Sat 1st Nov 2014 | Last updated: Fri 31st Oct 2014 at 16:19pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo

Latest News

‘I did not want the job,’ says Pope

By on Friday, 7 June 2013

Pope Francis greets youths during an audience with students of Jesuit schools and institutions in Italy and Albania (PA)

Pope Francis greets youths during an audience with students of Jesuit schools and institutions in Italy and Albania (PA)

Pope Francis has admitted that he did not want to be elected Pope.

During a question and answer session with Jesuit school students in Rome, Pope Francis said: “Someone who wants to be pope does not really like themselves. I did not want to be pope.”

Pope Francis also said that he did not want to move into the official papal apartments because he does not like living alone. He said: “”It’s a personality problem. I need to live with people. If I lived alone, I would feel a bit isolated and it wouldn’t be good for me.”

He added: “It would be bad and boring. A professor asked me about this and I told him ‘Listen professor it’s for psychiatric reasons.”

  • Anna

    Well, that could explain why he keeps referring to himself as “Bishop of Rome” and not Pope, leader of the world-wide Catholic church. For my part, I think it’s about time that he stops acting as if he still were archbishop of B.A. When he accepted the “job” as Pope, he should have realised that there are some obilgations that come with the territory. Not wanting to live in the Apostolic palace, not wanting to go to Castel Gandolfo, not wanting to celebrate the Holy Eucharist in St Peter’s but going to prison etc etc – always doing what he wants and wishes….This is not humility to me but arrogance. How I miss Pope Benedict – a truly humble man. He did what was expected – although he most certainly not didn’t want to be Pope.

  • Benedict Carter

    Mr Callender made a point that needs arguing?

  • paulpriest

    Why seek ye the living among the dead?

    He is not here…

    We are called to go out to the world preaching Christ crucified…

    …and His rising by our living testimony and devotion…

    But when the household is infected do we ensure healing first?

    Or do we instead open wide the gates and send everyone out to spread the contagion?

    How can a Church of 1.2Billion be at more risk now than it was when it was merely a few dozen?

    YET IT IS!!!???

    The Mystical Body of Christ is more wounded and ravaged than ever before…even more than when the Arians seemed triumphant and God’s truth was left scrambling in the wilderness, even when the donatist Terrorists assumed thrones, even when Rome was sacked and Peter’s domain was a single Castel or when that Corsican left the Church’s voice only to be heard in the confines of a prison cell? Even when the stormtroopers’ jackboots were a whitewashed line away from wiping the Holy See from the face of the earth..even when the Iron Curtain closed and all within it fled, hid or perished while the clerics faced the firing squad only to be replaced by Patriarchs & Metropolitans in the secret police…?

    Every five minutes & twenty seconds a Christian is martyred

    Every two seconds three babies are mechanically aborted

    Every five seconds three people will die of hunger

    Today fifty four thousand people will attempt suicide [that's almost exactly the same amount of people who are directly killed in combat every year]
    one in twenty of them will succeed…

    every 4th death certificate across the globe will have as its cause an easily curable infectious/parasitic disease

    Are we happier?

    In the UK alone last year there were 46.7MILLION prescriptions for antidepressants!!!
    ….yet from the pulpits, the bidding prayers, the Catholic journals and booksales…

    we’re making it perfectly clear…
    despite being the biggest educators and health providers and counsellors and comunity builders across the globe…
    we don’t really want to think about it….

  • paulpriest

    I sincerely hope the Herald has an isp tracker…

  • paulpriest

    I love the way the australians ‘tizzy things up’

  • An onlooker

    The issue remains about whether or not this was delivered as a manifesto or simply as an opinion about what direction the church should take. Don’t all the cardinals speak at the pre-conclave discussions?

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Quite.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Mr Callender made a point that needs arguing?

    Nope

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    The Mystical Body of Christ is more wounded and ravaged than ever before

    This is an objectively blasphemous statement, the Mystical Body of our Christ being eternal and incorruptible by Nature.

  • http://twitter.com/JamesCallender3 James Callender

    Hmm, now we have other people trying to speak on my behalf.
    Going round in circles here.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    What is “the hermeneutic of continuity” except a “political” way of saying nothing has changed really?

    Good question, scary, but underlying is the question : “what is a hermeneutic ?”

    A hermeneutic is a coherent interpretative stance.

    A “hermeneutic of continuity”, therefore, is a coherent interpretative stance surrounding a notion of doctrinal permanence in a changing world.

    The Revelation is provided by God, eternally, but nevertheless both immanently and transcendentally.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Not “harsh”, scary — mendacious and heretical.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Meanwhile, back in reality, Pope Francis remains sovereign in these and other matters.

  • paulpriest

    Hardly Blasphemous – was referring to the harm wrought upon Holy Mother Church and the sufferings wrought by our sin upon Our Lord

    Diachronicity of Grace and its prevention by sin – sufferings and afflictions upon the cross wrought by our sin NOW – which being more prevalent and occluding grace are inflicting more wounds upon Our Lord & Saviour. – we’re crucifying Our Lord more than any previous generation

    The Mystical Body of Christ is manifest Bodily through the Church Triumphant & Militant – The Triumphant being incorruptible and eternal – the Militant only being unassailable yet aeviternal

    I was referring to what’s happening now – not what’s in the eternal Now

  • http://twitter.com/JamesCallender3 James Callender

    Correct, JabbaPapa. Surprising how many “traditionalists” view it as fair season to denounce the Holy Father as some kind of heretic.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    My point was concerning the argument about whether some of the documents
    were misinterpreted or whether they were open to
    misinterpretation….and I said the 2 go hand in hand.

    scary, this would be exactly contrary to all ordinary doctrinal interpretation.

