 |
| ¿Qué tal, padre Jorge? |
One must not neglect the influence of Perónism on Bergoglio. Like all popular 20th century political movements, Perónism is a populistic movement which builds consensus by focusing on a common enemy. The synthesis of South American populism with the 20th century Society of Jesus produces a priest convinced of a dichotomy between those who receiving unfair treatment and their "moochers"—to borrow a term, ironically, from Ayn Rand.
If Bergoglio wants to "smell like the sheep" and influence American politics then perhaps he might have some words about Mr. Sanders, who seems determined the take money out of the hands who contributed to the collection basket and give it to millenniums who frequent independent coffee shops, or perhaps Mr. Rubio, the self-identified Catholic who said he would be willing to attend a gay wedding. Trump has his shortcomings, but his determination to recognize that the United States is a sovereign nation with defined borders is not one of them.
Should the Pope condescend to national affairs in the future I suggest he look to Leo the Great rather than to Leo X for inspiration.
Didn't he recently say he doesn't get involved in national politics (like Italy, for example)?
ReplyDeleteMarco, he said that in the same interview where he bashed Trump as unChristian. He won't get into the debate about homosexual unions in Italy,the neighboring state of the Vatican, but bashes Trump, who is running for president in a country an ocean away , over illegal immigration. It shows what political issues are important to Francis.
ReplyDeleteAnthony
It shows what political issues are important to Francis.
DeleteHe picks interesting battles.
Will ISIS sell tickets to the Papal Decollation?
ReplyDeleteMarco Rubio somedays is a Catholic and some Sundays he goes to Christ Fellowship a community of something-or-others who favor a personal relationship with Christ; i.e. on not requiring any intermediary, like a Pope or Priest.
ReplyDeleteBut as it makes no difference anymore what one is...
Rubio claims to be Catholic and attend mass every Sunday. I don't see any reason to doubt his sincerity, especially since, if he really were more Baptist than Catholic, it would be much more advantageous for him to run as an Evangelical. Some journalists have portrayed Rubio as if he were some kind of Catholic-Protestant hybrid who considers himself both Catholic and Protestant simultaneously. After reading more about his life, the likely reality is kind of sad. He began attending the SBC-affiliated Christ Fellowship in 2000 while away from the Church, but returned to Catholicism in 2004 (while continuing to attend Protestant services at his old chur--I mean "ecclesiatical community"). He claims to fully accept the teaching of the Church and has shown in interviews that he understands that there are differences between Catholicism and Protestantism. But while he personally identifies as Catholic, it looks like his wife is still Protestant and his children are basically being raised as Protestants. You can point fingers at him for flirting with religious indifference and neglecting his obligations to raise his children Catholic, but he is in a difficult situation, especially since his personal life is on full display to the public. Of all the "Catholic" politicians in the US, he is far from the worst, and he is not guilty of anything that the Catholic bishops are not more guilty of doing.
DeleteHe is a Catholic, when he is not a mormon, or a man who goes to a mega-"church" and gives them a lot of money.
Deletehttp://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/10/09/3710527/marco-rubio-religious-syncretism/
Like most politicians he is a liar.
O, and it takes all of 30 seconds to goggle where he goes to Church and Christ Fellowship is teeming with ex-Catholics
The headline is just slander. His family spent a few years in the LDS Church when he was a child. His involvement with Mormonism doesn't really extend beyond that. They are just trying to manufacture scandal. It would make more sense to say that Cardinal Newman was Catholic when he was not an Anglican.
DeleteHe says himself that he attends Catholic mass on Sundays (claims also to attend daily mass) and attends the Protestant services on Saturday nights with his family, and there isn't any reason to doubt him since it would be far more advantageous to him if he identified as Evangelical rather than Catholic. Catholics in mixed households who attend Protestant services are not uncommon, and they are not all "syncretists" or pandering for votes.
