Conservative Catholics loved Mother Angelica's rebuke of certain cardinals! She was ahead of her time in Trumpism!
It is all so sad, perplexing and peculiar!
A commentary from a respected priest from the National Catholic Register:
Culture of Rebuke Has Taken Hold in Church Discourse
COMMENTARY: The dialogue that Pope Francis often calls for is not actually taking place within the Church.
The most recent rebuke — thoughtfully expressed and respectfully made — to the exercise of the magisterium by Pope Francis came from the highly respected Capuchin Father Thomas Weinandy, who served from 2005 to 2013 as the executive director of the American bishops’ Committee on Doctrine.
So respected is he that Pope Francis appointed him to the International Theological Commission (ITC), the principal advisory body to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in 2014.
Father Weinandy’s letter to Pope Francis, dated July 31 and made public Nov. 1, rebukes the Holy Father for fostering “chronic confusion” through “ambiguous” teaching, asserting that he “censor[s] and even mock[s]” those who uphold traditional teaching and that he tolerates teaching contrary to the doctrine of the faith. Father Weinandy’s letter is clear and blunt: The Holy Father’s “calumny” of those who follow Church Tradition is “alien to the nature of the Petrine ministry,” which exists “to dispel error, not to foster it.”
Father Weinandy told Crux that he released the letter publicly because “the letter expresses the concerns of many more people than just me, ordinary people who’ve come to me with their questions and apprehensions, and I wanted them to know that I have listened.”
Indeed, there is nothing in Father Weinandy’s letter that journalists do not hear talked about openly among cardinals and bishops, if only off the record.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops asked Father Weinandy to resign as a consultant to its doctrine committee. It remains to be seen whether the Holy Father will allow Father Weinandy to remain on the ITC or will dismiss him from that role, judging that he has nothing further to offer.
The “all” would apparently include the Holy Father himself and those close to him.
Cardinal DiNardo is now the third cardinal, after Cardinal Pietro Parolin and Cardinal Gerhard Müller, to call for authentic dialogue in the Church after public rebukes — one styled a “filial correction” — of the Holy Father.
The implication is clear: The dialogue that Pope Francis often calls for is not actually taking place within the Church.
Indeed, something of a culture of rebuke has taken hold instead.
Cardinal DiNardo quoted St. Ignatius of Loyola on how a “good Christian ought to be more eager to put a good interpretation on a neighbor’s statement than to condemn it.”
Consider only the following major examples of how the Holy Father employs the pastoral strategy of rebuke:
In an August 2013 interview with Jesuit publications, he chastised some consecrated women as being sterile spiritual “spinsters” and some pastors for being “locked up in small-minded rules.” Later would come the implication that priests make the confessional into a “torture chamber.”
In his address to the Roman Curia for Christmas 2014, he listed, in detail, 15 spiritual diseases to which those listening to him were prone.
In a January 2015 airborne news conference, Pope Francis addressed questions of fertility by denouncing a particular woman who was expecting her eighth child, having had seven Caesarian deliveries previously. Pope Francis twice said that, upon meeting her at a Roman parish, he had chastised the woman for being irresponsible. Pope Francis gave enough information that it would be easy for her fellow parishioners to know her identity.
In the concluding address to the Synod on the Family in October 2015, the Holy Father unleashed a barrage of condemnations upon the cardinals and bishops who did not agree with him, charging them with “a facile repetition of what is obvious or has already been said”; of “burying their heads in the sand”; of “indoctrinating” the Gospel “in dead stones to be hurled at others”; of hiding “behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families”; and of giving into “conspiracy theories and blinkered viewpoints.”
In 2016 and 2017, the Holy Father has refused to clarify the ambiguities in Amoris Laetitia(The Joy of Love), all the while permitting his close subordinates to launch ad hominem attacks on those who seek clarification according to the Church’s tradition.
Last month, a personal letter of Pope Francis to Cardinal Robert Sarah, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, on liturgical matters was leaked to the press and then ordered to be sent to every bishops’ conference in the world. The content of the letter publicly corrected Cardinal Sarah’s efforts, and the manner appeared to be designed for maximum publicity.
One enthusiastic commentator noted that the maneuver was “unprecedented. … Certainly not since Vatican II have we seen such a public spanking of a high-ranking prelate.”
Moreover, on several occasions Pope Francis has called for open debate and frank and bold speech, in which members of the Church are not afraid to speak up and even contradict the Holy Father himself.
Consequently, the culture of rebuke that Pope Francis favors has now spread throughout the Church.
Hence, there are the events of recent weeks, with public rebukes and corrections of the Holy Father himself.
The Catholic commentariat, including bishops and priests, has also ratcheted up its rhetorical denunciations to fevered dimensions.
Fevers aside, this is a feature, not a bug, to borrow a phrase from the software world. The Holy Father believes that in the conflict of ideas, and the clash of personalities, the truth can be clarified. It is an idea borrowed from German philosophy, and Pope Francis is particularly attentive to the priorities and methods of the Church in Germany.
In the recent life of the Church, those modes of pastoral action have almost entirely disappeared.
It is very difficult to imagine a bishop addressing his priests in the way that the Holy Father has addressed bishops. A parish priest would never point out to the media a particular woman as “irresponsible” in her childbearing decisions. Yet would Jesus do it?
Pope Francis evidently thinks so, that the Church has to recover the denunciations that we find in Jesus’ preaching and teaching.
That is not the whole story, of course, for Pope Francis has spoken about the “tenderness” that marks the Christian and how “harsh language” has no place in the mind and heart and mouth of a pastor.
It is a difficult balance, to be sure. Pope Francis’ daily homilies are laced with harsh language, as he interprets the words of Holy Scripture. He delivers frequent judgments on whole categories of people he finds lacking.
The Holy Father is evidently trying to present a fuller model of Jesus the Good Shepherd, who both carries the sheep and employs the crook and staff to keep them in line.
The culture of rebuke cannot be the only mode of ecclesial discourse, even as we give it greater prominence following the Holy Father’s lead.
It needs to be complemented with dialogue in truth and charity; in the household of faith, the rebukes themselves are to be made in charity.
That is the current challenge and why Cardinal DiNardo invited reflection upon dialogue in the Church after the Father Weinandy letter. Whether it will come remains to be seen.
So respected is he that Pope Francis appointed him to the International Theological Commission (ITC), the principal advisory body to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in 2014.
Father Weinandy’s letter to Pope Francis, dated July 31 and made public Nov. 1, rebukes the Holy Father for fostering “chronic confusion” through “ambiguous” teaching, asserting that he “censor[s] and even mock[s]” those who uphold traditional teaching and that he tolerates teaching contrary to the doctrine of the faith. Father Weinandy’s letter is clear and blunt: The Holy Father’s “calumny” of those who follow Church Tradition is “alien to the nature of the Petrine ministry,” which exists “to dispel error, not to foster it.”
Father Weinandy told Crux that he released the letter publicly because “the letter expresses the concerns of many more people than just me, ordinary people who’ve come to me with their questions and apprehensions, and I wanted them to know that I have listened.”
Indeed, there is nothing in Father Weinandy’s letter that journalists do not hear talked about openly among cardinals and bishops, if only off the record.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops asked Father Weinandy to resign as a consultant to its doctrine committee. It remains to be seen whether the Holy Father will allow Father Weinandy to remain on the ITC or will dismiss him from that role, judging that he has nothing further to offer.
Call for Dialogue and Charity
A noteworthy statement from Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, president of the USCCB, was released on the Weinandy letter. It contains not a word of criticism of Father Weinandy, but calls for “dialogue within the Church” and says that “Christian charity needs to be exercised by all those involved.”The “all” would apparently include the Holy Father himself and those close to him.
Cardinal DiNardo is now the third cardinal, after Cardinal Pietro Parolin and Cardinal Gerhard Müller, to call for authentic dialogue in the Church after public rebukes — one styled a “filial correction” — of the Holy Father.
The implication is clear: The dialogue that Pope Francis often calls for is not actually taking place within the Church.
