Skip to comments.Pope says he is not a "Marxist" and it is not time to start "clericalizing" women
Posted on 12/15/2013 9:14:52 AM PST by NYer
click here to read article
It’s wonderful to see you too, trisham!
Merry Christmas - the kind the Pope means.
I really, really like Pope Francis and it amazes me how people misunderstand what he says. It’s clear to me.
Thank you, friend. :)
He wasn’t taken out of context and he’s not a Marxist. He’s the Pope (as was said upthread). The job of Pope is to lead people in the faith, not devise the best economic system.
It’s become clear to me now his economic ideas and mine differ, and that’s ok. The charism of infallibility has absolutely nothing to do with economics. A Pope can be wrong about anything he says really (even matters of faith and morals); the charism must be clarified and stated in a very specific way to be applied to any statement he makes. This is why many do not believe “ex cathedra” has been witnessed very often in the history of the Church.
So, now, all we (anyone) has here to disagree, or lambaste if that is one’s desire, the Pope with is his apparent affection for some people who are Marxists.
Big whoop. Again, he’s the Pope. He can’t show affection for people he knows personally who are Marxist, when taking about Marxism?
Maybe he’s friends with such people because he’s trying to share his witness of Christ with them. Anyone here think of that possibility?
After all, Christ associated with the sick too, not the healthy.
Can we (FR) move on now? Or are we going to try to continue to look for a Papal Marxist Boogyman in every interview/exhortation/encyclical he offers?
Keep on ignoring that direct statement he made while repeating trash.
People recognize that approach as SOP for propagandists who believe that if they repeat a lie often enough people will accept as fact.
Um, hmmm. maybe from this DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE ARTICLE: I have met many Marxists in my life who are good people, so I dont feel offended.
..apologies accepted anytime
Then DO clear it up for us won’t you I keep hearing OUT of context, but no one says what is IN context ..so please .SOME CONTEXT!!!!
This does not matter .whether or not they are sincere in their marxists beliefs ..they are not good, period .idealist or not. Just because someone is an idealist does not make them good .
I hope they will wake up too .but this slumber they are in is no excuse.
He is the one who made comments about his economic beliefs, and did so as Pope and now our Marxist President has glomed onto those comments as his talking points. I’m sorry, but that horse done left the barn. I wish he’d never said any of this, but he did, and it’s out there, and it’s now fodder for the Obama spin machine on income inequality and all of the rest of the redistributionist program. Sorry, that’s a fact.
BUT No, he’s not a marxist for sure, but he has bought into some marxist ideas about free markets and free enterprise. I don’t think anyone said anything more than that, and I do not think that is possibly out of context. He really does think free enterprise is all about greed, and must be regulated by some kind of angels of power, I presume government. There’s a name for that, and it ain’t free enterprise .
There are many people, even right here on FR, that used to be leftists. But they woke up. It happens more often than you might think.
Marxism doesn’t really prey on good intentions. It preys on envy and rage. In order to fall for the demonic lie that Marxism is, you must be consumed by one, the other or both.
Marxism and goodness are mutually exclusive. One cannot not be a “good person”, in any meaningful sense of the term, and be a self-identified Marxist.
I agree with that .but again off topic a bit .becaue while someone is a marxist they are NOT GOOD, PERIOD. Now, they may become good as you say .and they may think they are good now while still a marxist and they may be ‘nice’ or ‘pleasant’ - but if they are a marxist, they simply are not good.
Marxism is evil. Period.
I heard a nice song, used to have it on a home made tape, sort of a talking song.
It went something like this, but with sung refrains.
Once there was a king, who wanted to find out if there was a truly good man in his kingdom. So he sent his servant out to find a really good man.
The servant went to the churches, the schools, the monasteries - looking for a really good man. He searched and searched.
Finally he came back to the king, and said, My lord, I cannot find a truly good man. Every man had some bad in his heart.
So the king asked another servant - to find a truly bad man.
The servant searched through the prisons, the hospitals, the streets - and could not find a truly bad man. He told the king - even the worst man had a little good in him.
The moral of this story, the moral of this song, is the good man finds the good in all, and the bad man finds only the wrong.
Amen! I like that.
I think Pope Francis is like the second servant.
It’s not a question of whether the Marxist has any good in him. It’s whether he can reasonably be considered a “good person” while actively promoting something as perfectly evil and murderous as Marxism has proven to be.
Take Bergoglio’s comments and replace the word “Marxist” with “Nazi”. Are we having a different conversation? If so, why?
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
He's clearly weighing in on economic matters AS IF HE BELIEVES IN A SOMEWHAT STATIST, QUASI-MARXIST POSITION.......
How do you not see that in what he has said? Please describe to us what it is we are misunderstanding since, as you say, "it's clear to me".
Since I cannot read the Pope’s mind, nor do I personally know the people he considers “good” despite being Marxist, I cannot really discuss this any more with any weight (nor, IMHO, can any one else).
For all we know, the “Marxists” he said were good people, are not hardcore communists but dabblers, coffee table theorists, who the heck knows. I don’t know, you don’t know.
The good man sees the good in all, the bad man sees only the wrong. I think the Pope is a good man and wants to see some good in everyone.
Note my comment above.
I am not a foot Doctor.
If the Marxist in the WH gets his way, I won’t be one for much longer either.
Asked how hed interpret that, Cardinal Burke, the head of the Vaticans highest court, the Apostolic Signatura, responded that that the Pope "doesn't state that," admitting however that the Popes statements are not altogether easy to interpret. (Source)
(See video directly here -- Raymond Arroyo Interview with Cardinal Raymond Burke -- begins at 14:54 of the video.)
Keeping an open mind, my own view is that Pope Francis is looking at Marxists knowing that God has converted Marxists in the past and they've become "former Marxists / good Christians", and God can convert current Marxists in the future and they will also become "former Marxists / good Christians", which are the good kind of Marxists. (This could apply as well to all sinners, murderers, Muslim terrorists, democrats, atheists, mainstream mediacs, etc.)
That said, it was unfortunate that Pope Francis used the term "trickle-down", as we heard the demonrats call Reagan's economic program "trickle-down" economics for more than eight years. Reagan's economic program ultimately lowered unemployment, and provided increased opportunities for Americans, but did not (and could not) guarantee economic equality for all Americans, as Americans must choose to grab hold of their opportunities and take full advantage of them -- they are not forced upon them.
(This is just like Pope Francis being able to offer everyone the opportunity to become good Christians, but he cannot force them to all become good Christians -- they have to personally grab hold of the opportunities presented to them, and take advantage of those opportunities themselves to become good Christians.)
insulting the Pope on a forum doesn’t help.Prayers for you and you family.
You are still incorrect. READ what was said.
I have been influenced by distributist thought, but in the cultural sphere, not the policy sphere.
I value craft over goods produced without attention to quality.
I believe in an apprenticeship model, and hire and develop employees this way. I deliberately have a few very junior people as well as senior people in my organization doing similar work.
I work at a large company, but value small business and small government. I believe that big business generally prefers big government, and is often as much a threat to liberty as left-wing advocacy groups.
None of this has a direct effect on my policy preferences.
I would like to hear the answer to this question. This could be its own thread.
Anyone can say “Marxist ideology is wrong” while advocating for open borders, higher taxes and wealth redistribution.
Excellent observations. It is challenging for secularists to comprehend the notion of ‘conversion of heart’. Thanks for the post and ping.
It is a scandal that our President has latched onto some of what the Pope has said (wrt economic matters) to further his (Obama’s) agenda. But the Pope can’t be beholden to what others may or may not do with his words.
Again, after all of this bru-ha-ha, all “we” have proven is that the Pope associates with Marxists, and calls some (the ones he knows personally) “good”. Again, big whoop. He’s a priest, he’s supposed to associate with sinners, as a representative of Christ. And as little Jeremiah pointed out upthread, good people can see the good in others, evil can only see evil; I would only add that also, good people are willing to be generous with an estimation of good in others.
At least kind people are willing to do that. Maybe that’s a bit too naïve for some, but I don’t care if one wishes to be so judgmental. Regardless, at worse, naïveté is at least not a sin, and the type of naïveté we’re talking about here is economic naïveté, NOT within the purview of the Pope’s mandate. Again, for the third time, his job is to lead souls to Christ, not convert people out of Marxism.
As far as his opinion about free market enterprise, who knows, maybe his experience of “capitalism” has been forever colored by his Latin American experience. That is, forever damaged.
At the end of the day, he’s not a Marxist and therefore not promoting Marxism. He’s allowed to be wrong about economics while still being an effective witness for Christ.
Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t give someone the title of Pope, and then excuse what he says as private conversations about personal relationships .and you can’t have him release major statements and then not hold him responsible for his words being fodder for an evil President.
Sorry sorry sorry ..you are trying to defend him as a man of great import on the one hand .and then say ‘hey, he’s just chatting” on the other. That my friend is illogical.
I agree completely. I also believe that this is the necessary starting point to understanding Pope Francis and whatever he is communicating. He is laser focused on finding "... the 99 who were missing!, wherever they are.
Regarding the age old question ... 'Is man inherently good?' ... Pope Francis answers with a resounding 'Yes!'.
Frankly he needs to simply button up rather than show his ignorance on the matters of economics. I might expect this from a muzzie, but what he is saying is really unbecoming (and unworthy) of the head of the Roman Catholic church.
A lot of people are excusing it when they should be quite disturbed that he is telling the world some deep untruths. The lefties of America are all over this, celebrating. Too many here do not understand this fact.
Alright then, let me apologize for the confusion I caused. Let me be try to be clear now:
I’m not trying to say that his words, even when he talks about some Marxists he apparently knows are “good”, in his opinion, aren’t important words to consider. For Catholics they certainly are; everything the Pope says should, for Catholics, be considered very carefully. Indeed here, his statement that “[some Marxists] are good people” should be taken as a serious provocation for any who find the statement initially objectionable.
“Is it possible for a Marxist to be a good person? What does it even mean to be a ‘good person’? If they can be a good person and still Marxist, or even if not, how then, should we treat such people? Are they ‘ok’ the way they are simply because they are ‘good’, or are they completely lost to Satan? Should we dismiss them as ‘completely evil’, which can be a bit too convenient at times, or should we still attempt to be a witness to Christ to them?” These are questions we should ask ourselves, at least every Catholic should consider, as this is what the Pope is asking us to do, as the pastoral priest I mentioned earlier.
I pretty much assumed the above was common knowledge, or at least commonly assumed by others as well, when I made my previous post on the subject (if not also prior posts). Regardless though, if one does not wish to do such work above (which IMO seems like good work, such difficult questions, if examined honestly, could lead one to a deeper understanding of one’s role as a Christian, if not merely the “role” of being a human being as God intends), then minus that, we are still left with two facts that I stated before but will repeat here for conclusive clarity.
One, he’s the Pope not a scholar of economics and this ultimately should be regarded the same.
Two, if one does not wish to do the honest work implied above, as Obama clearly does not, clearly Obama only wishes to further his ideological agenda, and not enrich his or anyone’s humanity, then one should just ignore what the Pope has said about his Marxist friends, and also ignore any economic advice the Pope may have given.
This is because to do as Obama has done is clearly ripping the Pope’s words out of context. The Pope can’t be held liable for some mental midget like Obama implying his exhortation is an exhortation of Marxism! His (the Pope’s) hope is not to set us on a path to socialism, rather to set us on a path to holiness, part of which does, whether one wishes to believe it or not, mean treating even Marxists with dignity.
Well we disagree on a lot, but I appreciate your thoughtful and cogent responses and your mature tone. Fregards
But to impose it on a grand scale, which is what it would need to be, demands a large, powerful, governing body. In the olden days, that was a guild. The problem becomes that when there is no legal competition, there is little to push quality. It becomes what many in small towns see in their grocery stores. You pay top dollar for bad or rotten products.
In the US today, there are still a few guilds in areas like coffin making. They are very jealous of their market, and ruthless in protecting it. Hence why a $1,500 casket is marketed at $10,000.
This too shall pass. And IMHO, it won't be long ... they hate him down deep and they're merely enjoying using him, and his words, for now. He has not said and does not believe that 'marxism' is better. It's obviously not and he knows that. I suspect that he will condemn marxism soon enough since it has caused 'FAR MORE damage to the human spirit'. I choose to believe that there is a method to his seeming 'madness'. Maybe a little Breitbart in him, setting the arrogant liberals up for their own comeuppance later.
It is alarming when he uses some of the same words - however, his are sincere and without any preferred worldly ideology; theirs are insincere and only about personal pride and a selfish lust for power. He truly cares about the poor while the liberals care about their own power and merely 'use' the poor to further that.
There is nothing in the Exhortation that cannot be found in the social Doctrine of the Church. I wasnt speaking from a technical point of view, what I was trying to do was to give a picture of what is going on. The only specific quote I used was the one regarding the trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and social inclusiveness in the world. The promise was that when the glass was full, it would overflow, benefitting the poor. But what happens instead, is that when the glass is full, it magically gets bigger nothing ever comes out for the poor. This was the only reference to a specific theory. I was not, I repeat, speaking from a technical point of view but according to the Churchs social doctrine. This does not mean being a Marxist.
Pope Francis is all about the Great Commission and evaluates everything in light of the question ... "does this evangelize new souls?" His perspective is apolitical, non-technical and he knows that it will 'offend the comfortable'. He doesn't want anyone to be comfortable because he believes that has left too many 'sheep' still wandering about, lost and in need of being found.
Marxist? I don’t know. But he’s definitely a socialist.
I don’t even think that is true.
Man's Capacity for God
27 The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for:
The dignity of man rests above all on the fact that he is called to communion with God. This invitation to converse with God is addressed to man as soon as he comes into being. For if man exists it is because God has created him through love, and through love continues to hold him in existence. He cannot live fully according to truth unless he freely acknowledges that love and entrusts himself to his creator.1
33 The human person: with his openness to truth and beauty, his sense of moral goodness, his freedom and the voice of his conscience, with his longings for the infinite and for happiness, man questions himself about God's existence. In all this he discerns signs of his spiritual soul. The soul, the "seed of eternity we bear in ourselves, irreducible to the merely material",9 can have its origin only in God.
