Pope Francis says he hopes for the grace to know when to quit

Pope Francis says he hopes for the grace to know when to quit cruxnow.com...

May 15, 2018

Pope Francis on Tuesday said he thinks about the time he might be called to step down from his role as bishop, citing the example of St. Paul leaving Ephesus.

Speaking during his homily at the morning Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae, the Vatican guesthouse which serves as the papal residence, Francis said all bishops should seek the “grace to be able to take our leave and step down” if this is the will of the Holy Spirit.

The pope was speaking about the scriptural passage where Paul leaves the Church in Ephesus to go to Jerusalem.

“It’s a decisive move, a move that reaches the heart, it’s also a move that shows us the pathway for every bishop when it’s time to take his leave and step down,”

“When I read this, I think about myself…because I am a bishop and I must take my leave and step down,” Francis said.

“I am thinking of all bishops. May the Lord grant all of us the grace to be able to take our leave and step down in this way (like Paul), with that spirit, with that strength, with that love for Jesus Christ and this faith in the Holy Spirit,” the pope said.

Only two weeks later on June 29 there is a Consistory in Rome when pope Francis will appoint new cardinals.

Benedict 16th used a consistory to deliver his resignation letter (although it entered into force about one month later).

Whether Francis will resign soon, nobody knows except for him and God. This is not the first time he speaks of it.

Or may be he will serve a year or two more?

“When I read this, I think about myself…because I am a bishopand I must take my leave and step down,” Francis said.

Was my bold section a mistranslation? That says he is stepping down.
They could end up with 3 living popes.

Benedict’s historic renunciation of the papacy in 2013 was the first papal resignation in more than 700 years, when Gregory XII gave up the Chair of Peter in 1415.

yea he may be gettin close

he came out today against abortion

kinda not usual for him

He's obviously not listening to God or he would have quit a long time ago.

Sure would be nice to have him step down.

He doesn’t know how to keep his religion out of other people’s business. I love God, but religious people that try to tell others what to do really get on my nerves.

Dear God, I quit.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Hi Iggie--

You wrote

QUOTE

'Dear God, I quit.'

UNQUOTE

I seem to remember that cute little 'logion' placed into the mouth of a Greek-speaking 'Jesus' in the canonical Greek 'council-approved' gospels

'No son of man having placed his right-hand on the plough only to look-back could ever be a fit-worker for the Kingdom of Heaven. Lest we forget what happened to Lot's wife !'

Or all of those hang-on-to-the-end-for-your-reward-sayings placed into the Messiah's mouth in the Apocalypse of Yohanon (whoever he was) aka the Book of Revelation extracted from chapters 2 & 3

'But for those who trudge-on until the bitter end to ultimate Victory, I shall allow each one of them to eat of the fruit of the Tree of Life in the Garden of q'Eden, so they might live forever, for their names shall each be inscribed in (and never blotted from) the Sefer Chayim ('Book of Life') when their names shall be forever recited before the face(s) of my Father in Heaven, each dressed in pure white-linen, wholly unscathed by the Second-Death. Yea, they shall all sit down to feast with the Meshiaq' where they shall be served the hidden-Manna of Moses from golden dishes, and drink from wine from the River of Life which flows out from the midst of Paradise poured into 12 golden goblets in the Kingdom, and shall be granted the right to sit with the Bar-Enasha ('son of Man') upon 12 thrones to rule alongside the Meshia'q (where they shall pass judgement on the 12 tribes of Yisro'el, when each shall be given the white-stone of the proselyte separately engraved each with a secret Name, which only the bearer can read) even as I have been given Authority to rule over the goyim with an iron scepter--so they might smash them all to powder as when a potter smashes an earthen vessel--where they shall stand forever as pillars in the temple of EL whose secret names shall be engraved upon their foreheads when they enter the Holy City as conquerors in order to tabernacle therein forever...'

I guess Pope Francis doesn't want any of that anymore and would prefer to go back and become plain-old Jorge Mario Bergoglio again ! So much for the 12 promises of the Messiah !

originally posted by: Metallicus
Sure would be nice to have him step down.

