(Interview) Francis: the Pope is “a normal person”, not Superman

Outstanding interview. He talks about marriage, marxism, Pope emeritus Benedict, life, loneliness of power, and several other interesting topics.

Haven´t found a full english translation yet, so here´s a summary:
vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/francesco-francis-francisco-32502/

And here´s the full text, in Spanish:
lanacion.com.ar/1669312-francisco-pintar-al-papa-comosi-fuera-una-especie-de-superman-me-resulta-ofensivo

And in Italian:
corriere.it/cronache/14_marzo_04/vi-racconto-mio-primo-anno-papa-90f8a1c4-a3eb-11e3-b352-9ec6f8a34ecc.shtml

Not forgetting the role of women in the church, the Church’s handling of abuse as well as contraception.

sconews.co.uk/news/35385/pope-speaks-out-on-marriage-family-and-abuse-in-frank-interview/

Interesting interview, but I predict further volcanic eruptions over those two lines on contraception. :stuck_out_tongue:

I saw another version of this interview from the Associated Press. I especially liked Pope Francis’ words concerning his predecessor, Pope Emeritus Benedict. Francis, it seems, is encouraging Benedict to remain active in the visible life of the Church. He is not so concerned with protocol, but rather sees this as a way of demonstrating the love and respect for our aged and elderly that is too often lacking in our families and society. A great message!

Here is another interesting quote:

“I have never understood the expression “non-negotiable values”. Values are values. Full stop! I cannot say that among the fingers of the hand there is one more useful than the others. So I do not understand in what sense there can be negotiable values.”

This seems to bring into question certain voter’s guides we have here in the States. Sounds a little more “Seamless Garment” to me. Always challenging, in a loving way, this great pope of ours!

Not sure exactly what you mean here. His words seem to point out the obvious, values are not negotiable. Values where certain political issues reside, abortion, SSM, and many other Catholic values are not negotiable. In no way is he saying they are negotiable.

If by this you mean to say the voters’ guide is in line with the fact that it goes without question they are non-negotiable, then we agree. If by your comments you mean the voter’s guide is wrong, please re-read the Holy Father’s words.

I love Pope Francis, but I think trying to view him through those lenses is a little problematic.

In my eyes, we must see Francis as a pastoral (rather than a theological) Pope - a John XXIII rather than a Benedict XVI.

When he talks about contraception, he is certainly not going to “repeal” Humanae Vitae. Instead, he will probably offer guidelines to confessors to make the use of severity / leniency more uniform.

When he speaks of second marriages, he is not going to offer communion to people living in sin; rather, he might streamline the pre-marital and annulment processes.

I hope I’m not proved wrong. But even if I am, he’s older and wiser than me, and I’m sure he knows what he’s doing. All I need is a little faith. :slight_smile:

I think what he is trying ot say is our Catholic Values are never negotionable. I doubt very much if he is refering to the “Voters Guides” They do serve a great purpose!, God Bless, Memaw

Yes, I believe you are correct.

Do you not see a tendency among people to prioritize our Catholic values? To give some more value than others? You’re right, I’m sure the Holy Father was not referring to voter’s guides. The deliberate use of the term “non-negotiable” was coincidental, though it made a connection for me. I do not in any way see this as an attempt to denigrate the good work many do to the promote the values they hold most dear, but more like a gentle nudge to expand our field of vision. I clearly come to this with my own biases too.

I’m confused by the remarriage/communion reference he makes and I’ve seen this topic here on several threads, too, but don’t understand clearly:
If a person gets divorced and remarried, and has the first wedding annulled…they still cannot receive the Eucharist?

.

Okay, here goes my attempt at explaining… :smiley:

A is married to B. A and B encounter problems, separate (or even have a civil divorce) and live apart.

A gets married a second time to C. In the Church’s eyes, this is an invalid (bigamous) marriage, because the Sacrament of Matrimony is indissoluble. Therefore, unless A and C live in a “Josephite” (= chaste) marriage, they are committing adultery; A is in a state of mortal sin, and therefore cannot receive Communion.

However, if A and B’s marriage is annulled, then the objection is lifted; a decree of nullity is not a divorce, but a declaration that A and B were never validly married in the first place. Once this happens, if A and C have their marriage rectified, they can receive Communion.

Ohhhh. Thanks…yes, I understand those steps…I see now it’s the wording people use that was confusing me, i think.

So when someone says “he’s divorced and remarried”…just by using those words, we can assume that there has been* no *annulment…right?
Had there been an annulment, the first marriage would not even be described as a first or former “marriage” because it was never “real” or…“valid”…so one wouldn’t describe the new one as “his second marriage” or “a remarriage”…because to the Church, it would be seen as his first.
(right?)

.

In most cases, yes.

Had there been an annulment, the first marriage would not even be described as a first or former “marriage” because it was never “real” or…“valid”…so one wouldn’t describe the new one as “his second marriage” or “a remarriage”…because to the Church, it would be seen as his first.
(right?)

Technically, this is correct, but in casual conversation, most of us conflate the two, leading to much confusion. :wink:

It puzzles me how someone could say something like that and still consider himself a catholic. Saddly, you are not the first one I´ve come across :shrug:

You’re talking about the pope?

.

Why would you say this?
His interviews are smart, loving, thoughtful, and honest.

.

I agree with the title of this thread. Although I must say I am kind of surprised no other pope has used this approach before, when it seems like it should have been a given.

I am certain that we have had a great many humble and loving popes through the ages. No other pope, however, has been in this time we live in, this digital age where we are all instantly and constantly connected (if we choose to be - and apparently a lot of people choose to be). At no other time could the Holy Father’s remarks become known to so many at the same time.

To the poster who wishes the pope would stop giving interviews (and this seems to be a common wish, based on the comment boxes I have read concerning this latest interview), I must disagree. Even if we of a more liberal understanding get the message wrong, it is still very important to keep the conversation going; to keep the Gospel message alive and relevant in today’s culture. A closed-mouth system of “us vs. them” might make us feel better, but we are called to proclaim the good news, in and out of season, and that is what Pope Francis is doing. God bless him!

We have had humble, good popes in the past, but it doesnt seem like they went the extra mile to show what it means to be humble. To live it publically and to be such a visual example of it, is what I mean when I say Id think that was a given.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.