Sidebar
Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Pope Francis on Catholic Fundamentalism & Condom Use

f0da3168ba4c4f81bca7210c249d7ee3In my podcast earlier today, I said I hadn’t read anything from the pope’s Africa visit. That didn’t last long. Tonight, after helping my lovely wife get the kids in bed, I came down to ye olde computer to get back to work and there, plastered on the screen, was a link to the Zenit translation of the Vatican-provided transcript of Pope Francis’s plane presser. The one people have been reeling over, and that just based on pull-quotes.

I’ve decided I’m not going to provide any analysis at this time. Read it for yourself. But I do want to offer the two most controversial sections for your convenience. You tell me what you think they mean.

On Catholic fundamentalism:

Philippine de Saint-Pierre, KTO

Holy Father, good evening. You paid tribute to the platform created by the Archbishop, the Imam and the Pastor of Bangui and today, more than ever, we know that religious fundamentalism threatens the whole planet: we saw this also in Paris. So, in face of this danger, do you think that religious dignitaries should intervene more in the political field?

Pope Francis

To intervene in the political field: if you mean to “engage in politics,” <the answer is> no. He must be a priest, Imam, Rabbi: this is his vocation. However, politics is engaged in indirectly by preaching values, true values, and one of the greatest values is fraternity among ourselves. We are all children of God; we have the same Father. And, in this connection, there must be a politics of unity, of reconciliation,  … – and a word I don’t like, but which I must use – tolerance, but not only tolerance, but also coexistence and friendship! It’s this way. Fundamentalism is a sickness that is in all religions. We Catholics have some, not some,  many, who believe they have the absolute truth and go around soiling the others with calumnies, defamation, and they do harm, they do harm. And I say this because it is my Church, we too, all of us! And it must be combated. Religious fundamentalism isn’t religious. Why? Because God is lacking. It’s idolatrous, just as money is idolatrous. To engage in politics in the sense of convincing these people that have this tendency, is a politics that we, religious leaders, must engage in. However, fundamentalism that always ends in tragedy or in offenses is a bad thing, but there is a bit of it in all religions.

On the liceity of condom usage in fighting AIDS:

Jurgen Baetz, DPS of South Africa

Holiness, AIDS is devastating Africa. Care helps many today to live a bit longer. However, the epidemic continues. Last year, in Uganda alone, there were 135,000 new infections of AIDS. In Kenya the situation is in fact worse. AIDS is the first cause of death among African young people. Holiness, you met HIV-positive children and heard a moving testimony in Uganda. Yet, you said very little on this issue. We know that prevention is fundamental. We also know that condoms are not the only means to halt the epidemic. We know, however, that it’s an important part of the answer. Isn’t it time, perhaps, to change the position of the Church for this purpose? To agree to the use of condoms in order to prevent further infections?

Pope Francis

The question seems to me too narrow and it also seems a partial question. Yes, it is one of the methods; I think that the morality of the Church finds itself on this point before a perplexity: is it the fifth or the sixth Commandment? To defend life, or that the sexual relation be open to life? But this isn’t the problem. The problem is greater. This question makes me think of that which was posed to Jesus once: “Tell me, Teacher, is it licit to cure on the Sabbath?” It’s obligatory to cure! This question, if it’s licit to cure … But malnutrition, the exploitation of persons, slave labor, the lack of potable water: these are the problems. Let us not ask ourselves if this or that band-aid can be used for a small wound. The great wound is social injustice, environmental injustice, the injustice I’ve mentioned of exploitation, and malnutrition. This exists. I don’t like to descend to such casuistic reflections, when people are dying from lack of water and from hunger, from <lack of> a dwelling … When all are cured, or when there are no longer these tragic sicknesses caused by man, be it because of social injustice, be it to earn more money – think of the arms trade! – when these problems no longer exist, I believe the question can be asked: “Is it licit to cure on the Sabbath?” Why do arms continue to be produced and traded? The wars are the greatest cause of mortality … I would say forget about thinking if it’s licit or illicit to cure on the Sabbath. I would say to humanity: do justice, and when all are cured, when there is no longer injustice in this world, then we can speak of the Sabbath.

Read the full transcript here.

