Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I Donít Care Much About the Pope
Unequally Yoked ^ | May 9, 2014 | Leah Libresco

Posted on 05/11/2014 3:28:06 AM PDT by NYer

Pope Benedict stepped down from the papacy during my first year as a Catholic, and, all during the conclave, my friends wanted to know if I was excited or overwhelmed. Was I watching the livestream of the Vatican chimney? Did I have a favorite candidate? Which of the cardinals would disappoint me?

Except for taking a look at some of the twitter jokes about @ConclaveSeagull, the bird that was photographed on the conclave chimney, I mostly ignored the whole thing. Catholicism isn’t like Washington D.C., where a new administration brings in a wave of new political appointments (and unleashes a swarm of ousted job seekers). The new pope didn’t seem that relevant to my day-to-day experience of the faith because, ultimately, he wouldn’t have much to do with it. Although some questions in Catholicism are still live issues (what would we make of extraterrestrials? how should Mass be translated into American Sign Language?), it’s not as though the Pope is going to reopen the question of transubstantiation or the divinity of Christ.

Don’t get me wrong, I like seeing a picture of the Pope kissing a baby as much as the next gal, but I don’t feel that invested in knowing everything he thinks and does, and examining it for portents. In fact, Michael Brendan Dougherty points out that it’s novel for Catholics be able to think this much about the pope. It’s only recently that we became be exposed to all the minutia of his phone calls and personal experiences:

Between Pentecost and the launch of Vatican.va, most Catholics did not have access to the day-to-day musings of their pope. The Roman pontiff’s theological speculations have been of almost no interest to Catholics throughout history, and never became so unless he was a great theologian already, or there was a great controversy which the authority of the Roman Church might settle. To the average Catholic living hundreds of miles from Rome the Faith was the Faith, whether the pope was zealously orthodox like St. Benedict II or a sex criminal like Pope John XII.

Doran Speed saw a relationship between the intense, possessive curiosity about the life and character of our current pope and the very quick canonizations of two of his predecessors this year.

I think we should not canonize popes until a big chunk of time has passed since their death – say, 200 years…

So I understand why we canonize some people very quickly – if there is abundant evidence of the person’s virtuous life, etc., and a profound call for this person to be recognized as a saint, the Church responds to that call and does not make people wait for no good reason.

But with popes – gosh, I just feel like this has the potential to go very much awry, becoming a near-instant referendum on What Pope Such-and-Such Represented and Whether That Was Good.

My parents are historians, so, when I was little, I had a slight misunderstanding/wish about how history was done. I knew that historians did not investigate the very recent past, since not enough time had passed to be able to analyze it in a useful way (though, by all means, start preserving primary source documents for later). So, I imagined that there could be a formal (sort of ribbon cutting) party to celebrate when a new decade was now open for investigation. I imagined historians gathering in departments all over the world to clink champagne at the stroke of midnight, and then hit the books.

If that were the case, we might have hit the appropriate lag for the Vatican II party (though we should still expect not all of our judgments will stick. but we’re definitely not there yet for Francis, Benedict, or John Paul II. As an ordinary layperson, I just don’t need to do much scrutiny or tea-reading on a day to day basis. I’m pretty sure that, if there’s an actual problem, I’ll notice, without having to turn myself into a theological seismograph in the meantime.

The whole thing reminds me of a part of the Acts of the Apostles that recently turned up in the Mass readings.

When they heard this, they were enraged and wanted to kill [the disciples]. But a Pharisee in the council named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, respected by all the people, stood up and ordered the men to be put outside for a short time. Then he said to them, “Fellow Israelites,[ consider carefully what you propose to do to these men. For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him; but he was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and disappeared. After him Judas the Galilean rose up at the time of the census and got people to follow him; he also perished, and all who followed him were scattered. So in the present case, I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone; because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!”

I’ll worry most about things and people that exist closer to me, where I don’t need quite so much discernment and telepathy to work out what would be useful for me to do.


TOPICS: Catholic; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 05/11/2014 3:28:06 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; GregB; Berlin_Freeper; SumProVita; narses; bboop; SevenofNine; Ronaldus Magnus; tiki; ...
Modern media, especially the modern Catholic media, has brought the pope into our homes, across the radio, in television, and into our niche media world. He's in the browser of many Catholics every day. And conservative Catholic media relies heavily on the inflated imaginative role of the papacy, just like British tabloids rely on the royals. The pageantry, mystery, and fame attached to the office are a great way of selling magazines, getting clicks, or raising funds. He is the worldwide celebrity that represents "us." He's the reason the Faith gets talked about by others.
From Michael Brendan Dougherty's article link

Good point. Up until recently, few followed the pope. Now, every move and word is analyzed.