41 All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. The manifold perfections of creatures - their truth, their goodness, their beauty all reflect the infinite perfection of God. Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures" perfections as our starting point, "for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator".15
I don’t want to impose my values on a grand scale. I have no desire to rule over people.
I believe that there are a set of cultural and moral conditions that must obtain for political and economic freedom to be possible. And this moral condition is not ruthlessness. The loss of freedom that we are experiencing is a consequence of moral decay.
The funeral industry is still every bit the scam it was when Jessica Mitford exposed it...
This pope is giving so many off the cuff, unrehearsed interviews, that the Vatican - and he himself - is forced to do continuous damage control.
He has directly or indirectly insulted and/or belittled orthodox Catholics numerous times, be they pro-life, opposed to homosexual marriage, teachers and promoters of NFP, those who attend the Latin Mass, or simple faithful Catholics sending him spiritual bouquets of Rosaries.
He says not to judge others but then he oh so humbly speaks of others as
"Pelagian!""Mr and Mrs Whiner!""Triumphalist!"
"Long-faced, mournful funeral Christian!"
"Sayer of prayers!"
"Querulous and disillusioned pessimist!"
"Children who are afraid to dance, to cry, afraid of everything, who ask for certainty in all things!"
"Closed, sad, trapped Christians who are not free Christians!" "Specialist of the Logos!"
"Functionary!""Self-absorbed, Promethean neo-Pelagian!""Restorationist!"
And what pray tell do we do with a Pope who says not to judge others out of one side of his mouth, then does exactly that out the other?
What about not breaking the bruised reed?
Who is more reviled in this world, more bruised, than orthodox pro-life, pro-family Catholics?!?
Sorry, criticize me all you want, I'm just following the lead of our Holy Father. My criticism if that is what it is, is pretty minor compared to his list above.
Time is looking to take back their award..
I respect you immeasurably. Thou I think in this you’re missing the forest for the trees.
God’s grace to You and Yours.
Half of all Catholics on FR want to interpret the Pope for us, spinning the man's words and telling us what the Pope "really" meant. Given his repeated speeches on the same subject, it made sense for the Pope himself to come out and clarify his thoughts, in case the Pope believes that he is being misunderstood. And now this has happened. How will this direct quote, found on this thread, be spun by Catholics more conservative than this Pope?
There is nothing in the Exhortation that cannot be found in the social Doctrine of the Church. I wasnt speaking from a technical point of view, what I was trying to do was to give a picture of what is going on. The only specific quote I used was the one regarding the trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and social inclusiveness in the world. The promise was that when the glass was full, it would overflow, benefitting the poor. But what happens instead, is that when the glass is full, it magically gets bigger nothing ever comes out for the poor. This was the only reference to a specific theory. I was not, I repeat, speaking from a technical point of view but according to the Churchs social doctrine. This does not mean being a Marxist.So with the Pope making himself clearly understood, we give him this response:
"Since the origins of modern capitalism around 1780, more than two-thirds of the worlds population has moved out of poverty. In China and India alone, more than 500 million have been raised out of poverty just in the last forty years. In almost every nation the average age of mortality has risen dramatically, causing populations to expand accordingly. Health in almost every dimension has been improved, and literacy has been carried to remote places it never reached before.
Whatever the motives of individuals, the system has improved the plight of the poor as none ever has before. The contemporary left systematically refuses to face these undeniable facts."
-- Robert Novak, from the thread Economic Heresies of the Left (Novak on Caritas in Veritate)
I’ve been waiting for this statement, frankly. It appears as though the Pontiff isn’t a Marxist because he says he’s not. Okay, let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that’s true.
His repetition of his comments regarding trickle-down theory show that even if he isn’t a Marxist, he sounds a lot like Charlie Rangel. Is that a good thing? To suggest that trickle-down theory results in NOTHING EVER for the poor is demonstrably false, as your cite of Novak proves.
The free market has been vastly superior in raising people from poverty than any other system that has ever been tried.
That said, I would have liked to have seen the Pope refute the notion that governments should enact specific policies designed to promote equality. I know there will be posters who will claim he didn’t say that, but what he did say was that ‘policies should be enacted’ to achieve specific social ends which he named, and who enacts policies if not governments?
There is much that is admirable in what the Pope said otherwise (and yes, my Catholic brethren, I did read it). But economically speaking, perhaps it’s better if the Pontiff would simply let well enough alone and encourage everyone to aid the poor as Christ did in John 21 — through the Church of Christ, not through government.
The injurious effect of his comments can't be denied, and his biases come through loud and clear.