Get updates from Catholic and Enjoying It! delivered straight to your inbox
Pope Benedict XVI, that is. And the Political Leaders were members of the European Parliament.
Obviously, he is (as one of my readers really actually said of Francis) a “Stalinist“.
Lifesite news never told me this!
The more flak Pope Francis is getting, the more I’m liking him. Is that wrong?
No. In a strange way it’s liberating to know that “we stand alone” and that the Gospels are being validated right before our eyes. If anything proves that the Catholic Church holds the truth it’s the fact that there are no political parties who support us.
If FOX news says it’s true so it must be true. That Judge guy said it. It was obvious he’s never actually read anything the Pope has said but in the segment the person interviewing him said he’s a “devout Catholic.” That’s a totally unqualified statement but it apparently makes him an expert.
The right’s Napolitano is the same as the left’s Pelosi. Anytime someone self professes as a “devout Catholic” I know more often than not that the next statement will be how they disagree with the Church.
And Drudge is having a nutty. ” Vatican has strictest immigration policy in the world” “the popes border wall” with a pic of the Vatican wall. Just a couple headlines. Gotta laugh.
The “Vatican Immigration Policy” is the new trope. Never mind the Vatican is a city state consisting of 109 acres or so…
The Right is really digging a vast hole for themselves. What a bunch of idiots! If anyone was going to *fix* their problems it was the Catholics. Now they’ve all but ensure the demise of their party.
Did the Pope also talk about the grave and pressing sin of contraceptive use in his address? Euthanasia? Torture? Yeah, he mentioned slavery, but what about *human trafficking*; he never said *those* words from his mouth! What about violence against and sexual abuse of adolescents? Rampant substance abuse in America? Quick! Someone get the Pope back to Congress! He didn’t talk them! We just don’t *know* where he stands on these and all the other sins he didn’t explicitly mention! /sarcasm
I actually pity the reactionaries.
Two weeks ago I lent my lawnmower, with a full tank of gas, to my neighbor Frank. When he returned it the tank was empty. I couldn’t believe it. I watched the Pope’s entire address waiting for him to say, “Hey, Frank what kind of guy doesn’t refill a lawnmower tank?” He didn’t even mention it! Obviously, he’s a socialist.
I have a feeling abortion is a little more commonly thought about and actively supported by more Americans than, say, Euthanasia. And generally you’re hard pressed to find many Americans who support human trafficking nowadays. Abortion and contraceptives? Why, not only is the body count in the tens of millions, but they are actively supported by the majority of Americans – and American Catholics. That seems to be the issue. Sort of like visiting Alabama in 1835 and failing to mention that slavery thing. Let’s face it, it’s not the ‘Right’ that’s freaking out, but the ‘Left’ that is having a field day and dancing in the streets with the knowledge, as CBS stated this morning, that you can now fall afoul of the Church on certain teachings associated with more liberal sensitivities, and…no problem. Will the strategy work? Will the approach of a quiet, understated dig at a couple things that result in the death and suffering of tens of millions eventually bring about change? We’ll have to wait to see.
How DARE you excuse the Pope for not addressing euthansia. You fool. Lots of politicians, doctors, and people are out there condoning this sin, and you just brush it aside because it isn’t abortion? Are you Catholic? Do you care? Do you know how many people are being trafficked nowadays? Do you think your Congress is doing enough to destroy this sin? Do you care? DO YOU? I demand a Pope who will explicitly mention these evils that you stupidily ignore. Gee, you’re no better than that Francis guy, Dave G. /sarcasm
…Do you get the point yet?
Lots perhaps. But not as many as actively and knowingly support and advocate for contraceptives and abortion. Including the majority of American Catholics. That’s the point. And of course not just that, but the entire culture of post-Christian sexual ethics – embraced by more than one rascal who considers himself otherwise quite conservative – in an era of 30 million AIDS victims that makes the demand for abortion so necessary. Not to mention the endless harm and suffering brought about by that sexual ethic. There’s not much I heard the Pope say I have issues with. I am mightily puzzled by his continued insistence to mention that side of the modern coin so seldom, so subtly, or sometimes not at all. It’s not as if he’s shy about condemning what he thinks needs condemning.