Should the Pope condescend to national affairs in the future I suggest he look to Leo the Great rather than to Leo X for inspiration.
ReplyDeleteOr Leo IV, who built that spiffing wall that surrounds most of Vatican City - mostly as a reaction to the interior redecorating efforts in Old St. Peter's by certain overly enthusiastic migrant refugees from North Africa and the Middle East the year previous, as I recall.
Why do you call Pope Francis by a name that sedevacantists would call him by, using his non-papal name as though he weren't the Pope?
ReplyDeleteWhatever he does, and whatever you think about it, he is still the Vicar of Christ and deserves respect.
I recommend this: http://catholicozarks.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-pope-and-illegal-immigration.html
Oh, please grow up. Everyone does it; it's not a problem. John Paul II has been referred to as Wojtyla, Paul VI as Montini, etc., and not as a slight to their office.
DeleteAlso, you might as well say we don't believe Pius XII to have been Pope for using his name Pacelli, as it is used in this blog. It is ridiculous!
Delete@Paul: I never said that either the blogger or any commenters didn't believe that Francis is the Pope, if you read my comment. I said that sedevacantists do this--I know that firsthand--and if this had been the first entry on this blog that I had seen, I would easily have assumed it was a sedevacantist blog on that basis.
DeleteAlso, "everyone" doesn't do it--I don't, and this is the first I've heard of any non-sedevacantists doing it. Even if that comment were true, just because "everyone" does something doesn't make it okay, as I don't think I have to tell you.
And it's not exactly endearing when the first thing you say is "please grow up". What's not grown up about saying that sedevacantists engage in this practice, that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, and that the Pope deserves respect? People already don't respect Traditionalist Catholicism, and that's bad enough.
You are making a mountain out of a molehill. I may have been a little uncharitable, but nonetheless, you are making a big deal out of a small issue, which is my main point. I have no problem with saying Pope Ratzinger, Pope Ratti, or Pope Pacelli (or even Pope Sarto). There is nothing wrong at all. I got a little impatient with your implication that the blogger here, whom I got to know a bit, is disrespectful to the Pope by using his non-papal name.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAlso, you, of all people, don't need to preach to the choir that because everyone does it, it doesn't automatically mean it's right. Your tone here is also condescending!
DeleteOne more thing: the Rad Trad specifically referred to Bergoglio as Pope!! He didn't say "the man who pretends to be Pope" or some such thing as a sede would. Your whole point about this being a sede blog from this one point is demolished. Again, I say you are overrreacting to a very small issue, if it be even that!
DeleteCalling a pope by his last name is an endearment in Italian culture. I call the 20th century Pii by their surnames often to avoid repetition in articles. I referred to the reigning pontiff as Bergoglio to bring him down to earth, to emphasize the personal, political nature of his comments, to drive home that this was not a moment of religious instruction.
DeleteI have not been a sedevacantist since March 2013, when everyone was.
@The Rad Trad:
DeleteOkay, I've never heard of that but I'll take your word for it. And that certainly makes sense that you don't want to confuse Pius XI with Pius XII. I see. That does in fact make sense, thank you for explaining--and thank you for not getting upset by what I said. I don't want to start fights--or continue them.
It took me a bit to understand what you meant by that last sentence (I have Asperger's Syndrome so I take things literally) but now I laughed. That was funny--and so true.
God bless you.
@Paul: Please calm down and don't read into my comments things that I didn't say. Maybe I should have been clearer, and if so that's on me, and I apologize. But good grief, that many responses? Seriously?
DeleteMy fault, but I do still have a tendency to be a little warm on certain things. I apologize.
Delete@Everyone: I really should have worded my original comment differently and I apologize and ask forgiveness for not doing so. Please let me clarify my position.
