More Proof of What a Liberal Disaster Pope Francis is

Here he is writing with naked approval of socialism:

Socialism took two main paths — the democratic and the totalitarian one. Democratic socialism became a healthy counterbalance to radically liberal positions in both existing models. It enriched and corrected them. It proved itself even when religious confessions took over. In England, it was the Catholic party, which felt at home neither in the Protestant-Conservative nor in the Liberal camp. Also in Wilhelmine Germany, the Catholic center could continue to feel closer to democratic socialism than to the conservative powers. In many ways, democratic socialism stands and stood close to the Catholic social teachings. It in any case contributed a substantial amount to the education of social conscience.”

If only we could have a *real* Catholic pope, like Benedict XVI, instead of that liberal disaster, Francis.

Oh. Wait.

Benedict XVI wrote that.

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!

Patheos Catholic LogoCLICK HERE TO "LIKE" PATHEOS CATHOLIC ON FACEBOOK

Caritas in Veritate 7
All of Media History Re: the Church since 2005
Benedict on Creation
Benedict XVI on the Council
  • ivan_the_mad

    Brilliant stuff!

    “If Toynbee’s thesis is correct, is it our task today to try to save Europe by re-introducing the ‘religious impulse’ in a synthesis of what is left of Christianity with the other religious traditions of mankind?”

    “Thank God there are laws which prosecute those who ridicule the faith of Israel, its image of God, and its great figures, and those who look down on the Koran and the fundamental beliefs of Islam.”

    Wow, cf. Nostra Aetate in a big way! Benedict XVI powerfully expresses the wisdom of the Church’s teaching regarding religious liberty. Perhaps there was a more than human wisdom at work in the council, perhaps even something in the Tradition about the exercise of the teaching authority of the Church by the magisterium …

    This is, by the way, eminently conservative:

    “Every state is the creation of Providence, whether or not its religion is Christianity. Christianity is the highest of the religions; but every sincere creed is a recognition of divine purpose in the universe, and all mundane order is dependent upon reverence for the religious creed which a people have inherited from their fathers.” — Russell Kirk, The Conservative Mind

    • Alex

      “Thank God there are laws which prosecute those who ridicule the faith of Israel, its image of God, and its great figures, and those who look down on the Koran and the fundamental beliefs of Islam.”

      I daresay Pius XI’s act of consecration of the human race to the Sacred Heart would nowadays be prosecuted by the secular authorities as hate speech.

      Perhaps there was a more than human wisdom at work in the council

      A more than human intelligence, certainly.

  • Dan C

    When one of Benedict’s first acts was dinner with Hans Kung, Weigel et al were in for a disappointing papacy.

    • Dave G.

      I could understand the concern. Just like those who were concerned when Benedict reached out to the Society of Saint Pius X. I remember the outcries well.

  • Steven Schloeder

    “Naked approval of socialism” is not even intellectually responsible.

    Ratzinger clearly distinguishes between totalitarian socialism and democratic socialism, and roundly condemns the first. And even with democratic socialism, Ratzinger does not give it any sense of “approval” but rather notes that the various political movements sought to fix the problems of the first, and was more conducive and compatible with a Catholic view of politics and social order. The Church properly never advocates any political system so as to not damage the Gospel of Christ by confusing it with or conflating it with a any secular and temporal political solution.

    • Elmwood

      very true.

    • Dan C

      He has less charitable things to say of capitalism. This is as close to approval he gets and C in V is almost an endorsement of 1970’s German Democratic Socialism, marking as it does Paul 6th’s PP.

      Economically, Benedict is left of me.

  • jeanvaljean24601

    Tsk, tsk.
    Trolling, Mister Shea?
    Sehr gut. Carry on.

  • Dave G.

    It seems like I remember conservatives being criticized for saying Benedict wasn’t conservative enough. That was when we first came into the Church. Or are they saying that whatever he was, Francis is more liberal?

    • Dan C

      Upon election, the conservatives were so so excited, they repeated Dowd’s phrase, “the cafeteria is closed” with glee. And the “smaller purer Church” was a cherished goal. Peruse Amy Welborn’s blog and the comments at the time. McClary, Price, Leonardi, Petrik (now bloggers and commentators elsewhere) were eager for this.

      A conservative blog was named “The Cafeteria is Closed.”

      Benedict was disappointing on so many matters to them. He did not live up to expectations.

      • IRVCath

        Interestingly enough, Herr Naus has gone into the fetid swamps of liberalism (in the sense condemned by the Church) from whence he came, when he discovered that Holy Mother Church requires a preferential option for the poor to go with that Latin Mass.

        • Dan C

          Mr. Naus was a strict libertarian from the Austrian school and was supported strongly by fellow conservative Catholics in his heretical economic beliefs. He only was roundly rejected by conservatives when he advocated for gay marriage. Before that…he was a hero.

          • IRVCath

            Oh, he was IIRC beginning to lose followers long before his volte-face on gay marriage, mostly those who started reading in the aftermath of Summorum Pontificum. I should know, I was one of those readers.

            • HornOrSilk

              But… he could write a book!

              • IRVCath

                He did, yes. About subject matter that is unprintable in a family-friendly organ.

      • Dave G.

        That’s what I was remembering. I was new in the Church at that time, so things were flying by left and right (no pun intended). But it seemed like Mark and others were, even then, taking shots at Conservatives who were criticizing Benedict for not being conservative enough, or even calling him liberal regarding various positions.

        Which is why I’m puzzled by the post. I know what it’s trying to say, but it seems that those who criticized Benedict would only agree and say this goes to show. Now if it was taking a shot at the media narrative that Benedict was a conservative (with all the negative that goes with that in the media/liberal narrative), while Francis is so awesome that he’s almost worthy to be in The Beatles, then it would make more sense.

  • Elmwood

    The question is which party is worse: the GOP or Democratic party which represent Protestant Conservatism and Liberalism respectively?

    I guess a pro-life Democrat is much closer to the ideal than an anti-abortion GOPer. But there are no pro-life Democrats.

    • Dan C

      The Republicans represent liberalism most aggressively. Just watch

    • Mark S. (not for Shea)

      “The question is which party is worse: the GOP or Democratic party?”
      .

      That question always reminds me of the other question: “Would you rather burn to death or freeze to death?”
      .
      My answer is the same to both questions: “Neither for me, thanks.”

  • Andy
    • Perry Turchi

      What do you you mean? The context of the quote here was a kind of “tongue in cheek”. It was, as stated, a quote from Cardinal J. Ratzinger and NOT Pope Francis.