Indeed, something of a culture of rebuke has taken hold instead.
Cardinal DiNardo quoted St. Ignatius of Loyola on how a “good Christian ought to be more eager to put a good interpretation on a neighbor’s statement than to condemn it.”
Deliberate Pastoral Choice
In that spirit, we might ask what it is that the Holy Father intends to achieve with the culture of rebuke that he has brought to the Church’s life. That it is a deliberate pastoral choice is not in dispute. The question is how the Church should receive it.Consider only the following major examples of how the Holy Father employs the pastoral strategy of rebuke:
In an August 2013 interview with Jesuit publications, he chastised some consecrated women as being sterile spiritual “spinsters” and some pastors for being “locked up in small-minded rules.” Later would come the implication that priests make the confessional into a “torture chamber.”
In his address to the Roman Curia for Christmas 2014, he listed, in detail, 15 spiritual diseases to which those listening to him were prone.
In a January 2015 airborne news conference, Pope Francis addressed questions of fertility by denouncing a particular woman who was expecting her eighth child, having had seven Caesarian deliveries previously. Pope Francis twice said that, upon meeting her at a Roman parish, he had chastised the woman for being irresponsible. Pope Francis gave enough information that it would be easy for her fellow parishioners to know her identity.
In the concluding address to the Synod on the Family in October 2015, the Holy Father unleashed a barrage of condemnations upon the cardinals and bishops who did not agree with him, charging them with “a facile repetition of what is obvious or has already been said”; of “burying their heads in the sand”; of “indoctrinating” the Gospel “in dead stones to be hurled at others”; of hiding “behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families”; and of giving into “conspiracy theories and blinkered viewpoints.”
In 2016 and 2017, the Holy Father has refused to clarify the ambiguities in Amoris Laetitia(The Joy of Love), all the while permitting his close subordinates to launch ad hominem attacks on those who seek clarification according to the Church’s tradition.
Last month, a personal letter of Pope Francis to Cardinal Robert Sarah, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, on liturgical matters was leaked to the press and then ordered to be sent to every bishops’ conference in the world. The content of the letter publicly corrected Cardinal Sarah’s efforts, and the manner appeared to be designed for maximum publicity.
One enthusiastic commentator noted that the maneuver was “unprecedented. … Certainly not since Vatican II have we seen such a public spanking of a high-ranking prelate.”
Moreover, on several occasions Pope Francis has called for open debate and frank and bold speech, in which members of the Church are not afraid to speak up and even contradict the Holy Father himself.
Consequently, the culture of rebuke that Pope Francis favors has now spread throughout the Church.
Hence, there are the events of recent weeks, with public rebukes and corrections of the Holy Father himself.
The Catholic commentariat, including bishops and priests, has also ratcheted up its rhetorical denunciations to fevered dimensions.
Fevers aside, this is a feature, not a bug, to borrow a phrase from the software world. The Holy Father believes that in the conflict of ideas, and the clash of personalities, the truth can be clarified. It is an idea borrowed from German philosophy, and Pope Francis is particularly attentive to the priorities and methods of the Church in Germany.
Christ Is the Starting Point
The starting point for understanding Pope Francis’ pastoral preference for denunciation and rebuke is the ministry of the Lord himself. Jesus rebuked, often in vigorous language, many of his listeners. He instructed his disciples to “shake the dust” off their feet against those who would not listen to them.In the recent life of the Church, those modes of pastoral action have almost entirely disappeared.
It is very difficult to imagine a bishop addressing his priests in the way that the Holy Father has addressed bishops. A parish priest would never point out to the media a particular woman as “irresponsible” in her childbearing decisions. Yet would Jesus do it?
Pope Francis evidently thinks so, that the Church has to recover the denunciations that we find in Jesus’ preaching and teaching.
That is not the whole story, of course, for Pope Francis has spoken about the “tenderness” that marks the Christian and how “harsh language” has no place in the mind and heart and mouth of a pastor.