  • Anna

    I am not arguing that. But – I am still entitled to express my opinon, am I not?

  • An onlooker

    Did Christ always do what worldly people expected him to do? Did he live in castles and palace? It is not a competition between Francis and Benedict and we shouldn’t expect the new pope to refrain from doing the right thing just because it might possibly reflect badly on others.

  • scary goat

    What arguments????

  • Cederic

    Arguments like: Did Jesus live in castles and palaces? just cannot be taken seriously. “The right thing” – you say. “Right” by whose definition? if I may ask. But it is still lso good to have people telling you what you may think….

  • scary goat

    How so?

  • An onlooker

    Are you saying that the way Christ chose to live is irrelevant? I wouldn’t dream of telling anyone what they should think, I was simply expressing an opinion based on my view of the way in which Francis appears to be following Christ.

  • bluesuede

    That’s a very ignorant thing to say. Disrespectful much?

  • Benedict Carter

    A ridiculous statement Jabba.

    Christ never promised that the Church would be healthy at all times. Indeed, Scripture warns of wolves, false teachers, the constant danger to the Faith, in diverse places.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Because the interpretation of doctrinal questions belongs to the Magisterium, including the Pope, and because no such misinterpretations can be deliberately provided by the Doctrine.

    Ordinary doctrinal interpretations are founded upon the Tradition of the Faith. Flaws of interpretation are therefore provided by individuals, NOT by the doctrines themselves.

    Some doctrines can be ambiguous — but this is because some of Christ’s own teachings are also ambiguous (viz. His various teachings on the nature of the Law, for instance). Any accurate portrayal of such doctrines MUST therefore be ambiguous, because they are statements of the sorts of freedoms and questions that Catholics may pursue in relation to these teachings.

    But doctrine CANNOT actually contradict itself, which is I think what you are suggesting, so that wherever one might think that it has done so can only be due to one’s own interpretative mistakes, or due to some purely formal flaws in the texts or in their translation, but which do not belong to the doctrines themselves, and do not affect their nature nor their actual substance.

    The Doctrine of the Church is transcendental in its very nature, and it resides with God in the Revelation of His Truth to mankind.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Christ never promised that the Church would be healthy at all times. Indeed, Scripture warns of wolves, false teachers, the constant danger to the Faith, in diverse places

    pp originally made a dubious statement about the Mystical Body of Christ, Ben, not about the Earthly Church.

    His rather excellent clarification addresses my real objection to his original statement far better than you have !!

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    What I said was for something to be misinterpreted it must have been to some extent open to misinterpretation”. I didn’t say anything about doctrine contradicting itself.

    Implicitly, the sort of misinterpretation that you allude to at length in this new post can only be founded on a doctrinal contradiction.

    You’re adding or attacking a whole bunch of personal interpretations to a pastoral teaching (NOT doctrinal) which, in itself, doesn’t say very much — and these interpretations contradict the actual doctrine of the Church concerning false religions.

    The extra teaching that I would personally read into that pastoral advice is the phrase : “Love the sinner, hate the sin“.

    ALL of the doctrinal teachings of the Church are of more importance than ANY of the pastoral teachings of the Vatican II Council — and the actually doctrinal teachings of that Council are to be found, generally speaking, in the pages of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, where the majority of them have been repeated. (they are few in number)

    Or is there a reason why it has been so widely misinterpreted?

    Because of the action of heretics spreading their false teachings on this question among the Faithful.

    Including in these very web forums … :-( :-( :-(

    “The Church regards with esteem also the Muslims”…. Which
    ones? All of them?

    The grammar is clear — this means Muslims generally speaking, but NOT every single Muslim individually.

    Why?

    Because of Christian Charity towards ALL of mankind, including all heretics and all overtly sinful.

    How? In spite of their religion or because of it?

    Despite their false religion — really, scary, pastoral guidance from whomever does NOT, CANNOT overrule any of the basics of Catholic doctrine.

    And the Second Commandment of Our Lord The Christ is very centrally located in this doctrine — as is His teaching, “Love your enemies”..

  • scary goat

    “Because of the action of heretics spreading their false teachings on this question among the Faithful.”

    I know personally at least 2 priests who spread this false teaching (and I don’t know hundreds of priests)….are they heretics?

    “Despite their false religion — really, scary, pastoral guidance from whomever does NOT, CANNOT overrule any of the basics of Catholic doctrine.”

    I know that ! It seems there are a lot of people who don’t. This is widespread, Jabba. The fact that I know that and you know that doesn’t prevent a lot of people from holding false views based on what they have been taught by their own priests.

    I would say there is a problem. And it needs sorting out.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    I know personally at least 2 priests who spread this false teaching …. are they heretics?

    Simply teaching something that is heretical is insufficient to be declared as “a heretic” ; though being a priest and doing so gives you a good head start.

    I don’t know, I hardly know enough about them, nor whatever pastoral qualifiers they may be using, to answer your question about these complete strangers.

    I’ve not infrequently heard priests saying things that I personally disagree with ; I’ve NEVER heard a priest teaching any heresies.

    I would say there is a problem. And it needs sorting out.

    You, I, HH Benedict XVI, all Faithfully orthodox Catholics, agree.

  • Maccie

    in the world of that worship the idol of power and position (without responsibility), of course most people don’t understand why someone will be humble enough like our Pope Francis who understands the responsibility that comes with the position.

  • TieHard

    No
    you are Peter … the gates of Hell will never prevail against you

  • paulpriest

    That’s not what Our Lord said…

  • TieHard

    ok clumsy paraphrasing… but you get the point…
    The Lord spoke Aramaic …..or was it Latin?

  • paulpriest

    Aramaic – and of course he read Hebrew – but the majority knew the common tongue – Greek.