So, despite widespread acceptance of substance abuse in this country (especially with alcohol, and especially among young adults), a significant and growing acceptance of euthansia in this country (most recently in California), indifference or a head-buried-in-the-sand attitude among many Americans regarding human trafficking (part of which occurs in this country), and a widespread immoral culture that fuels adolescent violence and sexual abuse in this country; since these things aren’t abortion or contraceptives, you’re not bothered by the Pope not explicitly naming these *significant* issues from the Pope’s address to Congress, just the issues *you* care about. Got it.
“There’s not much I heard the Pope say I have issues with.”
From your perspective, Dave G., it seems as if the Pope should’ve just mentioned the word “abortion” or “contraceptives” throughout the entire address, and you’d be a happy camper. That would be fine if Catholicism entailed only condemning abortion and contraceptive use. Which it doesn’t.
No, not just the ones I care about. And he wouldn’t have to have confined it to just abortion. But more bluntly (and we all know he can be blunt) taking aim at the other side of that societal coin that has, in its own way, led to the death and slaughter of tens of millions, as well as the broken lives, spirits and emotions of endless tens upon tens of millions more. That he deliberately hasn’t touched on one significant part of the social decay isn’t just cause for concern for some, but based on the news coverage, is increasingly cause for celebration from a great many more. Including Catholics who seem to think their desires and preferences are, finally, after all these decades, being affirmed.
“No, not just the ones I care about.”
Don’t be dishonest. You replied to my original post by lightly dismissing *major* sins and crimes that American law and culture have either been lax in dealing with or even outright supported. No, you couldn’t even pull an ad hoc move and say, “Okay, fine; the Pope should have mentioned those sins too *including* abortion”; no. you made it clear that Catholic teaching for you only deals with abortion and contraceptives. Here’s the funny thing: the reader who complained about the address in the first place (and whom Mark Shea replied to) didn’t even *mention* contraceptives! *I* did, then you *cherry-picked* that from my post while ignoring the vicious sins that destroy American society. You let the mask slip, Dave G. Don’t backpedal now.
This is all irrelevant, anyway. As I stated elsewhere, the murderers will gladly play word games with you, and anyone with any ounce of reason knows what the Pope meant. If you want to worry about those who have successfully duped you into thinking they don’t know what the Pope meant, then the fault is yours.
Well, heh, I’m not being dishonest. I’m just noticing what many in the media seem to be noticing – and are quite happy with. That an entire swath of what is eating away culture and destroying lives by the tens of millions hasn’t really been mentioned much, apart from possibly a few subtle digs. Why? I don’t know. It’s just been noticed. And I myself have noticed this. I don’t see it as these sins and those sins. They all seem to be different sides of the same coin. Part of that coin Pope Francis has been more than willing to speak out against bluntly, and directly. And yet one has received little at all. It’s just noteworthy. And that’s all by myself noticing it. That many in the press are taking it and running with it and coming to conclusions is up to them. But it is something I noticed. Still, he’s at the UN today, so we’ll see. Perhaps he was just waiting for a more opportune moment.
There’s nothing subtle about protecting and defending human life *at every stage of its development*. Again, you are giving credit to those who want to play stupid (they’ve also done this when you use the word “abortion”, by the way; they use euphemisms such as “sexual and reproductive rights”, “procedures”, etc.)
Pope Francis emphasizes this essential and inaleinable right to life again, when he spoke about the sacredness of every human life *including the unborn* at his UN address. People with common sense know exactly what that logically entails (that is, *thou shall not kill them*). When you pretend that they don’t know otherwise, you display your own ignorance. Stop joining the ranks of fools, Dave.
Wait, did you even talk about the other sins in your post? Because lots of people aren’t suffering and dying from destructive substance abuse, right, Dave G.? Because an entire political party doesn’t glorify torture, right, Dave G.? Because just a few teenagers experience violence and sexual abuse, right Dave G.? Don’t you think about the CHILDREN, Dave G.?