It is a difficult balance, to be sure. Pope Francis’ daily homilies are laced with harsh language, as he interprets the words of Holy Scripture. He delivers frequent judgments on whole categories of people he finds lacking.
The Holy Father is evidently trying to present a fuller model of Jesus the Good Shepherd, who both carries the sheep and employs the crook and staff to keep them in line.
The culture of rebuke cannot be the only mode of ecclesial discourse, even as we give it greater prominence following the Holy Father’s lead.
It needs to be complemented with dialogue in truth and charity; in the household of faith, the rebukes themselves are to be made in charity.
That is the current challenge and why Cardinal DiNardo invited reflection upon dialogue in the Church after the Father Weinandy letter. Whether it will come remains to be seen.
Father Raymond J. de Souza is the editor in chief of
Convivium magazine.
34 comments:
Wow. So, Pope Francis is leading the Church back to the traditional practice of pastoral rebuke, and leading us away from the decades-long pastoral fear of offending wayward members of the flock. An interesting take, that's for sure.
I have frequently said that "spirit" of Vatican II constituents (such as Pope Francis) impose their vision of Vatican II upon the Church in the most pre-Vatican II authoritarian way.
But Pope Francis' pastoral rebuke is toward orthodox Catholics not the heterodos and that is what is so peculiar, for sure.
Just looking at the conservative Catholic sphere of the JPII era, I found Mother Angelica's approach (especially her manner of speech) to be generally inelegant and simplistic, but preferable to the baroque and slightly effeminate sensibilities of silk and lace liturgical preservationists. Her success was not her institutional accomplishments, but her rallying of the working-class remnant of faithful Catholics, a group that now hardly even exists.
Pope Francis is about as liberal as Ghenghis Khan. Liberals always accuse others of what THEY are doing, known in psychology as"projection."
Mother's approach was be generally inelegant and simplistic AND congregationalistic. HER was was the way and anybody who did not share HER was immediately questioned.
She was caustic, accusative, and dismissive of others. She would have fit very well into a camp of Trump supporters
'She would have fit (sic) very well into a camp of Trump supporters'. Applying the same criteria, so would Pope Francis.
TJM,
Good observation. While I would not be excited by a genuinely liberal pope, at least such a pope would appreciate--though certainly not prefer--traditional Catholic doctrine and traditional Roman liturgy. Saint John Paul II was, in my estimation, a truly liberal pope, consistent with Paul VI. Both sought new ways of announcing the Gospel and experiencing the liturgy. A liberal pope is probably the best we can hope for in this era. At this point, and if things keep getting worse, maybe I will get excited if the next pope is a true liberal! In more stable times, I would probably even be a liberal. But alas...
Mother was extremely compassionate and loving. She was very good at explaining the problem of "misguided compassion." If you tell a person it's okay to live in his sin, that Jesus understands, it seems like compassion at the moment, but it leads that soul to hell. It is better to gently explain that God our creator says that sin is a turning away from God, and that we must choose God and abandon sin, with the help of His grace, if we hope to enter into heaven.
Her rebukes were saved for those in the Church who should have known better, and were leading souls to their doom. She rebuked them because she had a genuine love for those who were being encouraged to live in their sins. Mother often said, "If you see someone running towards a cliff, are you going to try to stop them, or are you going to stand back and let them go."
I'm with Mother, I prefer to try to stop them, even if they prefer to keep on running. I couldn't live with myself if I didn't at least try. Isn't that what the Church is for?
Father McDonald said..."But Pope Francis' pastoral rebuke is toward orthodox Catholics not the heterodos and that is what is so peculiar, for sure."
============================================================================
I believe that the bishops of Germany are identified by conservative Catholics as the most liberal, progressive collection of bishops within the Church. Therefore, let us examine Pope Francis' attitude toward said collection of liberal, progressive bishops.
-- Catholic Herald, December 1, 2015 A.D.
Pope Francis "was unsparing in his criticism during the ad limina visit of the German bishops shortly before his trip to Africa."
"In that meeting, Pope Francis painted a stark picture of a Church that was obsessed with structures and organization but neglected the sacraments and the evangelization."
=============================================================================
-- Catholic Herald, November 20, 2015 A.D.
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2015/11/20/pope-to-german-bishops-the-faith-in-your-country-is-being-eroded/
"Pope to German bishops: the faith in your country is being eroded"
"Pope Francis has offered a blunt assessment of Germany’s ailing Church during an audience with the country’s bishops."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."But Pope Francis' pastoral rebuke is toward orthodox Catholics not the heterodos and that is what is so peculiar, for sure."
=============================================================================
-- Catholic Herald, December 1, 2015 A.D.
Pope Francis "was unsparing in his criticism during the ad limina visit of the German bishops shortly before his trip to Africa."
"In that meeting, Pope Francis painted a stark picture of a Church that was obsessed with structures and organization but neglected the sacraments and the evangelization."
=============================================================================
-- Catholic Herald, November 20, 2015 A.D.
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2015/11/20/pope-to-german-bishops-the-faith-in-your-country-is-being-eroded/
"Pope to German bishops: the faith in your country is being eroded"
"Pope Francis has offered a blunt assessment of Germany’s ailing Church during an audience with the country’s bishops."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."But Pope Francis' pastoral rebuke is toward orthodox Catholics not the heterodos and that is what is so peculiar, for sure."
============================================================================
-- Pope Francis Blasts Liberals And Progressives
October 18, 2014 A.D.
Pope Francis declared:
"The temptation to a destructive tendency to goodness, that in the name of a deceptive mercy binds the wounds without first curing them and treating them; that treats the symptoms and not the causes and the roots.
"It is the temptation of the “do-gooders,” of the fearful, and also of the so-called “progressives and liberals.”
"The temptation to come down off the Cross, to please the people, and not stay there, in order to fulfil the will of the Father; to bow down to a worldly spirit instead of purifying it and bending it to the Spirit of God.
"The temptation to neglect the “depositum fidei” [the deposit of faith], not thinking of themselves as guardians but as owners or masters [of it];"
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Kavanaugh at 10:48, those adjectives you employed have greater application to modern day "liberals." You're always good for a laugh
One may perhaps concede that Pope Francis’ and President Trump’s personalities are arguably similar in some respects. However, the fact that Father d’Souza’s comparison between Pope Francis and Jesus is most definitely plausible, but that any similar comparison between Trump and Jesus is not even remotely imaginable, surely tells us all we need to know about the differences between the two.
nonymous2:
Some points to consider:
Mr Trump is a political figure who is only marginally religious, as compared to someone who is or would considered to be a devout practitioner of some faith tradition, especially a person such as the the Pope who is the head of a major religious denomination.
I suppose one may suspect his motivations, but the President does seem to have respect those who hold religious belief.
Jesus certainly rebuked others,especially the Jewish religious leaders of the time, but He is after all God.
I think Jesus would vomit on Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of the fake catholic politicians. At least Trump is trying to undo the Dem's evil agenda. Just last week he restored religious freedom by rolling back the contraceptive mandate and Notre Dame promptly dropped contraceptive coverage. Sick that the libtards running Notre Dame gave Abortion King Obama an honorary degree. I am a Notre Dame graduate and I've never given them a dime since then.
Human beings, especially those in positions of influence and authority , and without the wisdom , knowledge and judgement of God, should be more circumspect in what is said of others, and in how they exercise their responsibility,so as to not only to do the right thing, but to set a good example.
This is why It is so important that we pray for those who hold positions of leadership, whether Pope or President.
Am I perplexed by some of the things Pope Francis has said and done? Sure.
Always keep in mind though that the Holy Father is after all human, subject to the same wayward inclinations of the human condition we all are, to some degree or another, and, being in the position that he occupies, in great need of our prayers that in all things he be guided by the Holy Spirit.
TJM:
Other than policies on abortion and contraception, please describe the “Dem’s evil agenda” that Trump is trying to undo, and when you do so please explain why the policy in question is “evil” as opposed to something you happen to disagree with.
