- This topic has 4 voices and 25 replies.
-
Posts
-
Has the Pope tried to make sure his comments aren't being taken out of context? Has the Vatican even commented on how the media is portraying all of this?
Not that I have heard yet. One would think, however, that he will reaffirm doctrine on those hot button issues in the future. But keep in mind that the pope speaks to the world, and so if there is distortion in a few places of the American media, it might be overblown. I think it will be more important how the bishops react to it and other theologians. You are probably right, though, that there will be enough concern to merit a response by the Pope in some form, at some point in time (though probably not in a press release).
If the message is being distorted it is being distorted in the German media too. I live in Bavaria, 70% Catholic, and people around here are saying the same thing I am.
What do you mean they are “saying the same thing”? Tell me your honest answer – how do you interpret the paragraphs I quoted above in light of his larger interview? Do you think he really gave liberals a cause for “celebration”? The only real way I could see that is if he somehow stated it was not immoral to engage in homosexual sex or have abortions or use contraception.
The Pope is at a minimum a crappy messenger. He did it yet again: Pope attacks global economics for worshipping 'god of money'Either he is doing this stuff on purpose or he is as simple as he would have us believe. Either way he is unfit to be Pope in my opinion.
Haven't most popes spoken against the love of money though?
Well, not just the popes....1 Tim 6:10....now why is this controversial? Scout, I get the feeling that politics or cynicism has consumed your perspective. I don't know how you can say that Pope Francis is "unfit" when the College of Cardinals - who are presumably much wiser in the government of the Church than any of us outsiders - elected him. What if this is exactly the message the Holy Spirit wanted to send forth at this time in history?I think when we hear American politicians speak, we understand them in light of American history and politics. This is not the case when we hears other world leaders speak. What is plaguing the world is not necessarily what is plaguing America. What may sound "liberal" to our American ears may be a legitimate message on a more global scale.As an American, I can say that capitalism is the best system we've got and that it is much better than socialism. But are there dangers in any economic system - capitalist, socialist, or otherwise? Certainly. Is it good in the world that more and more wealth is concentrating into the hands of fewer people? From a practical perspective, I don't think so. Ideally, we should want some level of wealth to be shared by many, which helps raise society as a whole rather than a few who are powerful and able to control it. Now, is it moral for massive wealth to be held by the few? I don't know that this is immoral, except it is certainly immoral for gains to be made through immoral means (effectively making this out to be worship of money). Also, even if massive wealth was gained morally, the rich have a duty to help the poor, to protect their workers, and so forth. Have the rich been gaining wealth immorally or neglecting the poor? Probably. It may not be a new problem in the scheme of recent history, but it may be one that needs to be pointed out. If not Pope Francis, then who?
Alright, so I just saw a report on CNN which interviewed a lesbian Catholic woman “married” and with a child. The report told how she was raised a Catholic and liked Catholicism and how she felt hope after Pope Francis' statement. My reaction: on one hand, the media report was ridiculous since it distorted the Pope's message, and it also conveyed a misunderstanding of Church doctrine. And if the woman was willing to defy the Church's teachings by “marrying” another woman, why does she care what the Catholic Church's view of her actions are?On the other hand, it is positive that people in the homosexual community recognize they are not meant to be ostracized but are invited back into the Church. This does not mean that they are meant to retain sinful ways, but that there is hope and mercy with God.Perhaps Pope Francis will expound more on this matter in the near future to stem some of the distortions taken from his interview.
Regardless of the doctrine of infallibility at the end of the day the Pope is still human. Perhaps I am being too cynical but I still hold that at a minimum he is crappy at getting his point across. You are right that at the heart of all his recent utterances is nothing new. What gets me is that the way he is saying these he leaves it up to interpretation what he is really trying to say. I guess what I really want is for him to be unequivocal and not leave any wiggle room for people to hear what they want when he makes a statement. I seriously get the impression that he is just saying what is on the top of his mind without considering the wider implications of the way his words can be twisted. Like I said, he strikes me as being a populist. I don't want a Pope who is a populist, I want one who is stern and unbending when it comes to upholding doctrine. Maybe that is why I liked Benedict so much.
I saw an interesting piece in Time today that has a bearing on this discussion. I’m Still Not Going Back to the Catholic ChurchI still cannot make up my mind completely but the more I think and pray about this the more I am starting to think like the author of this piece. I don't want to go there bu I may find myself doing it anyway. What I am seeing is a Pope who engages in freeform rationalization and while not discarding doctrine seems fairly adept at ignoring it from my perspective.
I like this Pope as far as what he is trying to do, but I'm afraid he is going to make some enemies in the Vatican with such ill worded statements that can be taken out of context. Francis needs a better PR staff I think.
I have decided that like a boil on my behind this Pope is a flaw that must be tolerated. I do not have to like him but I won't let him drive me from the church. His time too will pass. The question is how much damage he will do before he leaves. The NYT also has a piece that vaguely condemns Catholics like me that think the Pope is at best a poor messenger and at worst a destructive element within the church.BTW, did anybody see the story Drudge linked to about Atheist mega-churches?