60 thoughts on “Pope Francis on Catholic Fundamentalism & Condom Use”

  1. I wrote a little about his contraception remake here.

    http://restoringcatholicism.com/2015/12/01/1889/

    Basically to compare the pharisaical view about healing on the Sabbath with the contraceptive ban shows a major lack of basic formation in the Catholic faith. The law never probihibted healing on the Sabbath so that was a man-made rule and Jesus denounced it as it conflicted with divine law. The Ban on contraception is an infallible teaching of the ordinary and universal Magisterium which is backed by Christ so the two can’t be compared.

    Reply
  2. Fundamental is defined as, “a basic principle, rule or law that serves as the groundwork of a system; essential part…” So a “fundamentalist,” I would assume is someone who strives to adhere to the fundamentals of, in this case, Catholicism. If the Catholic fundamentalists Pope Francis is referring to are practicing and defending the “basic principles, rules or laws that serve as the groundwork of [Catholicism],” how can he say this is calumnious, defamatory, or harmful? Does he not believe the FUNDAMENTALS of HIS Church to be TRUE? Is he of the mindset that if you just “accept Jesus Christ into your heart,” and “help the poor,” you are saved? What of 2000 years of Tradition? What would he say of devout, pious, “fundamentalist” Saints? The views of Pope Francis that have heretofore existed in a blur of the unknown or misunderstood are lately coming into focus and it is terribly distressing.

    Reply
    • Not to mention the killing of unborn babies which is condoned and supported as a means of convenient birth control by an entire political party.

      Reply
    • Maybe, but as the word “fundamentalist” is commonly used in the United States, it refers to a certain brand of Protestantism as articulated during the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy of the 1920s. Catholic Answers says “Fundamentalism is a relatively new brand of Protestantism started in America that has attracted a tremendous following…What has been particularly surprising is that Catholics seem to constitute a disproportionate share of the new recruits.: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/fundamentalism I don’t know what the pope is referring to, but he may mean the poorly catachized Catholics who leave the Church and enter fundamentalism.

      Reply
      • I gathered that he was speaking of “Catholic fundamentalists,” not Protestants or Catholic converts to Protestant Fundamentalism… he claimed they were soiling HIS Church… here is the quote: “We Catholics have some, not some, many, who believe they have the
        absolute truth and go around soiling the others with calumnies,
        defamation, and they do harm, they do harm. And I say this because it is
        my Church, we too, all of us!”

        Reply
      • For pity’s sake!

        How on earth could he be speaking about ex-Catholic Protestant fundamentalists when he’s talking about the “many” in “my church”?

        “Fundamentalism is a sickness that is in all religions. We Catholics have some, not some, many, who believe they have the absolute truth and go around soiling the others with calumnies, defamation, and they do harm, they do harm. And I say this because it is my Church, we too, all of us!”

        Reply
      • …and your posts, AC, seem to refer to a certain brand of, “You’ve gotta be kidding,” that passes for logic and reason these days. Translation, there is no logic and reason, but rather the jumbling of words and concepts toward the end of justifying whatever it is folks want to do at the moment, or in a certain period of time. That’s why there’s such a capacity to shift from what the truth means when speaking to reporters on an airplane, to bishops at a synod, to faithful at a family conference, when speaking to the mafia, when addressing abortion, etc, etc, etc.

        The fact that you don’t know what the Pope is referring to is precisely why believing Catholics pray that he will begin to speak clearly and in union with the Catholic Faith or remain humbly silent.

        Reply
  3. The second answer is tantamount to questioning whether Jesus should have gone to the Cross while the Jews were being oppressed by the Romans and their religious leaders. Seriously, so the short answer — since social injustice is an unavoidable and irreversible adversity of sin — is that we should no longer bother with evangelizing about contraception, abortion, euthanasia, sodomy, whatever. No more Catholic devotions until you create a paradise on earth.

    Reply
    • I have been wondering about RCIA in other areas. It went from about 12 the last few years to 0 this year in my region. Has anyone else seen a similar trend?

      Reply
  4. What I get from the Bishop of Rome’s discourse is that his main concern is the salvation of all souls. To uphold that there is no salvation outside the Church and to look to the Saints and Martyrs as to how to live in these difficult times.