As for your speculations regarding Jesus’ reactions to the named politicians, I doubt that He would be any more approving of a man who boasts about grabbing female private parts, who openly mocks the disabled to pander to a rally audience, and who shows no respect for the truth. He may, of course, forgive the perpetrator of such atrocious conduct, but He would surely condemn the conduct itself.
Anonymous 2,
If you can blow breezily by abortion and contraception, there is nothing to discuss. You have lost your moral compass and are an apostate
Anon 2.
I served three years in the USArmy and was surrounded by men the entire time. Trump didn't say anything that the normal alpha-male doesn't say while amongst friends. They talk big and try to impress each other with their wild imaginations. Most listeners understand it for what it is. It is normal male behavior. Get over it.
Carol H. said..."I served three years in the USArmy and was surrounded by men the entire time. Trump didn't say anything that the normal alpha-male doesn't say while amongst friends. They talk big and try to impress each other with their wild imaginations. Most listeners understand it for what it is. It is normal male behavior. Get over it."
Donald Trump apologized for the vile comments in question that he had uttered. He said that he regretted the filthy comments that he uttered in regard to women. He said that is comments in question were wrong.
If his comments in question reflected "normal male behavior...Get over it," then why did Mr. Trump apologize for his comments in question? Why did he say that he regretted his comments about women? Why did he declare that he was wrong?
Why apologize for "normal" behavior? Why should he have regretted that which is "normal" behavior? Why did he acknowledge that his supposed "normal" behavior was wrong?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Carol H said..."I served three years in the USArmy and was surrounded by men the entire time. Trump didn't say anything that the normal alpha-male doesn't say while amongst friends. They talk big and try to impress each other with their wild imaginations. Most listeners understand it for what it is. It is normal male behavior. Get over it."
Some men speak in such fashion about women. Many men do not speak about women in such fashion.
A man who gives into Satan speaks about women in such terms as uttered by Donald Trump. A man who, with the help of the Holy Ghost, guards his heart, mind, and mouth, does not speak about women in such terms.
Donald Trump, when on the Howard Stern radio show, engaged in vile talk about women. Mister Trump even permitted Howard Stern to refer to his (Donald Trump) daughter, Ivanka, in crude sexual terms.
It is mind-boggling that a man would approve vile comments uttered in regard to his daughter.
I had considered posting a link to a news report that featured the transcript of Donald Trump and Howard Stern's conversation in question. However, Donald Trump and Howard Stern's comments about Ivanka Trump were disturbing. Therefore, I don't believe that it's correct to post the link in question to Father McDonald's blog.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
TJM:
“If you can blow breezily by abortion and contraception, there is nothing to discuss. You have lost your moral compass and are an apostate”
I did not “blow breezily by abortion and contraception.” You made that up. I conceded that Catholics can legitimately acknowledge that the Trump election has been positive on these critical issues.
And you made it up because you do not—because you cannot—provide a substantive response to my post. And so, just like your hero Trump when (as is usually the case) he has no substantive arguments, you resort to an ad hominem attack on the person who challenges you.
Carol,
For the reasons given by Mark Thomas, I will not get over it. Nor should you. And if (which I seriously doubt) Trump has been displaying “normal male” behavior, then I suggest there is something deeply pathological about the “normal male.” And clearly many decent Republicans agree with me, judging from their condemnations of Trump’s vile behavior.
But, of course, we all know that to his core loyal supporters Trump can do no wrong (even walk down Fifth Avenue and shoot someone). Their (your?) willingness to give this dangerous and deeply disturbed individual a free pass is truly frightening.
Sorry Father, I know that this is off topic, but I ask everyone to pray for the 20+ souls whose lives were stolen away from them at church in Texas today. Please include in prayer those that were injured and the grieving family members and community members.
Thank you, and God have Mercy on us all.
Thank you Carol for reminding us! How horrible and terrible! God bless that church!
Thank you to Carol H. and Father McDonald for their prayers for the people (as well as their loved ones) who were killed or wounded today at the church in Texas.
May God have mercy upon the gunman in question.
May the world beat its swords and spears into ploughshares and pruning hooks.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Anonymous2:
You sound like you are a fine fellow and I will acknowledge that Pres. Trump has in the past said things which I myself would not say.