2 posted on 05/11/2014 3:30:58 AM PDT by NYer ("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
"Now, every move and word is analyzed."

Yes - every word - because the crazy cacophony of individual interests are looking for any opening, any possibility to gain a foothold against the traditional stand of the Catholic Church.

We have crazed and militant homosexuals, we have diehard abortionists, we have arch-feminists and all sorts of other outliers staring at every word to see if they can make inroads against one of the last bastions of Christian religious normalcy remaining.

Look what happened to the Lutherans, the Anglicans, the Methodists and so many others when they allowed even a toehold by these groups. This world is hurtling towards the toilet at supersonic speed and there are only a few faiths holding on by their fingertips.

3 posted on 05/11/2014 3:42:59 AM PDT by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

Ironic that one Pope was canonized and known for standing up to communism and the current one is an advocate of it.

The Jesuits should have been dissolved a long time ago. A bunch of stinking liberals. The whole order.

Before the Catholic bashers start pouncing, mind your own business or get baptized.


4 posted on 05/11/2014 3:49:39 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Really excellent point. As a kid, the Pope barely registered in Catholic school.


5 posted on 05/11/2014 3:55:46 AM PDT by miss marmelstein (Richard Lives Yet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

The Jesuits should have been dissolved a long time ago. A bunch of stinking liberals. The whole order.


They were. It just didn’t stick, thanks, to of all peoples, the Russians (and Catherine the Great specifically. Unquestioning obedience to all the Pope says, does, and wants apparently applies only when convenient.


6 posted on 05/11/2014 3:56:15 AM PDT by Hieronymus ( (It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. --G.K. Chesterton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail; NYer
I saw this good comment by Arthur MccGowan on a different thread, and I'm taking the liberty of posting this here, as my (borrowed) contribution to good Catholic sense:

"Popes do not issue marching orders daily, weekly, monthly, or even yearly. No person who is well-instructed in the Catholic Faith, and is sincerely practicing it, needs to follow the Pope’s doings and sayings. A Catholic is at liberty to like or dislike any Pope.

"If he dislikes a Pope, he should try to remain unaware of the day-to-day news about the Pope. The notion that all Catholics must “heed the call” of the Pope to conversion, or spiritual renewal or growth, etc., and must therefore read all of the Pope’s interviews and daily homilies, is silly. The call to all those good things is in Scripture and the constant teaching of the Church."


7 posted on 05/11/2014 3:58:58 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The Holy Catholic Church: the more Holy she is, the more Catholic she is.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Interesting article. However, I think she confuses the processes of evaluating historical impact and determining personal holiness. The former definitely requires the passage of time, and it never really reaches a resolution. Historians are still debating Alexander the Great.

On the other hand, the Church is uniquely qualified to rule on individual sanctity, and her criteria are very different from those used in analyzing a historical figure.


8 posted on 05/11/2014 3:59:58 AM PDT by Tax-chick (If I offended you, you needed it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Up until recently, few followed the pope. Now, every move and word is analyzed.


And those who did follow the Pope were generally capable of making theological distinctions. Basic rule of thumb: if it doesn’t eventually end up in the AAS (Acts of the Apostolic See—Rome’s official monthly publications http://www.vatican.va/archive/aas/index_sp.htm ) or is something too large for this but promulgated with great solemnity (like the Code of Canon Law or the Catechism), one can in good conscience ignore it. Even if it does end up in the AAS, not everything has equal weight (Vatican II—Lumen Gentium 23 or 25, I forget which).


9 posted on 05/11/2014 4:12:57 AM PDT by Hieronymus ( (It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. --G.K. Chesterton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer
When they heard this, they were enraged and wanted to kill [the disciples]. But a Pharisee in the council named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, respected by all the people, stood up and ordered the men to be put outside for a short time. Then he said to them, “Fellow Israelites,[ consider carefully what you propose to do to these men. For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him; but he was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and disappeared. After him Judas the Galilean rose up at the time of the census and got people to follow him; he also perished, and all who followed him were scattered. So in the present case, I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone; because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!”