    In other words condoms save lives and don’t be so rigid everyone is saved (just don’t believe in what those pesky saints believed in – you know utter submission to God in mind, body, soul, and effort). Oh and save the earth – Gaia will judge us in the end.

    Reply
      • But that is the only mission – saving the planet from Global worming. Woe to those who think otherwise – you are nothing more than a rigid, fundamentalists Pharisee.

        Reply
        • I’m all for Pope Francis having his say on this issue but when he aligns himself so closely with everyone’s favorite President (guess who?) that tells me he is up to no good. When P.F. gave his little speech before the U.S. Congress he barely had a bad thing to say about the 3,000 unborn killed each and every day. There are some who think he may be the false prophet spoken of in Book of Revelation. Others who are reserving their right to make that decision as it is too soon to pass judgment.

          Reply
  5. Who are those that the pope is referring to as “fundamentalists,” exactly? What does he mean by “fundamentalist” in the Catholic Church? I’m afraid that if you suspect the pope is talking about you, you may be exactly who he is talking about. I think to myself, “am I one of the ‘fundamentalists’ he is talking about, because I care about proper liturgy and I want to be a faithful Catholic?”

    I am a relatively new convert and I am not well-versed in the Bible, but during this era of confusion within the Church, the OT books about the Maccabees speak a lot to me about what it means to remain faithful to God when both the world at large is increasingly hostile and the guardians of the faith seem to be full of compromise and conflict. Also, the book of Tobit, showing how one man remained faithful in a foreign land when others were afraid to follow God’s law, for instance how Tobit buried the dead at great risk to himself.

    How to remain faithful during this difficult time? Maybe someone else who knows more than me can comment on the relevant lessons from Maccabees and Tobit.

    Reply
    • Indeed, these times remind me of the Maccabees as well. It shows that even those that hold the highest offices in the True Religion may work against God’s cause. And in such cases, we have to obey God more than men. Tobit’s story also serves as a great example how to stay steadfast, as his blindness would not make him murmur against God.

      Pray much, Orion. St. Alphonsus says “The man who prays will be saved; the man who does not pray will be lost. The saints are in Heaven because they made use of prayer; the damned are in Hell because they refused to pray.”

      http://www.catholicpamphlets.net/pamphlets/Prayer-%20The%20Key%20To%20Salvation.pdf

      God bless,

      Konstantin

      Reply
      • Thank you very much for the link to the Catholic pamphlets, it looks like a very helpful resource. God bless you and stay strong in the faith!

        Reply
        • You’re welcome. I’m a convert, too, just like my parents. God has helped us to become and to stay Catholic in these times of crisis. God will help you not to despair, even when things look really bleak in the Church.

          Reply
          • Thanks again for for your encouragement. I came across an article lately called “Don’t let anyone tell you the Council didn’t change much” by Robert Kaiser. You can find it online easily. I haven’t read the whole thing, because it makes my blood boil. Stepping back from that initial reaction and trying to calm down, my secondary reaction is one of pain, dismay, and confusion. As I understand it, the basic thesis is that Vatican 2 changed just about everything in the Church, and that was a good thing. The author seems to think that just about everything about the Church before V2 — liturgy, education, morality, etc. — was all wrong. It’s a really amazing rejection of the pre-V2 Church. The reason this is dismaying to me is because this is just what I have experienced in multiple parishes: the way of worship, the beliefs, the relationship of priest to people, architecture, art, music — everything! — is different from the way things used to be, and even if the people don’t have an explicit agenda about this the way the article’s author does, for them this is just the way the Church is, and they don’t realize what has been lost or the problems with the new way of doing things. The reason I am confused is because: why did all these changes happen? If the Church was really as terrible and messed up and in need of reform as the article’s author intimates, then what is going on with the Church?? Even for those without an iconoclastic agenda, the embrace of the new implies a rejection of the past — and why reject that past? Were the Catholics from circa A.D. 0 – 1965 such baddies and so wrong? The author’s critique of the Church — that is was too hierarchical, stifling, rigid, smothering, judging, unpleasant — sounds a lot like Protestantism! And yet, it’s in a Catholic journal. It is so confusing and painful to see the Church apparently pitted against itself: new vs. old. What can we do about this? What should I do, as an individual? The thing is, as far as I can tell the author is right: the Church did change fundamentally as a result of V2. I am skeptical of the “hermeneutic of continuity”. How to make sense of it all?

