceived is a “silly woman,” and nothing like a man: for to be deceived is the part of silly women. “Laden with sins.” See whence arises their persuasion, from their sins, from their being conscious to themselves of nothing good! And with great propriety has he said “laden.” For this expression marks the multitude of their sins, and their state of disorder and confusion; “led away with various lusts.” He does not accuse nature, for it is not women simply, but such women as these, that he blames. And why “various lusts”? By that are implied their various faults, their luxury, their disorderly conduct, their wantonness. “Divers lust,” he says, that is, of glory, of wealth, of pleasure, of self-will, of honor: and perchance other vile desires are implied.

    You are a bore – likely an apostate , a former Catholic who now hath not even God (2 John 9) – and you come here attacking the Catholic Church Jesus established.

    Repent while you still have time, Lady. As it now stands, you are headed for Hell and you are already in Hell in that you are Satan’s servant.

    May God have mercy on your soul.

  13. Marie says:

    Listen you mindless fool. I am a ROMAN CATHOLIC IN A TRADITIONAL CHURCH WHERE WE HAVE VALIDLY ORDAINED PRIESTS AND A VALID ROMAN CATHOLIC HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS IN LATIN…. NOT LIKE THE SHEEPLE LIKE YOU WHO BELIEVE WHAT THAT APOSTATE JORGE SAYS. THE STUPIDITY OF ????people WHO CALL THEMSELVES ROMAN CATHOLIC AND DO NOT KNOW THE TRUE TRUE FAITH.

  14. Tony Jokin says:

    Marie,

    According to the Catholic faith, do you think you have authority to definitively determine whether a prelate, especially when the prelate is the Pope, is an apostate?

    I can understand Catholics becoming cautious of a Pope or any other prelate because they tend to speak and act in a questionable manner. One can choose then to cling to what has been handed down unless the matter in regards to which the Pope is speaking about is a new one (ex. In-Vitro Fertilization, Euthanasia etc). If it is a new subject, you assent to the Pope. If not, just continue to cling to the faith you were handed down.

    But to say that Pope Francis is an apostate, at least as far as I understand our Catholic faith, is really above the pay grade of every individual currently on this earth.

    So you might have the Latin mass where you are at and all the Catholic traditions. But if you have another Pope of your own or belong to a group that thinks that Pope Francis is an apostate, then you are among bad company. If I were in your position, I would leave that group.

  15. Marie says:

    IF YOU WERE A CATHOLIC YOU WOULD KNOW THAT THE NOVUS ORDO CHURCH IS A FALSE CATHOLIC CHURCH….. WE DO NOT HAVE ANOTHER POPE THE SEAT OF THE FISHERMAN, THE SEAT OF PETER, THE SEAT OF THE POPE HAS BEEN VACANT SINCE 1958. YOU ARE IGNORANT. GO READ AND EDUCATE YOURSELF… HERE ARE 3 WEBSITE FOR YOU: http://www.traditio.com, vaticancatholic.com and novusordowatch.org
    Novus ordo seculorum means new world order….The Vatican was hijacked in 1958. Where have you been asleep under a rock? The service you have is Protestant…It is not catholic. I AM IN THE BEST HOLIEST AND SAINTLY COMPANY. I WOULD NOT LEAVE TO BE AMONG HERETIC LIKE YOU.;. GO AND READ THOSE WEB SITE AND WAKE UP BEFORE YOU FIND YOURSELF CONDEMNED TO HELL!

  16. Marie. Yep, you are one of the silly women easily led astray.

    The moderator of Traditio was not a priest but he fooled a lot of people for a long time – he still has you fooled.

    Marie, the bible tells us to shun a heretic after a few attempts; so, IANS has a deal for you, you shun we heretics here and we will shun you here.

  17. This ain’t my first sede-rodeo, Calamity Jane. I used to confront you hateful nuts for years at Free Republic. I have a LONG memory and you picked a fight with the wrong man

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    One of your links connects one with Traditio, a site run by a fake priest.

    Subject: Re: (“Fr. M. E.) Morrison

    Body: Hello:

    M.E. Morrison was “ordained” in California in a Protestant church (Ebenezer Lutheran Chirch) by Thaddeus Alioto, a married man claiming to be a bishop (because he had been “consecrated” a bishop by Wallace David de Ortega Maxey).

    De Ortega Maxey had been “consecrated” numerous times by various North American Old Catholic bishops (whom even the Old Catholic Churches in Europe deny have valid orders). De Ortega Maxey also claimed to have been consecrated by Antoine Aneed.

    Aneed’s story is that he was consecrated a bishop by a RC Eastern Rite bishop in Syria and sent to America. Both the Vatican and the Syrian Patriarchate involved denounced the story as a fabrication.

    If you have any doubts over the veracity of my statements as to where Morrison got “ordained,” just ask his fellow “independent” priest, Merril Adamson. He was “ordained” in the same ceremony. I’ve a written statement from him confirming the fact.

    This is important not because of anything Morrison states on the internet, but because he dresses up his statements as coming from a RC priest.

    Even the devil can quote Scripture.

    Anyone e-mailing to Morrison’s list a request for the facts of his claimed ordination will be dropped.

    It never ceases to amaze me how sedevacantists can be so cock-sure JP II is a fraud, yet swallow hook, line and sinker any number of bogus clerics; just because the frauds sing the music sedes like to hear.

    It takes more than “right” preaching to make a priest.

    Regards, Terry Boyle

    [Mr. Boyle’s website is at http://www.tboyle.net/ ]

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    These are the sort of Satan Slaves you get your Faith from and, thus it is YOU who is headed for Hell. Wise-up….

  18. Marie says:

    ALL OF YOU ARE DESTINED FOR HELL. I HAVE THE TRUE FAITH. AND THAT IS THE END OF IT. TRY TO TAKE PIGS OUT THE SLOP AND YOU GET SQUEELING AND SLIPPERY NON-SUCCESSFUL PIGS.

  19. NO

    (gunning for the last word with an inane woman is probably not a good idea, but what the hell….)

Be kind, be (relatively) brief, be clear...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s