Posted on 07/15/2017 1:54:58 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
With a harsh denunciation of American conservatism, published in the semi-official Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica, the Vatican has plunged headlong into a partisan debate in a society that it clearly does not understand, potentially alienating (or should I say, further alienating) the Americans most inclined to favor the influence of the Church.
Why? Why this bitter attack on the natural allies of traditional Catholic teachings? Is it because the most influential figures at the Vatican today actually want to move away from those traditional teachings, and form a new alliance with modernity?
The authors of the essay claim to embrace ecumenism, but they have nothing but disdain for the coalition formed by Catholics and Evangelical Protestants in the United States. They scold American conservatives for seeing world events as a struggle of good against evil, yet they clearly convey the impression that they see American conservativism as an evil influence that must be defeated.
While they are quick to pronounce judgment on American politicians, the two authors betray an appalling ignorance of the American scene. The authors toss Presidents Nixon (a Quaker), Reagan, Bush, and Trump into the same religious classification, suggesting that they were all motivated by “fundamentalist” principles. An ordinary American, reading this account, would be surprised to see the authors’ preoccupation with the late Rev. Rousas Rushdoony and the Church Militant web site: hardly major figures in the formation of American public opinion. The essay is written from the perspective of people who draw their information about America from left-wing journals rather than from practical experience.
The central thesis of the Civilta Cattolica essay is that American conservatives have developed an ideology, based on fundamentalist Protestant beliefs, that sees the US as morally righteous, with other people as enemies and thus justifies conflict and exploitation. Again and again the authors describe this attitude as “Manichean;” they insist on the need to “fight against” it. They insist on tolerance, but they have no tolerance for this attitude. Nowhere in the essay does one find a suggestion of the attitude, made popular by Pope Francis, that the Church should “accompany” sinners. No; the sins of American conservatism are unforgivable.
“Triumphalist, arrogant and vindictive ethnicism is actually the opposite of Christianity,” the authors tell us. So this is a heresy, then—the “Manichean” references were purposeful—and it must be condemned? The Vatican today lauds Martin Luther for his desire to reform the faith, but denounces Evangelical Protestants for—for what, exactly? The Civilta Cattolica essay speaks—in typically incendiary terms—of an “ecumenism of hate.” But it is not obvious, frankly, who hates whom.
As the authors round to their conclusion, they tell us that Pope Francis “wants to break the organic link between culture, politics, institution, and Church.” So the Pontiff intends to detach the Church entirely from public issues, even when moral principles are involved? Yes, the authors reply; in the realm of political affairs, “the Pope does not want to say who is right or who is wrong for he knows that at the root of conflicts there is always a fight for power.” So, for fear of becoming mired in a power struggle, should the Church step aside, eschewing involvement in moral debates—and, more than that, condemn those who do frame public issues in moral terms?
The ignorance and intemperance of the Civilta Cattolica essay are doubly troublesome because the authors are so close to Pope Francis. Journalists often overstate the influence of Vatican officials, identifying mid-level staff members as “key advisers” to the Roman Pontiff. Unfortunately the two authors of this essay really are among the closest advisers to Pope Francis. Father Antonio Spadaro, the editor of Civilta Cattolica, is a regular visitor to the Pope’s office in the St. Martha residence, described by one seasoned Vatican-watcher as the “mouthpiece of Pope Francis.” Marcelo Figueroa, a Presbyterian minister who was friendly with then-Cardinal Bergoglio in Argentina, was hand-picked by the Pontiff to launch a new Argentinean edition of the official Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano. And speaking of official publications, the Spadaro-Figueroa essay appeared in Civilta Cattolica, whose contents are cleared before publication by the Vatican Secretariat of State. It is not unreasonable, then, to assume that this essay reflects the Pope’s own thinking. That is frightening.
I really do not believe that the pope is even a believer.
He worships politics, not Christ.
what we have today is a false Pope.
I really do not believe that the pope is even a believer.
He worships politics, not Christ.
what we have today is a false Pope.
Agreed.
He longs for you, Argentina!
.
Those “Jesuit rascals” stand against every syllable of the word of Yehova, and every person that believes therein.
They truly are the Synagogue of satan!
.
.
>> “To go along with the ignorant, intemperate Vatican assault on traditional Roman Catholicism.” <<
Which is itself an assault on the ancient word of Yehova.
.
In this case -— think about it -— the Catholics are right and the Vatican (the present clerical bureaucracy) is wrong.
.
>> “He worships politics, not Christ.” <<
He worships man.
He trusts in the ascension of man.
He believes that Man will inherit the Earth as a perfectible realm.
He loses big!
.
In this case -— think about it -— the Catholics are right and the Vatican (the present clerical bureaucracy) is wrong.
.
Those among the “Catholics” that are true believers are right.
.
No matter how corrupt the Vatican is, no matter how much the pope hates Catholics!—you don’t accomplidh anything by depriving yourself of the sacraments.
Many people have the false notion that money goes from their local parish to the pope. Not a penny does.
Thanks. Remember when Benedict XVI came here and favorably quoted Hawthorne and de Tocqueville?
Common folk all over the world get America and strive to emigrate here, but too many European intellectuals still don’t get what we’re all about.
Too bad our youth are not taught the ideas of liberty, so that they are equipped to recognize the ideas of tyranny promoted and practiced by "progressives" today.
Like islam. But the Church hasn't the courage to challenge a real demon.
Exactly.
Exactly.
I certainly dont hate Catholics, but I do hate the lies and deception which has taken over the Church.
I hate virtually everything about what the hierarchy has been doing for decades. For example, the bishops have been more interested in being Democrats than standing up for unborn babies. They were on the side of the Communists in Central America. They covered up sex abuse. They condemned or ignored the pro-life Rescue Movement. (One great bishop, René Gracida, was the exception.) They are silent as James Martin, SJ, runs around the country promoting sodomy.
Now, one of the worst bishops in the world has been elected pope, and he’s possibly the worst pope of all time.
But no one is going to make me stop receiving the sacraments.
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.