          • I just had a look, it seems like Mr. Kaiser doesn’t really understand what the Catholic Faith is about, or at least that’s what I hope for him, since everything else would be pretty malevolent on his part. Don’t get too worked up about it.

            The state of the Church was of course better before the council and what you observe is correct, pretty much everything has changed. We live in those times of which St. Paul warned us, that they will invent new doctrines that flatter their senses. Therefore, hold on to what has always been considered Catholic. I will write again, I have to go now.

          • I think you should stay away from sites like the Tablet or the National Catholic Reporter for the time being. I know a recent convert who was reading too much of what the enemy was saying and went all crazy. I suggest (if you haven’t done so already) to nourish your faith with sound doctrine, that is good old books, such as the Baltimore Catechism, books by Saint Alphonsus of Liguori or, if you want to get deeper into theology, by studying the Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott. You can also buy the Catechism of Perseverance (at the bottom): http://papastronsay.com/bookshop/index.php . It’s an outstanding catechism that treats many questions with greater detail than the normal ones.

            One last piece of advice: steer clear of sedevacantism! It may look tempting, but trust me, it is junk. I had to fight this temptation for years but after seeing it refuted I can only say it’s a joke and it is dangerous for your salvation. They are schismatics, not Catholics and the theory itself might be a heresy.

            Keep up the fight and stay prayed up,

            God bless,

            Konstantin

    • You stick to your duties, Orion. If you aren’t sure, you don’t say anything, and you stick to your duties and continue seeking to grow in the knowledge and love of God. Try to give your enemies the benefit of doubt, pray for them and for yourself, and look for good fruit so that you may know the trees from which they fall. That’s what I’ve been trying to do.

      Reply
      • Thank you very much for your words of wisdom and advice. I am troubled that it seems at times like the Church somehow decided at Vatican 2 to stop being Catholic. I think you are right to keep focused on our everyday duties connected to our state in life. To stay positive, prayerful, charitable, and keep things in perspective is right on. I appreciate your encouragement. Pax tecum!

        Reply
    • Yes, yes, yes!
      We are indeed in Maccabean times and we need the courage to remain faithful and to resist the Shepherds who connive with the enemy to force us to sacrifice to pagan gods.

      Reply
  6. Yet another stunning exercise in circumlocutionary persiflage delivered at 30,000 ft. The pope’s performances seem to be a one-man Abbot and Costello routine; one leaves them never knowing exactly who’s on first.

    Reply
    • This post is gold. Gold! Deadly accurate and funny at the same time, it’s one of your best and that’s saying a lot. “One-man Abbot and Costello routine” … so well-said.

      Reply
  7. I’m serious about this question. Is alcohol served on the Holy Father’s plane? Does Pope Francis drink alcohol? It could explain a lot.

    Reply
    • If you are going to attribute the fuzziness to alcohol, then that mean he must be drunk all the time. But I don’t think that is the case.

      Reply
      • Good point. Perhaps he is a “dry drunk?” You know, an alcoholic that has quit drinking, ‘white knuckle’ style, but has no real recovery. A dry drunk can be quite an enigma. I don’t know, I’m just trying to make sense of this poor man in a way that is charitable. I mean, something is seriously wrong, but nothing I’ve read seems to quite hit the mark. When I look at the Church right now, clergy, religious, and laity, I sure see plenty that resembles a big dysfunctional family that has an unhealthy focus on one particular unpredictable member, just like in an alcoholic family. Some deny there is any problem at all. Others are resenting things he says and does. But we all seem to be reacting to his every move, wondering what other hurtful or embarrassing thing is going to come from him. And some will not tolerate any criticism of him at all. It’s all very disturbing and very unhealthy.

        Reply
        • I think the question is “how low will he go?”. Let’s hope not much lower because it is terribly low as it is. However, I think we will see it plummet.

          Reply
          • Yes, may he hit his bottom soon, for his sake that he might get help, and for the sake of the whole Family. Lord, save your people.

  8. I remember when all the Catholics I knew of or read books of or about believed we had the absolute truth. I’m gunna wait until I hear from the atheist guy on these items.