(I hope I don’t have to put the “/sarcasm” at the end of this post as well, Dave G. Sigh, okay. I’ll explicitly type it so you don’t get hopelessly confused about what I mean, just like you did about that Francis guy.)
There’s that rugged sense of personal responsibility we’ve come to know and admire.
It’s the Holy Father who should be reforming American barbarity!
Not catching that one at all. But for what it’s worth, knowing the Catholics I’ve known in my life, I was just as puzzled by Benedict’s apparent reluctance to confront certain issues more directly than he did. But then again, I do think that the culture of greed and the culture of hedonism are closer linked than the red state/blue state narrative would have us believe.
The “red state/blue state” divide is not in substance, it is in style – the blue state worships mammon through control of money and creation of programs to control the poor, and moloch through abortion, the “red state” worship mammon through adulation of the rich and “ignoring” the poor, and moloch through wars and the death penalty. Both sides like their sex, and drugs and rock and roll – just different styles of each.
Yeah. Two different roads to get to the same place. I remember being in college back in the 80s, those who were ‘liberal’ constantly yelled against the greed of Reagan’s America. And yet, how often did I notice them gobbling up the goodies and the cars and the home entertainment centers that red blood ‘conservatives’ were buying. Conservatives, by the way, who were more than happy with the MTV sex culture that was becoming the norm,.
Ha… remember Jimmy Swaggart? Perfect example. Damning MTV while secretly masturbating to Madonna (figuratively, of course).
Eggsacklee! The Left media is totally trolling the Right at the moment and they are falling for it hook, line, and stinker. Essentially, what they’re doing is making sure that, whoever wins the Republican nomination, they won’t get a single Catholic vote. All they have to do is poke a little and the bigoted, anti-Catholic GOP spills their guts with their openly and unapologetic anti-Catholic rants. It’s a bit painful to watch actually, really dumb people tripping over themselves from such an obvious troll attack. There really is no coming back from this. The Left have many tweets, posts, and sound bytes to hold onto for October when it comes time to remind Catholics that the Right wants to put them back on crosses like the good ol’ days.
I’m just wagging my head because they literally handed victory over to Hilary. The sad part is, the refrain will be that it’s all the Catholics’ fault.
I’m not really watching the politics side of it. I’m noticing the growing joy from the media that we finally have a Pope who is, as Charlie Rose put it, passionate where the Left is passionate, and willing to agree to disagree where he isn’t. As a Slate editorial said, it’s a little like the Matrix. You mean I’ll be able to dodge bullets? No, I’m saying you won’t have to. Same here. Increasingly the media, and those who advocate for issues associated with the Left, are saying it’s not that Pope Francis is going to change Church teaching where causes dear to Liberalism are concerned. It’s that he’s going to make it so he doesn’t have to. Based on the coverage, and the embrace by those who advocate for such issues, that seems to be the growing consensus. And the fact that Pope Francis has, at this point, clearly and deliberately resisted speaking to those issues directly, appears to be affirming that view with each passing day.
They are trolling… that’s why. They know that kind of reported sticks in the craw of Conservative Christians (mostly WASPs) who prefer the punitive parts of the Gospel (since they think that they are automatically bound for heaven… that they’ve already got their ticket). And it’s worked remarkably well. If you can’t see how masterful it has been then that’s too bad. But come November, it’s going to be that much more difficult for the Republicans to muster Catholic votes when there are so many delicious sound bytes from the mouthpieces on the Right lamenting that the days of oppression of Catholics in the US have somewhat dissipated in the last couple of centuries. I’m telling you, the Right shot themselves in the foot here by taking their mask off and revealing their bigoted anti-Catholic viewpoint. The fell for it hook, line, and stinker. It shows how unsophisticated they are when they can be trolled by an unsophisticated media so easily. It’s over now. Dumb asses.