More good advice to those who go bonkers about everything that attacks their sensibilities. We don't need to try to fight every front that seems unholy/immoral to us. As a departed, but prescient old friend used to to say (probably a paraphrase of the paragraph from Acts, "If God ain't in it, it cannot stand; If God is in it, it cannot fail."

What a nice reminder of Who is really in charge and in control.

10 posted on 05/11/2014 4:21:15 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

On the other hand, the Church is uniquely qualified to rule on individual sanctity, and her criteria are very different from those used in analyzing a historical figure.


The old rules laid down by Urban VIII after Trent were very thorough. Paul VI reduced the rigor of some parts of the process, and Pope Francis, by opting for frequent use of equivalent canonization, is doing so further. The process is important, as it is not merely assuring that the person is in heaven, but that the person is an outstanding example to follow.


11 posted on 05/11/2014 4:27:44 AM PDT by Hieronymus ( (It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. --G.K. Chesterton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
The notion that all Catholics must “heed the call” of the Pope to conversion, or spiritual renewal or growth, etc., and must therefore read all of the Pope’s interviews and daily homilies, is silly. The call to all those good things is in Scripture and the constant teaching of the Church."

That's something I needed to understand. Thanks for posting...

12 posted on 05/11/2014 4:32:47 AM PDT by Albion Wilde ("The commenters are plenty but the thinkers are few." -- Walid Shoebat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus
The process is important, as it is not merely assuring that the person is in heaven, but that the person is an outstanding example to follow.

That's true.

However (to elaborate my original point, rather than disagree with yours), we may with confidence recognize that a person is in heaven, and that he lived an exemplary life, without reaching a conclusion regarding the prudence of his every act or every impact of his life.

These are the kinds of questions always open to re-examination. Policies of President George Washington are still debated, for example, and there's no reason they shouldn't be.

13 posted on 05/11/2014 4:39:20 AM PDT by Tax-chick (If I offended you, you needed it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar; Chainmail
Ironic that one Pope was canonized and known for standing up to communism and the current one is an advocate of it.

That is quite an accusation. Please cite and source documentation to justify it.

14 posted on 05/11/2014 4:46:26 AM PDT by NYer ("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer

You guys sound like jihadists.

When’s the meeting?


15 posted on 05/11/2014 4:51:03 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (If you want to keep your dignity, you can keep it. Period........ Just kidding, you can't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Kudos to Arthur McGowan for the initial comment and to you for sharing it on this particular thread. It is most relevant. Happy Mother’s Day!


16 posted on 05/11/2014 5:26:35 AM PDT by NYer ("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

I agree with your point that canonization does not in fact endorse all aspects of the policies, but rapid papal canonization tends in that direction. No popes have been elevated this rapidly in at least the past 1400 years, and it seems to me the rush is more a self-administered pat on the back to assure ourselves that things are ok rather than because the ones being canonized stand head and shoulders above all their predecessors—and pseudo-equivalent canonization in the case of John XXIII (waiving the requirement of a miracle after beatification), makes this seem even more the case.

The rush to canonize made feasible through the easing of the traditional standards makes it so that the quite good and truly outstanding get lumped together and makes it more likely that the person will not be seen in historical perspective. Four miracles, or three miracles and martyrdom, was a much taller standard.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350746?eng=y


17 posted on 05/11/2014 5:29:31 AM PDT by Hieronymus ( (It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. --G.K. Chesterton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Well here’s one for starters. I know the LSM is going to spin it however they want, but what is the Pope doing talking to the UN about wealth redistribution?

He’s guilty of being economically and politically ignorant for opening his mouth about things he doesn’t fully comprehend.

Wealth redistribution from the business end of a gun is not charity.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3154218/posts


18 posted on 05/11/2014 5:51:47 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

Nothing prevents the mistranslated and misunderstood Pope from unambiguously clarifying EXACTLY what he means.


19 posted on 05/11/2014 5:54:15 AM PDT by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

“Ironic that one Pope was canonized and known for standing up to communism and the current one is an advocate of it.”

It amazes me how people make things up out of thin air - like claiming the pope advocates communism.


20 posted on 05/11/2014 5:59:11 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar
Ironic that one Pope was canonized and known for standing up to communism and the current one is an advocate of it.

A point that is lost on many of the current pope's defenders. One led people to freedom, while the current leads them to slavery.