He doesn’t know how to keep his religion out of other people’s business. I love God, but religious people that try to tell others what to do really get on my nerves.

Isn’t that what the Bible does or any other religion for that matter. Now I am not saying they are right or wrong but those different books and texts are essentially trying to guide others to do what is written.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou

originally posted by: Metallicus
Sure would be nice to have him step down.

He doesn’t know how to keep his religion out of other people’s business. I love God, but religious people that try to tell others what to do really get on my nerves.

Isn’t that what the Bible does or any other religion for that matter. Now I am not saying they are right or wrong but those different books and texts are essentially trying to guide others to do what is written.

I don’t know as I am not religious just spiritual.

originally posted by: SeaWorthy

“When I read this, I think about myself…because I am a bishopand I must take my leave and step down,” Francis said.

Was my bold section a mistranslation? That says he is stepping down.
They could end up with 3 living popes.

Benedict’s historic renunciation of the papacy in 2013 was the first papal resignation in more than 700 years, when Gregory XII gave up the Chair of Peter in 1415.

i hope so. the problem is, he is repeating similar although not so strong words for the last three years.
Benedict was expected to resign sooner, still he stayed 8 years well over 80.

Some catholic sources already discuss the possible next pope.

Liberal prelates want Cdl. Pietro Parolin to replace him www.churchmilitant.com...

If the Holy Father does resign, certain liberal bishops who helped elect Pope Francis to the papacy have already said they want the current secretary of state Cdl. Pietro Parolin to replace him. Last March, news broke of liberal prelates like U.K. Cdl. Vincent Nichols speaking not only of the pope's hoped-for resignation but also of a desire to have Cdl. Parolin take his place.

However, I don't think a cardinal secretary of state is a realistic option. It means a second term of the same team. Parolin 63 is younger that may guarantee him 15 or even 20 years in papacy, that in modern terms is quite too long after one of the longest pontificates of John Paul II.

The conservative cardinals grouped around card.Sarah and Burke, are minority but will not agree to a liberal who will continue the line of Francis. Being minority, they de facto blocked any bigger changes at two consequent Synods on family.

On the other side, the ultra liberals may see Parolin as too moderate. For five years, the pontificate of Francis didn't bring so many real changes for them. Why should they want to extend that line for another decade or two?

My view is, the next pope will not be cardinal at all. There are enough worthy bishops or even priests among the 1.2 bln Catholics to be able to serve as the first post- Petrus Romanus pope. A breakthrough is needed, based on the already built base by Francis and Benedict. That breakthrough is not likely to come from the establishment, divided conveniently to liberals and conservatives, and also geographically (rich North and poor South). The election of Bergoglio showed how a relatively unexpected person climbed the ladder exactly because the two camps couldn't agree on the more likely candidatures that were discussed before 2013 conclave.

a reply to: 2012newstart

I can't help but once again picking up the list made by medieval Catholic monk St Malachy about the-- to him-- future popes and the destiny of the RC Church, and follow the descriptions all the way to the bottom where the sitting pope seems to clock in as the last one. A curious remark about one «Peter the Roman», supposedly a code name for pope Francis seems to prophesy that Rome (lit. «city of seven hills») will be soon be destroyed following this Peter the Roman stepping down from his throne to walk the streets of Rome to «pasture his sheep in many tribulations» until a certain «dreadful judge will judge his people» ==> en.wikipedia.org...

I always saw the final paragraph(s) in Malachy's list as concerning the end of the papacy and that the last pope (i.e. the sitting pope or the next) would resign or abdicate after having served a while, however, the final prophecy seems to be split in two, and the first part seems to refer to an untitled bishop (supposedly a bishop of Rome, i.e. «the pope»). There seems to be a consensus among the prophet halfwits that this medieval list of popes is overwhelmingly accurate and that Benedict XVI was the supposed «Olivetan» (apparently a reference to the Benedictine order and his chosen papal handle, Benedict) from the 111th entry and that John Paul II fit nicely in as the 110th one. John Paul II's birth during a solar eclipse, his odd tendency to kiss the ground wherever his planes touched down, his excessive traveling across the world and other things like his business with Copernicus, pardoning him on the behalf of the RC Church, admitting that Copernicus was correct in his observations and works on the heliocentricity of our solar system-- all fit well with Malachy's note about the 110th pope-- Lat. «De labore solis», that is «From the labour of the sun» or «Of the eclipse of the sun»