    Reply
  9. So Jurgen Baetz is the Pharisee, Francis: Jesus, Africans: the withered, the condoms: miracles.

    Got to keep your head on a swivel around this guy.

    Reply
  10. You nailed it Steve! I mean, this quote “many, who believe they have the absolute truth” was wrongly translated as “many who believe in absolute truth” in all of the reports (at least 10 sites) that I read in English. I am glad you got a good source/were careful to find out what was really said (it’s also at the Vatican site in Italian). Still disconcerting stuff. But had that quote been accurate as most places reported it, it would have been much much worse.

    Reply
  11. OMG! San Bernadino. I just know it’s some of those radicalized, fundamentalist Catholics once again gone on a rampage with their Kaluminkovs! I hear they were also armed with bombs loaded with defamanite!

    Reply
  12. Don’t worry! He clears up everything in this letter to Scalfari published on the Vatican website:

    “To begin with, I would not speak about “absolute” truths, even for believers, in the sense that absolute is that which is disconnected and bereft of all relationship. Truth, according to the Christian faith, is the love of God for us in Jesus Christ. Therefore, truth is a relationship. As such each one of us receives the truth and expresses it from within, that is to say, according to one’s own circumstances, culture and situation in life, etc. This does not mean that truth is variable and subjective, quite the contrary. But it does signify that it comes to us always and only as a way and a life. Did not Jesus himself say: “I am the way, the truth, and the life?” In other words, truth, being completely one with love, demands humility and an openness to be sought,received and expressed. Therefore, we must have a correct understanding of the terms and, perhaps, in order to overcome being bogged down by conflicting absolute positions, we need to redefine the issues in depth. I believe this is absolutely necessary in order to initiate that peaceful and constructive dialogue which I proposed at the beginning of my letter.”

    Bergoglio is the Modernist word for confusion.

    Reply
      • I think not. Parse it carefully. Use Christ’s alter-names, eg Truth. What I find is nothing short of satanism layered in obfuscation. I point to one such “exegesis” of Francis’ commentary, above.

        Reply
    • There is a denial of Christ in there:

      I would not speak about “absolute” truths, even for believers, in the sense that absolute is that which is disconnected and bereft of all relationship. 

      Christ is Truth. Necessarily Absolute Truth. So Francis does not want to speak of Christ to believers? And he says that relation to Christ is impossible?

      Not even Satanist belief is that divorced from Christ. They seek desecration of Christ — that is relation. Francis is a step ahead: complete severing of relation. What Francis describes is voluntary decent into Hell.

      This is not confusion. These are words from the dragon.

      Reply
  13. Pope F rancis said, “when there is no longer injustice in this world, then we can speak of the Sabbath.”

    Jesus said: (Matt 8:18-22) When Jesus saw the crowd around him, he
    gave orders to cross to the other side of the lake. Then a teacher of
    the law came to him and said, “Teacher, I will follow you wherever
    you go.”Jesus replied, “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son
    of Man has no place to lay his head.” Another disciple said to him,
    “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” But Jesus told him, “Follow me, and let the dead
    bury their own dead.”

    Reply
    • “You will always have the poor.”

      Was Christ wrong?

      Because if one assumes He didn’t extemporize randomly — then Francis is saying that he wants to suspend the regular offering forever.

      Reply
  14. The whole “condom use” matter connects to the climate faith. One of Francis’ dogmas is that carbon dioxide is immoral (he said that, for example, a few days on in Africa.)

    I will repeat this elsewhere because I think it needs to be repeated: Jesus is sinless. Jesus breathed and he cooked fish on a fire. By definition, production of carbon dioxide is not merely not sinful, but SANCTIFIED by Christ’s having positively done it.

    The whole carbon lie (which does not even meet the threshold of science in lieu of making predictions about phenomenon, much less with laboratory repeatability) is anti-Christ: blasphemy.

    Thoughts, insights and corrections appreciated!

    Reply
  15. It is so much easier to tell the truth than to lie. But because one wants to lie then one goes all around the world and back again and out again in an attempt to make it look like they are addressing the question when they are not.
    Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we venture to deceive. The Pope is getting very adept at this. Or maybe he was always adept at this but he chose to not reveal it all at once.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...