Again, I haven’t really thought about how it impacts the political races. I just know that most Catholics in America are more than happy with those sides of the moral debates labeled ‘liberal.’ Without Catholics, abortion rights and gay marriage wouldn’t have made it anywhere. And I don’t consider those things ‘eh, no biggie.’ They are part of a bigger coin that is laying waste to endless millions and rotting civilization in the process. Part of that coin Pope Francis has lashed out against, and with good cause. I have little issue with what he has said. But like I keep saying to David below, it’s not as if I’m shocked because the Pope repeatedly refuses to go after this whole red fire hydrant instead of blue fire hydrant debate. It’s that a part of modernity that is every bit as disastrous, damning, and destructive as the greed and abuse of capitalism is being taken as nothing other than a side issue with which we can lovingly and respectfully disagree. Or so appears to be the view of a growing number of commentators who represent those moral views associated with liberalism. First one I heard say it was Chris Matthews. Since then I’ve been listening and reading, and that seems to be the growing consensus.
Heresyyyyy!!!!!! *Runs screaming through town*
If he were truly a Stalinist, at least we wouldn’t have to suffer the griping of his critics for much longer…Uncle Joe wasn’t one to let ill will fester between him and his constituents.
Why anticipate the negative response, from Catholics who view abortion as the preeminent moral issue, to Francis’ address?
Rightly or wrongly in the context of addressing Congress, does anyone imagine Francis restating the warning to Catholic politicians that Benedict gave…
Yet, a mention of abortion would have caused a moment’s hesitation to Jon O’Brien (Catholics For Choice), who thinks Francis’ “Year of Mercy” is intended to get bishops to lighten up already…
Francis’ lack of precision at times causes me difficulty. But the only two concrete problems I have are had because two individuals I deeply respect have stated so…Phil Lawler questions the wisdom of plunging full speed ahead on “unsettled” scientific questions…
…and Ed Peters (and Fr. Gerald Murray, J.C.D.) wonders who should be satisfied with the current “Mitis ludex”?
Scripture has direct words about the rich and their obligation in caring for the poor, and Jesus succinctly teaches the challenge and burden the rich face as they are so comfortable with their material well-being.
So I think some Americans are defensive as Pope Francis is emphasizing solidarity with the poor and calling us to do more:
“The great danger in today’s world, pervaded as it is by consumerism, is the desolation and anguish born of a complacent yet covetous heart, the feverish pursuit of frivolous pleasures, and a blunted conscience. Whenever our interior life becomes caught up in its own interests and concerns, there is no longer room for others, no place for the poor. God’s voice is no longer heard, the quiet joy of his love is no longer felt, and the desire to do good fades. This is a very real danger for believers too. Many fall prey to it, and end up resentful, angry and listless.”
Most of us here visiting Mark’s blog fall into the category of being rich when compared to the less fortunate around the globe and those who lived before us in more materially difficult eras. We are rich by so many standards–even blue collar types–, so I suspect those critical of the pope not being specific in mentioning abortion are in some ways being defensive.
We know that it is easier for the camel to pass thru the eye of a needle than for the rich to enter heaven, and, again, most of us here are quite rich materially. Thus so much emphasis on the poor and knowing the limitations of our material attractions can result in a bit of defensiveness towards the pope’s message.
Glad to see that no one could possibly have a rational reason to wish some more things were in the speech. All those critics are just reactionaries who hate the commie pope and wish he would sell all the Vatican Gold(tm).
Francis said this:
“The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development.”
Benedict said this:
“As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable. Among these the following emerge clearly today:
– protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; …”
Really, Mark, you can’t see a difference between “protect and defend human life at every stage of development” and “protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death”? But I’m sure you can.
No, actually. I can’t. Because there isn’t one except for accusers bound and determined to gather firewood for the auto de fe.
So silly. Everybody but the Greatest Catholics of All Time knows perfectly well that Francis was reiterating the Church’s teaching on the dignity of human life from conception till natural death. NPR certainly got the message. But the Greatest Catholics of All Time have turned everything into a litmus test. Grotesque.