DeleteAside from the fact that I have indeed experienced sedevacantists using the non-papal names of Popes from John XXIII on (presumably the better to avoid speaking of them as though they were true Vicars of Christ), plus my ignorance of this aspect of Italian culture (I certainly never meant to imply that their birth names are somehow innately disrespectful, being the names they had before becoming Popes!), there was one other concern of mine that prompted me to speak.
That is the fact that all too often I encounter Traditionalist Catholics or otherwise right wingers who seem quicker to say bad things about what the Pope (or whatever leader) is saying or doing than about the fact that he is the Pope (or whatever office he holds), and we need to honor that office and the man holding it even if we divorce it from things he says or does that we don't like or even are just plain wrong.
I'm not used to this myself--I never grew up Traditionalist and don't know how to go about it on my own--but one thing I've concluded is that personhood trumps belief, even true belief (God the Father is the ultimate source even of God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, Jesus kept company with prostitutes without giving scandal as though prostitution were okay, etc.). And Peter said "Honor the Emperor", which strikes me as akin to "Honor thy father and thy mother."
So I'm trying to keep the two clear in my mind, to love and honor all my rightful authorities but also to know when what they believe, say, and do are wrong--and I don't know how to make that a regular part of my life. I need prayers in that regard.
@Paul: Apology accepted, and I forgive you--but looking back I am guilty myself of something and ask forgiveness for that, from the Rad Trad, yourself, and everyone here. I think I was attempting something in the way of a "test" that isn't my place to do. It was not my intent to provoke, nor to "get" anyone if they responded how I thought they would, but even if my intentions were good (it is good to recognize when we read too much into something--I've been guilty of that many times), it isn't my place. I'm not a priest or religious brother, and this isn't my blog. I hope you all forgive me because again, my intent was a gentle request for clarification and (if necessary) rebuke, but nothing worse.
DeleteNo problem. Blogs are too easily a way to get misunderstood. And I hope you stay to peruse here. This is a good blog to learn things Traditional, both of the Eastern and Western liturgies.
DeleteNo need for apologies. If you read this blog with regularity you will find my cowriter and I often use sarcasm and irony to shed light on a matter or lighten the mood. I am quite convinced most of the problems of the world result from people taking themselves too seriously.
Delete@The Rad Trad: I still think I was guilty of something I shouldn't have done, but I have now apologized, so I don't need to do so again.
DeleteI agree with you, and I in particular need that because I think I suffer from a mild chronic depression--added to which, too much of what passes for "comedy" these days is something I either find offensive or else I honestly need help knowing what was supposed to be funny about it. I like the sitcoms of the early days of television, for example, but I will not watch modern sitcoms (or comedy films) at all.
Thank you for being who you are.
@Paul: God bless you. I'm glad we were able to settle this the right way. I've had people get angry with me before but you struck me as the type for whom I'm not surprised that your last couple of comments say what they do.
I was afraid of that. I want to be a good communicator myself, but I also have OCD and scruples, so sometimes I don't always know. And I do still have this blog bookmarked--and thank you for your wishes.
If people say "Papa (i.e. pope) Surname," they are probably not sedevacantists. If they say, "Surname, leader of the Vatican II Sect," there is a chance they might be sedevacantists.
Delete@StrongmanBob:
DeleteYou're right. All I'm saying is that, before I read this blog entry, the only time I'd ever heard of non-sedevacantists using the non-papal names of Popes was in biographies, referring to the men before they became the Pope.
I never meant to imply that I thought the blogger was sedevacantist, only that, from my own experience, what he was doing was consistent with sedevacantism and inconsistent with my previous experience of Catholics who were not sedevacantist. Given that I was concerned about the possibility of scandal.
Understood.
DeleteFrancis' behavior has gotten quite ridiculous and best to ignore. That everything about Trump and his character/behavior is reprehensibly not Christian is beyond debate and one area where I fully agree with Bergolio. Nevertheless, it is the right of every nation to determine how many newcomers to allow into its borders. One need only look at Mexico's southern border and what happens to Guatemalans who cross that border illegally.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete