From Reuters news service:
The pope was presiding at a service intended to show the importance he attaches to the sacrament of reconciliation, commonly known as confession.
After reading a sermon, he was to have gone to an empty confessional booth to hear confessions from ordinary faithful as some 60 priests scattered around the huge church did the same.
His master of ceremonies, Monsignor Guido Marini, pointed him toward the empty booth but the pope went straight to a another one, knelt before a surprised priest, and confessed to him for a few minutes.
He then went back to the empty one and heard the confessions of a number of faithful.
I, again, find myself shaking my head, with few words to comment on the actions of Pope Francis. He confessed to a priest. And not to his personal father confessor, but to a priest that he picked at random. What better way to demonstrate a humility of heart than to show that any priest in the world is qualified to hear the confession of the Patriarch of the West, Pope Francis? What better way to encourage confessions than to confess in view of the public? Humility and repentance is to take the chance that your words of confession may be overheard and then may be passed on to others. Only the person who is secure in Our Lord Jesus Christ is able to confess not caring whether his words are overheard.
Again, I realize that while the Orthodox Church may be the Church, that this does not mean that it holds the patent on humility, on love, and on repentance. Pope Francis need not bow his head before any Orthodox. Nor, at this point, should any Orthodox dare to criticize him on his behavior. His doctrine may be wrong at points, but so, probably, are some parts of our personal theology. Yet, if he keeps this behavior up, when he stands before the Great Judge, that judge will say, “His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.’” May the Great Judge say the same over me when I face him in that great and terrible day when all my sins shall be known, and I can only rely on the love of Jesus Christ for me.
This Lent, I look at the photograph of what Pope Francis did, and I shudder. Would I have the courage to confess, not caring if I were to be overheard? Am I really repentant and humble? Am I willing to say that changing my life to grow into the image of Christ is so important that I do not care who knows my sin, provided that I receive forgiveness in order to keep on growing?
Thank you again, Pope Francis, you have pierced my heart fully and completely. I am undone. I am ready to reflect more on my journey to you, my life-long Lenten journey to you. May I be more like Pope Francis someday.
Amen, brother Ernesto.
With due respect, Father: Pope Francis (or any Pope for that matter) is not the “Patriarch of the West”. Since 1054 that See is vacant. Actually, even before the Schism, the Popes didn’t have jurisdiction over all Western lands.
Regarding Francis’ humility, I’m nobody to judge him, but it looks more a PR or propaganda show rather than an intimate act of humility. Our Lord warned us about doing right things to be seen by others.
Regards
It is true that the Pope removed the title of Patriarch of the West from his titles in 2006. It is also true that whether the see is vacant or not depends on which sound and legitimate Orthodox sites you read. Some say it is vacant, some say it is not. There is no agreement in the Orthodox world on this matter, other than that no “replacement” Bishop of Rome has ever been appointed.
Let me hazard a guess here:
Thaddeus is cage-phase ORTHODOX!!!!!!! without the strings of Greek technical terms?
The fact that the Pope removed or not the title of Patriarch of the West (self-appointed), does not mean the Popes hold that title with legitimacy. That’s their view, no the Orthodox view. The See of Rome has not had an Orthodox Patriarch because of different reasons throughout History:
1-Historical oppressive monopoly of the Popes over the West (Forcibly integration under Rome of Sicilian, Venetian Orthodoxy and invasion of Orthodox England by the Papist Normans.
2-Subsequently, lack of means from the Orthodox Church to appoint a legitimate Orthodox Patriarch or even maintain viable Orthodox communities in the West (Rome included) until the end of the XIX Century.
The lack of an Orthodox Patriarch is a historical lack of opportunities in History, and not an acceptance or validation of Rome’s claims in any way.
Have a blessed Week, Father.