Apart from this I think that the world would be a much better place without organised religion, and that all bishops should resign, seeing how they are the most reactionary bunch of tossers around, completely void of sense and lacking even the slightest understanding of reality or the basic facts of life. People should be allowed to be religious, just like people are entitled to be fools generally. If people want to spend their lives believing the Earth is flat and worshipping some renegade rabbi-turned-god who supposedly rules the world from his abode in the sky-- is fine with me-- as long as they don't force their Bronze Age crap on me and others.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Thank you for your substantial post and view!

St Malachi undoubtedly has what to say for today. For me, Petrus Romanus is a Good pastor. The judge from heaven comes to give justice, that is good to the good ones, not to condemn. I am not afraid of that.

We need a new Council. After Vatican II passed quite a long time, and the problems piled up especially in the years after 2000. Pope Francis proposed a new Nicaea council. May be he could announce it before he resigns (may be Vatican III not Nicaea III for obvious reasons)

Pope Francis looks rather tired and aged on his visit to Geneva. It is no surprise he talks of his resignation.
Moreover, in recent statements on several occasions he backtracked reformist views and took more classical or even conservative position. Perhaps this is the end of his liberal reform. As well as his pontificate. He prepares to quit and to leave the disputed questions to his successor. To remain in history with the image he has chosen to be remembered with. This is his honourable right of course. No person on this earth can continue forever.

Will the cardinal-electors seek the person who will assure a Francis-2 term, or they will go after some different option? One may say it is logical to have continuation. However the transition Benedict-Francis showed that might not be the case. Francis was elected to do reforms, and the reforms were blocked on local level to a great extend. And here I do not mean the debated family issues, I mean the everyday running of the Church in your own diocese. What changed? Are we happy with what we see, or we want a REAL CHANGE?

Let see the list of cardinal electors:

en.wikipedia.org...

Africa 15 13.2%
North America 22 19.3%
South America 12 19.3%
Asia 14 12.3%
Europe 47 41.2%
Oceania 4 3.5%

US has 10 cardinal electors, Canada has 3. The other 9 cardinals listed under North America are actually from Latin America.

For a pope to be elected are needed the votes of 2/3 of the cardinals electors (those under 80).
However, if the election is protracted (something that didn't happen in the last two ultra-fast conclaves) then the majority required is reduced to simple (over 50%).

Calculation shows that North America and Europe hold votes beyond simple majority, and with some help from outside could reach 2/3 without much difficulty.

Much more important is how the liberal/conservative camps are set.

Africa is predominantly conservative. An African pope? For me that is the least likely scenario. Although the conservative Catholics in the West (a vocal minority at the core of the parish life in every country and city) may want to see cardinal Sarah elected pope, it is not a realistic expectation. They'd rather put their expectations on more realistic candidates as I go thru later in my review. Today's college of cardinals would not choose someone who tells them what is right to do from a position of Impeccability and superiority, as they could do in 16th century. It just doesn't work that way today.

From the US cardinals many are moderate-to-conservative, however the new appointments are rather liberal and vocal(card. Cupich and Tobin). Let remember that cardinal Dolan of New York played the role of PR with his daily press-conferences during the pre-conclave discussions, while no other cardinals were willing to talk in public, setting the tone when everyone else was silent. US pope is not expected due to the US being the world power, however the US cardinals may well define the frames of who will be elected next. Card. Ouelett of Montreal effectively determined the election of Bergoglio in 2013 by his withdrawal.

Europe as a whole is rather liberal. A European pope again after so many centuries of Italians and Europeans? Or may be the goal is to seeking relations with the Russian Orthodox Church, the second biggest Christian Church? A Byzantine-rite cardinal would be rather an obstacle in the dialogue with Moscow. I couldn't see also a French, German, Polish pope again, certainly not Italian, due to a combination of historic and psychological reasons on the old continent.

Latin America seems to go in the middle in the standoff between conservatives and liberals. That may explain why Bergoglio was elected in 2013 as a compromise, after Ouellet of Montreal granted him his votes (what a practice). Is it possible a new compromise candidate from South America?

Cardinal Maradiaga (75) of Honduras is considered radical reformer although not liberal in the meaning the West puts in that word en.wikipedia.org... He is one of my favourites, if it means anything. He erected in Honduras a replica of the cross in Medjugorje, the popular Catholic shrine in Bosnia where millions believe Virgin Mary appears today.

If we are going to talk of supernatural manifestation promoted by the Catholic church, card. Schoenborn of Vienna has invited the Medjugorje seer Ivan several times in Vienna cathedral to have his vision sessions in public, followed by a Holy mass served by the cardinal himself. (However Schoenborn is rather liberal otherwise). Many professed their belief in Fatima, with allegedly cardinal Bertone saying in 2013 that if elected pope he would reveal the real secret? The papal nuncio in the UN hold a conference dedicated to the 100th anniversary of Fatima apparitions.

The supernatural moment should not be underestimated in an institution that holds its foundation on Jesus Christ and the descending of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles. Although in a secularised world we may think the politics and the various interests of power decide everything, it might be just "enough is enough"for the common Catholic believer who was told OTHERWISE in his formation years on Sunday school and Holy Mass...

Anyway. Let continue with the review of the continents.

Asia has 14 cardinals and growing communities of believers. However, the only predominantly Catholic country is the Philippines. It is unlikely, imo, to have a pope from a country that is predominantly Buddhist. For a Philippine pope there are only two candidates, cardinal Quevedo being 79, that means in practical terms to be elected cardinal Tagle. Many electors would not endorse the personal characteristic of Tagle who is charismatic indeed but in his own country's cultural style.

Is it possible a surprise move as cardinal John Tong Hon of Hong Kong, 78, with the view of a future conversion of 1.4 bln China? Indeed, John Paul II was elected from a Communist country, but Poland predominantly Catholic with centuries history has very little in common with Hong Kong...

Another option is the cardinals to choose for the next pope a non-cardinal. That is allowed and happened in the long history. He might be a bishop, priest, deacon, or even lay non-consecrated man. The only condition is that man to be able to be consecrated as bishop (certain circumstances could prevent that). The motivation for that could be, a man not from the system to be allowed to reform the system that proved it cannot reform itself. More realistically, for a non-cardinal pope we may look among the several thousand bishops. Many of them may escape the public view but some of them have remarkable qualities. Such as archbishop Krieger of Sao Salvador da Bahia and Primate of Brazil, who is still not elevated to cardinal.

Let remember the conclaves in the past have taken months, even years. Today we live in a much more informed society, in which the Church princes take only days of the actual conclave and weeks of pre-conclave deliberations to elect the successor of Peter. Soon that topic will become N1 eclipsing many others. As it happened in 2005 and 2013. Because, to lead the 1.2 bln Catholics means to a great extend to lead the Christendom and to be the moral voice of the world, whether we like that fact or not.

a reply to: 2012newstart

Or...regardless of who is elected, the next pope could be the False prophet of the revelation who will make the people bow down before the beast...so say some online, among the most believing catholics. What if they are right? This pope is wise to withdraw... in other words, the Vatican goes down in history choosing not to change itself. Because what the Vatican teaches is not what Jesus taught. Jesus didnt create the vatican! The best those prelates would do, is to disband the rotten cohorts and to start from scratch, from the roots.

Im sorry to spend so much time on this topic. Enough is enough! The soon it falls, the better for us all! As Our Lady says in Fatima in the non-official Neues Europa version.

Nobody knows the future, not even the prophets who see as in a mirror (St Paul) events that may happen tomorrow or after 2,000 years more. Indeed Malachi list ends, and it indicates a major judgement, or said in other words, a major change the way the earthly component of the Church runs. I do not speak of the invisible component of the mystical church. Apparently the visible human part of the Church doesn't run smoothly and doesn't fulfil its mission as it is today. It will be judged according to Malachi, that is that rotten part (including absurd rules) should cease to exist to make room for a new beginning, for a new return to the fresh roots.