You mentioned in a comment you made about Mr Trump boasting about grabbing female body parts which of course is reprehensible.
We see now in various media that entertainment and political figures along with some prominent journalists are being publicly accused of this and even much worse. A criminal case is now being built against Mr. Harvey Weinstein.
Not that this is completely new, as we have seen with Mr Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby and in the past with such figures as Gary Hart and Wilbur Mills.
Years ago a lot of these things were hidden from the public as we see from the recently release JFK papers which detail how Dr Martin Luther King
was involved in things which were far more scandalous than anything Mr Trump is said to have done.
I believe there are those waiting for some credible accusations along that line to be made against Pres. Trump.
So far this has not happened so for now I have to go along with Carol.
Carol:
I will include the victims and the families in my prayers.
James J,
Yesterday evening I was reading a litany of alleged encounters by dozens of women with Harvey Weinstein. I could not believe what I was reading. If only half true, Weinstein is clearly suffering from some kind of pathology. Even though some might be tempted to characterize his attitudes and behavior towards women as that of a “normal male,” most males do not translate into action the fantasies to which they are naturally susceptible. And many “credible accusations” have in fact been made against President Trump—Google “Donald Trump Sexual Misconduct Allegations” for the Wikipedia listing and description. At least, the allegations against Donald Trump seem just as “credible” as those leveled against Harvey Weinstein.
In addition, let’s not get too fixated on the sexual aspect here. I mentioned two other points as well—thus, “a man who boasts about grabbing female private parts, who openly mocks the disabled to pander to a rally audience, and who shows no respect for the truth.”
Carol and Father McDonald,
Yes, it is terrible—Satanic even— just as terrible and Satanic as the Las Vegas shootings last month and countless others during the last few years. Of course, if it turns out to be a religious fanatic, or even an otherwise deranged individual, connected to ISIS, we know that President Trump and his allies and supporters will be all over it, doubtless with renewed calls for even tougher immigration restrictions. Whereas, if it turns out to be some other deranged person, well, we just have to put up with it because any, and I mean any, attempt to introduce reasonable gun control, background checks, etc., will be denounced as an attempt to do away with the Second Amendment. It is all so tiresomely predictable.
In the meantime, more people die and more hearts and lives are shattered. As you say, Carol, may God have Mercy on us all!
Things that (some) men say, in the Army, among friends are not appropriate for the President of the United States to say publicly. That's not complicated, is it?
Via his 1956 A.D. Christmas Address, Pope Venerable Pius XII called upon nations to surrendered armaments to the United Nations Organization.
Perhaps it is time within the United States to modify to our situation, in regard to firearms-related carnage, Pope Venerable Pius XII's call to surrender armaments to an authority established to secure peace .
Pope Venerable Pius XII:
"In fact only in the ambit of an institution like the United Nations can the promise of individual nations to reduce armament, especially to abandon production and use of certain arms, be mutually exchanged under the strict obligation of international law.
"Likewise only the United Nations is at present in a position to exact the observance of this obligation ******* by assuming effective control of the armaments of all nations without exception." *******
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Sorry, Father McDonald, I posted my previous comment to the wrong thread.
Mea culpa.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Anonymous 2, you treated abortion and contraception in a cavalier fashion - there is no other reasonable interpretation to your opening remarks. Ergo, I do not take you seriously as a Catholic because you likely voted for Abortion extremists Obama and Hillary. Even most European countries do not allow abortions after 20 weeks, whereas, Obama as a state senator in Illinois voted against a bill that require medical services be provided to a baby that survived an abortion and Hillary who famously stated until a baby breathes on its own, the baby can be aborted. Very Hitlerian, no?
TJM:
No, it is you who treat abortion and contraception in a cavalier fashion by using them as an excuse not to respond to questions or challenges regarding your positions on other issues. You have done it several times in the past and you are doing it again now. And you do it because your unquestioning support for Donald Trump borders on the fanatical. Very Hitlerian, no?
Post a Comment