21 posted on 05/11/2014 5:59:49 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

“Ironic that one Pope was canonized and known for standing up to communism and the current one is an advocate of it”

“May the Lord preserve him, and give him life, and make him blessed upon the earth, and deliver him not up to the will of his enemies. [Psalm 40:3] O God, Shepherd and Ruler of all Thy faithful people, look mercifully upon Thy servant Francis, whom Thou hast chosen as shepherd to preside over Thy Church. Grant him, we beseech Thee, that by his word and example, he may edify those over whom he hath charge, so that together with the flock committed to him, may he attain everlasting life. Through Christ our Lord. Amen”


22 posted on 05/11/2014 6:14:05 AM PDT by NKP_Vet ("It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died;we should thank God that such men lived" ~ Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus
the quite good and truly outstanding get lumped together

That's a good point.

23 posted on 05/11/2014 6:32:48 AM PDT by Tax-chick (If I offended you, you needed it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

How am I making it up out of thin air? I provided a link and others have said, if he’s being misinterpreted it’s up to him to clarify what he means.

Why is he lobbying the UN for wealth redistribution? Call it whatever you want, but it’s not the Popes business to ask governments to redistribute wealth. When government does it it’s theft, not charity.

I don’t trust Jesuits. They have their own agenda and it doesn’t include me.


24 posted on 05/11/2014 6:37:39 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

He’s not talking about “wealth redistribution.” He said that the benefits of wealth should be distributed to the rest of society, and while I think he tends to be a little statist, when he said the State, he meant that it was the responsibility of governments to make sure that all of society benefitted. For example, why do certain Latin American countries, which have good upper level economies, where the rich are heavily taxed and foreign companies even more heavily taxed, find themselves unable to provide running water for their towns and even parts of their cities?

I think the problem was the use in the English translation of the word “redistributed” and the fact that people never read the whole thing and automatically assumed that he was saying wealth had to be redistributed.


25 posted on 05/11/2014 6:37:53 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail
Yes - every word - because the crazy cacophony of individual interests are looking for any opening, any possibility to gain a foothold against the traditional stand of the Catholic Church.
We have crazed and militant homosexuals, we have diehard abortionists, we have arch-feminists and all sorts of other outliers staring at every word to see if they can make inroads against one of the last bastions of Christian religious normalcy remaining.
Look what happened to the Lutherans, the Anglicans, the Methodists and so many others when they allowed even a toehold by these groups. This world is hurtling towards the toilet at supersonic speed and there are only a few faiths holding on by their fingertips.

The crazed and the militant...great description. Those folks want the easy path. The Catholic Church doesn't, at first glance, extol the easy path. It teaches and extols GOD'S path, Jesus' path. Jesus SHOWED us that path.

It may seem difficult in our lives, but our lives are so short, aren't they?
For ETERNITY it's a path we want with all our minds and hearts, for THAT is the path to our Creator.

26 posted on 05/11/2014 6:38:50 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: livius

Does this Pope speak English? Serious question. He sure seems to be misquoted or misinterpreted a lot.


27 posted on 05/11/2014 6:41:25 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar
We don't "follow" the Pope. We follow Jesus. The Pope is simply His Vicar on earth.

From Google: A vicar (/ˈvɪkər/; Latin: vicarius) is a representative, deputy or substitute; anyone acting "in the person of" or agent for a superior (compare "vicarious" in the sense of "at second hand").
In this sense, the title is comparable to lieutenant. Linguistically, vicar is cognate with the English prefix "vice", similarly meaning "deputy".

Deputy/Lieutenant Francis I

28 posted on 05/11/2014 6:45:00 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

“How am I making it up out of thin air?”

Simple: He’s never advocated communism.

“I provided a link and others have said, if he’s being misinterpreted it’s up to him to clarify what he means.”

If you’re misrepresenting him - and you are - it’s up to you to stop doing it. Take some responsibility for your actions. You made a claim. Show me where he ever once advocated communism. And explain this away: http://www.newsy.com/videos/pope-francis-the-marxist-ideology-is-wrong/

“Why is he lobbying the UN for wealth redistribution?”

I don’t think he’s lobbying anyone. I think he is saying those who have can help those who don’t and that governments can organize this through taxation. I don’t think that’s a good idea. To me it smacks of forced “charity” but he is entitled to his view. What I don’t do is make things up that are untrue. I’m leaving that to you.

“Call it whatever you want, but it’s not the Popes business to ask governments to redistribute wealth.”

Sure it is - if that’s what he believes will help the poor. You can disagree with his ideas, but to say he has no business doing it is at the very least hypocritical since anyone could just as easily point out it isn’t your business what the pope does. See how that works?