Whether a destruction in Rome will happen similar to sci fi movies, or that will be symbolic, or a mix between, we have to see. I hope it won't take literal destruction by enemy forces, rather it will be a spiritual cleansing.

For me, pope Francis is the last in the list because with him ends the classical papacy known from middle ages (and that is not how the papacy looked like from the time of Peter).

May be, tomorrow new planets are discovered and new successors of Peter go there to start new communities, as the Roman church was established after the communities in Jerusalem and Antioch? We just don't know.

And even only on earth, why should we keep rules as dogmas when they are not dogmas? Francis said, the canonical law is not found in the Gospel. Why then blindly serving rules that are made up by people during the centuries, and that are prone to error, and have been changed so many times?

Even the current structure of the Church gives enough freedom for major changes. One of them is to enlarge the role of the cardinalate. Let say, appoint 1,000 or more new cardinals predominantly young and zealous, and send them as controllers to every diocese. They don't have to be priests, and even better to be lay persons, so they do not mess with the consecrated function of the clergy, rather to control how the temporal visible side of the communities' life is going on. That visible life needs to be fixed, not the sacramental life. Let the clergy be kept busy with the purely spiritual matters as it should be from the beginning. That was the purpose why the deacons were introduced in the early church, to take care of the material needs while the bishops and priests take care of the spiritual ones. However later the deacons changed their function to become just another level in the combined spiritual-material hierarchy. How many deacons do you know today? There aren't many, exactly because their function disappeared. The recent move to ordain as deacons old married men is a good idea, but I don't know to what level those men are involved in the everyday running of the parishes, other than to read the Gospel and give Holy communion (as we know, non-deacons including women are also permitted to give Holy communion). Do you notice the absurd? An institution created by the Apostles themselves, the deaconate, completely lost its original function. So let go back to the roots.

Today, I think it is improper to vest more power in the old deaconate after it lost its significance in the ages. Rather to empower more lay cardinals (that existed in history) to oversee from above, not from below, how the money and other material things are distributed, and to exercise overall control. Not as a part of the current system, but as a new created organ that controls the current system. Because the system proved it cannot correct itself, not in the pace and time of one human lifespan. To try to correct the system slowly extended in one human lifespan with mild measures not to stir controversy within the hierarchy in first place (because the lay people would welcome controversy if it means betterment), and using the same people from within the system, means de facto a programmed failure of any attempt to reform the system. Even major changes in the Curia cannot override the inertia, because what you do is to put other members of the system as members of the Curia. As we see the live example of the ruined reform before our eyes, of the otherwise good intentions of Francis. It doesn't work and it won't work with anyone in that way.

Another issue could be, the headquarters to move from Rome to another place(s), may be a partial move. Some functions may remain in Rome, while others to be transferred where the majority of Catholics live, or where special spiritual needs arise. As the last three popes'visits around the earth show the importance of the local churches. Today's communications allow that. Rome bears negativity of the centuries, historical gross errors make heavy its own weight, and that is obvious. Peter was not appointed by Jesus to go to Rome. He decided that later. His successors may decide otherwise, if needed.

I can't imagine the successor of pope Francis to be just Francis 2 with the same baggage of intended changes that never work in real, and the billion wide church to continue shedding members and eventually be ruined from inside. Something new should be done, and fast. We do not have the luxury of time as the middle ages had and did nothing because of that (more could be said here). We are pressed by the time, to do the change NOW.

Another issue that the successor of pope Francis should do without delay, will sound futuristic for many but is in fact very needed.

Francis correctly noticed several times of the need of new energy sources to be employed Now. Most recently, he said that to Oil CEOs on special conference for them. That means they are willing to listen, and if they come to listen the pope about matters he might not be specialist into, that means they seek his moral backing for decisions they have already decided to implement in the nearest future.

What are those energy sources, for everyone who reads sites like this forum, knows there are plenty of such sources, not only the solar panels. They border sci fi but are already a science fact. Those are sources based on other physical principles, discovered in secret labs and not taught in the universities. CIA admitted publicly "half of all UFOs are OURS". Whether we call it antigravity or zero point energy or energy of the vacuum as the physicists would prefer, it doesn't really matter. What matters is to be introduced without any further delay, because we already lost too much and risk the civilisation's existence, as pope Francis noted correctly.