“When government does it it’s theft, not charity.”

I agree it isn’t charity, although I can’t call all taxation outright theft since we agree to it in some fashion.

“I don’t trust Jesuits.”

I don’t trust people who make things up. Which distrust is based more on reality here?

“They have their own agenda and it doesn’t include me.”

And yet you’re posting about something that you say doesn’t include you?


29 posted on 05/11/2014 6:52:32 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

No, he knows very little English. He knows Italian (his family background is Italian) and he knows German from his studies.


30 posted on 05/11/2014 6:53:56 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Ok. Wealth redistribution is not technically communism, it’s also not slavery, but it is the same concept and it is morally wrong.

Fine let the Pope do what he thinks is best, although I disagree and think he doesn’t understand basic economics well enough to speak about them competently. He also provides a lot of undue stress on Catholics who don’t agree with his “socialistic’ viewpoints.

Jesuits are the same order who covered the cross at Georgetown University when Obama spoke. Some defenders of the faith. As a Catholic, they don’t like conservatives, so I may not fit their plans, but the Jesuits don’t represent most Catholics.

I had high hopes for this outsider Pope and they are diminishing day by day. There’s only so much you can attribute to spin.


31 posted on 05/11/2014 7:14:28 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

He speaks some English, but something like this is written in either Spanish or Italian and then translated into English. Once upon a time, they used to write in Latin, and frankly, I think that’s better, because the translation was then going to be a little more standardized.

I suspect that the original in this case was probably Spanish, and what he said was “repartir los beneficios,” which would mean distribute or share the benefits. It seemed to me, when I read the whole statement, that it was actually carefully written precisely so it would NOT seem like Marxism, while at the same time urging governments to make sure that the citizens benefitted from wealth-creating activities (and the big problem in the developing world and increasingly in the US is that governments are really kelptocracies, and any money that goes into them stays in the bureaucracy or even in the personal bank accounts of the people at the top).

I think he should have been more direct and given examples. But on the whole, once I actually read the statement and not what the press said about it, my blood pressure went back to normal and I realized that it actually wasn’t a bad statement.


32 posted on 05/11/2014 7:20:39 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: livius

Maybe he’s too nice and not cynical enough like me to realize what you said about Kleptocrats.

What this is all about is that, like it or not, the Pope needs to be a bit more media savvy.

His words have a lot more power than he may or may not realize.


33 posted on 05/11/2014 7:24:08 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

It’s not about you. Whether you trust me or not is irrelevant. I don’t speak for a billion Catholics.

I also didn’t make it up. Euphemisms may make things sound less onerous than they are, but nevertheless they remain what they are.


34 posted on 05/11/2014 7:27:26 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

In other words, you have no actual proof whatsoever for your claim that the pope advocates communism. It was a false claim made up out of thin air just as I said.

Thanks for playing.


35 posted on 05/11/2014 7:28:10 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I’m a little puzzled, because he never says “wealth redistribution” and yet the press and 95% of the Freeper universe is claiming that he was out there urging the seizure of property...

He urges personal charity and tells government institutions that they must make sure that wealth benefits everybody. Governments already collect taxes on individuals and businesses and other forms of income and even wealth, so it’s not as if nobody was paying taxes until the Pope came along. But in some countries, even where the wealthy pay a huge percentage in taxes...the poor still don’t have running water in their villages, there’s about one watt of electricity available, and the police services are so corrupt that crime is out of control so people don’t even have basic stability.

I think he’s a little too trusting that the state will be honorable - which is a puzzling attitude for an Argentinian! - but I certainly don’t think he’s advocating for Marxism.


36 posted on 05/11/2014 7:28:26 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: livius

I agree with. The press puts words in his mouth. The pope IS too trusting that governments will be honorable. I think that many popes have suffered from that mistaken belief.


37 posted on 05/11/2014 7:30:06 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: NYer

This pope is clearly some sort of Marxist agent.


38 posted on 05/11/2014 7:30:42 AM PDT by riri (Plannedopolis-look it up. It's how the elites plan for US to live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

I agree that he needs to be more careful, because anything that can be misinterpreted most definitely will be misinterpreted, probably intentionally.

The media and the left (one and the same, alas) have an idea of what they want to hear him say, and even if he doesn’t say anything remotely like that, they’ll find a couple of words that they can interpret to their liking.