From there to think what if...other star civilisations already use these same principles for centuries that allow in principle to cross the galaxy, and had enough time to master them unlike us marred in wars and suppression of development all our history, is not that far. Francis already said he would baptise Martians. In his encyclical on the environment, he started talking of the Universe created by God...and stopped short to mention there are many trillions other stars in that same universe...He preferred to jumped directly from the Universe creation to the earth, to talk of the earth's ecology. He could have done it, he could name those other worlds to exist at least in theory. Theology doesn't deny it. If he would have done it, we would have been already in the new era.

His successor must do it. Not only because it would be nice to know the various types of angelic beings described in the Bible have their dwelling places up there, as well as their chariots of fire that showed up in the history and in the Bible...that could help us in pretty REAL and visible, touchable way in our everyday life. But also because such contact is imminent. The so called Disclosure of ET and/or their superior tech is just a step away.

Trump announced the flight to Mars is very soon. It shouldn't be soon if we use traditional Newtonian craft! We lost our access to the Moon in first place. It could be soon only by the means of more advanced craft that already exists, developed secretly with the help of more advanced civilisations' representatives on Earth. That is imminent to happen. And the next pope should welcome it, something more, he should initiate the public talk of it. As Francis initiates the talk of new energy sources. Because the Vatican has the records, the Holy scripture has the records of such multiple contacts. They only need to be interpreted correctly.

What Ezekiel saw and described in chapter 1 is reality known for millenia. We don't have the luxury to deny it any longer, to enclose ourselves from God's creation,and ultimately from God's grace. We don't have that time anymore. 1900 years were enough. Because may be Jesus told the apostles something about the real world beyond earth, but the next generations powerful of the day chose to annihilate both the books and the priests/monks who kept them. We either restore the Church back to the original design, including Everything inside, including the angelic reality suppressed throughout the centuries, or its days are numbered. And because I believe the Church will survive the current crisis, therefore I believe Everything will be revealed and restored now. Including the direct access to the angelic realm that the Apostles enjoyed. How was Phillip transported from Gaza to Azotus?

Acts 8:39 39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. 40 But Philip was found at Azotus

Not even by some wings, but instantaneously. How about the healing? Only by prayer? Well the books were censored a big deal for centuries later before we get what is written in them.

We need exactly the level of belief and access to the supernatural realm as the apostolic church, if we want to restore anything and get out of the current deadlock crisis. And if in the past it was up to a handful of clergy scholars to " interpret correctly " what the text meant, and to do nothing, today what is the real meaning transpires from everywhere. From the science latest discoveries, from the stars above, from the untold and half told words of politicians, from leaked interviews of insiders technical and military personnel who speak what is done in top secret projects. It is all in the public domain of internet. Today we cannot close ourselves anymore in scholastic exercises that might have been good for the middle ages but don't work anymore. Today the Church (in first place the Catholic but also the others) have the duty to proclaim to the world what was known for millenia, if they are to lead the world morally into a different and better future.

Because Jesus mandated it with his last words: " Go to the ends of the Universe"...and let not start changing the words again, substituting them with less meaningful ones, such as ""world"" and even ""earth"". If Jesus talked of the earth alone, that mandate ended in 16th century...The Greekw ord used in Mark 16 is Cosmos, whatever it means. And the Greek knew to count and give names of the visible stars...

The next pope should not hide behind ambiguous phrases given in airplane interviews (with all respect to Francis) but should proclaim "ex cathedra" the things he believes to be the Truth by the special grace given to him by the Holy Spirit. How otherwise he would lead others if he himself is not sure when speaking here and there and contradicting himself all the time? Francis did much and said even more, but his reform as well as his time come to an end. We need something different than Francis-2. And hope the cardinal electors that will become more this Friday 29th to finally enter into their role and stop the hidden agenda plans who is convenient to be elected as compromise...Enough of camps and fighting! The people will not forgive that only after one generation!