And of course, note that nothing he said about protecting life from conception to natural death, about the culture of death being imposed on the world, about freedom, etc. was mentioned at all.

I think he’s learning; I doubt that he is enjoying the experience, because he probably did trust the press too much if only because they flattered him by making him a media hero right out of the gate (because they hated BXVI so much).


39 posted on 05/11/2014 7:33:25 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

Why do you say that about Pope Francis? The Catholic Church in no way is a proponent of Communism.

Source or just your thoughts?


40 posted on 05/11/2014 7:39:02 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

You are correct. I misspoke.

I still don’t like the fine line he walks with this kind of speech.

The UN is the biggest sinkhole of charitable donations in history. Appealing to them is a lost cause at best. They’d love nothing better than to enrich themselves and further their own Marxist agenda with more donations.

I’m sorry I over reacted, but legitimizing that cesspool irritates me.


41 posted on 05/11/2014 7:42:57 AM PDT by mindburglar (When Superman and Batman fight, the only winner is crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar
What do you know about subsidiarity? That's what the Pope is talking about.

Repeat After Me: Subsidiarity & Solidarity
Subsidiarity and Human Dignity
Does the USCCB Understand Subsidiarity?
[CATHOLIC CAUCUS] The Principle of Subsidiarity
[CATHOLIC/ORTHODOX CAUCUS] Subsidiarity Over Social Justice
What is the USCCB’s problem with subsidiarity?
Subsidiarity: Where Justice and Freedom Coexist
Health reform still full of thorny problems for Catholics (Vasa comes out for subsidiarity)
What You [Catholics] Need to Know: Subsidiarity, [Catholic/Orthodox Caucus]
Catholic Word of the Day: SUBSIDIARITY, 06-11-09

42 posted on 05/11/2014 7:43:36 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

This pope seems to tend to speak first and think later - or perhaps he simply does not yet understand how his words will get twisted. I’m not sure. I also think he - like the previous three or four popes - doesn’t know too much about how economics actually works. I also think he tends to assume too much goodness on the part of governments. I would agree with you on all of that without any hesitation.


43 posted on 05/11/2014 8:09:09 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998; mindburglar

Indeed. Particularly demonstrating how much they fail to grasp what communism was.


44 posted on 05/11/2014 8:22:37 AM PDT by wonkowasright (Wonko from outside the asylum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

Please provide substantive proof that Pope Francis advocates communism....and I AM baptized. ;-)

PS. The media/present-day press is not considered “substantive.”


45 posted on 05/11/2014 11:48:02 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo....Sum Pro Vita - Modified Descartes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar

Still waiting for your source for this statement.


46 posted on 05/11/2014 11:52:32 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
This pope seems to tend to speak first and think later - or perhaps he simply does not yet understand how his words will get twisted.

What concerns me most of all is that, after some interview or comments from the pope, I can never really be sure just what he really did mean us to understand from his words. It seems that no matter how simple the question or situation he manages to issue a statement that can always be understood as meaning any number of usually quite contradictory things, and among which there is never a particularly good reason to assume one over the other. What teaching value is there in that? Don't get me wrong, I am sure he is sincere and all that, but that doesn't really make the situation any better.

47 posted on 05/11/2014 1:23:37 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I think if you look up a couple of posts you will see where he admitted his error and apologised for it.


48 posted on 05/11/2014 1:25:56 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mindburglar; vladimir998

I agree with both of you. I think Pope Francis is actually quite orthodox but he’s naïve, trusting, and there are serious problems not only with what his casual statements but with what he allows to be said about him or “quoted” by people who claim that he told them such and such in a private conversation. Since these things always agree with what the media wants, they are picked up and broadcast, and I hope he gets more savvy very soon!

Also, I think he needs a better press secretary. The current one did no favors for BXVI and is doing none for Francis, who kept him on. I don’t think he’s ill-intentioned, just an incompetent Italian.

JPII had a Spaniard, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, who was smart (and an Opus Dei member) and managed to keep things in hand. I don’t think the current one is up to it, and he embarrassed BXVI on a number of occasions and is obviously doing the same with Francis.

That said, I think Francis is more leftwing and VII than I would like, but I don’t think he’s anywhere near what the press and the German bishops would like him to be.

Also, I think all popes should stick to religion and stop talking about economics, about which they know nothing. And few to none of their advisors know anything about it either, and 80 year old cardinals (apparently among his “advisors”) are surely totally clueless on the subject.


49 posted on 05/11/2014 2:47:11 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson