All of this is the ethos for the papacy and the Church that radical post Vatican II Theologians want for the Church beginning in the late 1960’s! I was taught this in my 1970’s seminary….
Press title for astute commentary:
The substitution of radical social politics for doctrine spells doom for millions of Catholic faithful.
In a recent interview with the Neapolitan newspaper Il Mattino, Pope Francis offered an expansive prescription for the human race. “Planetary injustice,” centered around climate change and Third World debt, must be the focus of the Church, he explained, adding that politics is the “highest form of charity.” Saying that “everything is connected,” the Pope sounded like he was channeling the latest New Age woo-woo philosophy—which in a sense, he is.
The Catholic church was once the greatest conservative institution in the West, and not in any narrow sense of the term. In her self-understanding she was the guardian of the apostolic inheritance, the natural moral law, and an understanding of conscience and right reason that had nothing to do with debilitating rationalism or an enervating moral subjectivism.
17 comments:
I wonder if the Pope's direction is better described not as the "substitution of radical social politics for doctrine," but as "the application of doctrinal principles to the current social sitiation." The fundamental doctrine that underlies the application of our principles is "that human life is sacred and that the dignity of the human person is the foundation of a moral vision for society."
Throughout Christian history the Church has had to apply, where appropriate, our doctrinal principles to new circumstances. Pope Leo XIII was faced with "New Things" in his day. I strongly suspect that some found his approach "radical." Some were not pleased with the Pope's venture into matters of economics and the fraught relationship between Capitol and Labor. Said one, "The chair of Peter is not a chair in economic."
Anything that seems novel can be unnerving to some, even if it is not new at all.
But it isn’t novel. It goes back to the late 60’s. While the Church can offer moral direction to secular pursuits, positions taken by Church bishops including the pope, in the areas of weather and debt forgiveness and other polio realities with more than one political moral perspective, are opinions and Catholics need not accept these as doctrine.
Political not polio…
Fr M
if the "churches financial house" was in order I might have less trouble listing to a communist Pope blather on about about economy.
If the Pope and the bishops were consistent in making statements reflecting that human life is sacred and that human dignity - based in the imago Dei - is the basis for morality; then they might be worth listening to... but they are neither consistent nor correct in most of the applications (including those mentioned in the article). This is among the reasons so few people pay them any heed.
Sophia might take you to task for suggesting that there can exist "...more than one political perspective,..." She noted: "Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them."
That gibe out of the way, might we say that it is immoral to pollute a lake to the point that the water is toxic? Isn't there more than one political perspective? "It's a river on my land; I can do what I want," is one (the Libertarian view). "We have to protect water as communnity property," is another.
As for what is "novel," remember we're dealing with a 2000 year tradition. 60 years is only 3% of our existence...
"the American Mind, A Publication Of The Claremont Institute."
We are dealing with a right-wing outfit backed by such right-wing billionaires as Dick and Betsy Devos.
The article in question is utter trash...a vile attack against the Vicar of Christ.
Among the article's sick claims:
"Francis’s episcopal appointments scrupulously avoid any defender of orthodoxy, the moral law, or the Magisterium of the Church."
The above declaration tells us everything that we need to know about the sick article in question.
The article added that Pope Francis has promoted to the rank of Cardinal "those who oppose Catholic moral teaching."
The article also claimed that Pope Francis has worked to "abolish the unchanging moral law." In addition, the article claimed that Pope Francis favors unorthodox thinking in regard to "ethics, politics, and sexual morality."
The article insisted: "None of this is remotely Catholic."
As Cardinal Sarah declared, attacks against Pope Francis are Satanic.
The disgraceful article in question is just that.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Daniel J. Mahoney authored the hit-piece in question. But this is not his first Satanic attack against Pope Francis.
In 2020 A.D., for National Review, he authored the following article:
-- Pope Francis, Wayward Shepherd.
Among the lies in said hit-piece, Daniel Mahoney declared that Pope Francis "has been largely silent about the decimation of ancient Christian communities in the Arab and Islamic Middle East."
Here are just a few examples of the many times that Pope Francis has spoken in defense of Middle Eastern Christians:
-- 2014 A.D...Pope Francis convoked a Consistory of Cardinals to discuss the crisis that has plagued Christians in the Middle East.
-- Pope Francis tells consistory of 'unjust' situation for Middle East Christians
24 OCTOBER 2014 by Simon Caldwell
Christians in the Middle East are enduring attacks of terrorism "on an unimaginable scale", Pope Francis has said. "We cannot resign ourselves to imagining a Middle East without Christians, who have professed the name of Jesus there for over 2000 years."
-- June 10. 2015: Pope Francis calls for end to 'genocide' of Christians in Middle East
-- Pope, Patriarch say Mass for “persecuted Christians of the Middle East”
-- 2018 A.D. Pope and Assyrian Patriarch: Blood of Middle East martyrs is ‘seed of Christian unity’
-- 2018 A.D. Pope denounces ‘complicit silence’ on Mideast attacks against Christians
-- 2022 A.D. Pope: 'Never forget plight of Syria and Christians in Middle East'
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The following demonstrates Daniel J. Mahoney's unreliability in regard to his claims about Pope Francis.
As I had noted, in 2020 A.D., writing in National Review, Daniel J. Mahoney declared that Pope Francis "has been largely silent about the decimation of ancient Christian communities in the Arab and Islamic Middle East."
But five years earlier, on July 17, 2015 A.D., National Review declared:
"Pope Francis has indeed spoken many times of the persecution of the Christians of the Middle East."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
Right-wing? You mean people of Faith who do not promote abortion, gay marriage and transgenderism and gender ideology at the kindergarten level. Your act and your obsequious papalotry is beyond tiresome. Please go over to Father Z and share your
“Insights” with him, unless you have already been banned their for being a nuisance
TJM and Mark Thomas:
The following article is a very illuminating discussion about the Claremont Institute:
https://www.thebulwark.com/what-the-hell-happened-to-the-claremont-institute/
It is a long but worthwhile read.
As you know, I would not throw the baby out with the bathwater but try to evaluate a piece on its own merits. The author, Daniel J. Mahoney, makes several provocative and challenging points. This said, there is much with which to disagree. Some objections have already been noted.
Here are two more:
First, the article appears to commit a fundamental error at the very outset: “Saying that ‘everything is connected,’ the Pope sounded like he was channeling the latest New Age woo-woo philosophy—which in a sense, he is.” What is the author suggesting here—that everything isn’t connected? If so, he is on shaky ground indeed.
Second, the author asserts that
“Politically, Francis has been a disaster. He has interpreted Catholic social teaching in a partial and summary way that is at once statist, centralist, humanitarian, and globalist. He unilaterally identifies Catholic teaching with pacifism, even if he has no authority to do so. He is at heart a Peronist, indulgent to (left-wing) populism and oblivious to the role that the free market can play in encouraging individual initiative and producing the goods that prevent the poor from sinking into destitution.”
Others clearly beg to differ. See, e.g.,
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2021/04/75439/
Mark,
Thank you. For starters, I am not sure “everything is connected.” I really do not know what that actually means because there are countless things that are not connected.
I think the overall thrust of the piece Father McDonald shared is correct about Francis, that he wades into secular matters and the various causes du jour for which he lacks competence and really has nothing to do with his primary business, the saving of souls. And then Francis has a knack for crushing Faithful Catholics who desire traditional liturgy in the name of “unity” while doing nothing to promote liturgical unity (which in fact has never existed in our Church’s history) and allowing very serious liturgical abuses to continue which scandalize faithful Catholics.
Mark,
I did read the article you suggested and the author did criticize Francis about certain straw-men he utilizes in making his arguments which underscores the problem - popes should not weigh in on secular matters where they lack competence. In my opinion, the Pope would serve the Faithful better by simply stating that those in commerce should adhere to the Commandments such as “thou shall not steal.” That applies to whether you are in a capitalistic or socialistic system. I am waiting with baited breath for his letter criticizing socialism
Mark, thank you for the information about the Claremont Institute.
Just follow the money. Right-wing megadoners funneled money into the Claremont Institute. Therefore, right-wing hit pieces against "liberal/marxist" Pope Francis were sure to follow.
But beyond the Claremont Institute...
Daniel J. Mahoney, who authored the posted article, has a history of having produced hit pieces against Pope Francis.
As I had noted, in a 2020 A.D. anti-Pope Francis hit piece in National Review, Daniel J. Mahoney declared in preposterous fashion that His Holiness "has been largely silent about the decimation of ancient Christian communities in the Arab and Islamic Middle East."
But five years earlier, in 2015 A.D., National Review declared: "Pope Francis has indeed spoken many times of the persecution of the Christians of the Middle East."
To return to his current hit piece in question, Daniel J. Mahoney declared that Pope Francis "regularly invokes the need for mercy but almost always without the necessary accompanying appeal to repentance and the metanoia of the soul."
Pope Francis, of course, has preached countless times..."go to Confession, go to Confession, go to Confession...reform your life."
Daniel J. Mahoney's preposterous anti-Pope Francis hit pieces contain one bit of nonsense after another.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
In regard to the countless anti-Pope Francis hit pieces that have been developed within, and without, the Church:
The countless attempts to rally Catholics against Pope Francis have failed miserably. The overwhelming amount of Catholics love Pope Francis.
Throughout our time, our holy Popes, from Venerable Pius XII to Francis, have been attacked repeatedly by right-wing, as well as left-wing, forces within, and without the Church.
But said attempts to turn the Holy People of God against our holy Popes have failed.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
TJM:
I agree that, at first blush, the notion that everything is connected might seem strange to us. But isn’t this because we are conditioned by our predominant worldview, which emphasizes a fragmented analytical approach to understanding and problem solving, breaking down the whole of a reality into parts, and atomistic individualism, separating humans from the communities to which they inevitably and inextricably belong, both of which minimize or even blind us to holistic synthesis, systems thinking, and our mutual interdependence? I take a very elementary stab at identifying our various interdependencies in chapter 4 of the book (see especially pp. 149-54). For a deeper dive, see e.g., Fritjof Capra in
https://www.earthandspiritcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/3-2-Turning-Point-A-Science-of-Living-Systems-Fritjof-Capra.pdf
Now, is some of this “New Ageism”? Yes, but here we encounter, once again, the fact of coincidence and the importance of not throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The notion that everything is connected is essentially a mystical insight common to all spiritual traditions, including Christianity (although post-Enlightenment Christianity, except for the monastic contemplative tradition, has generally tended to minimize, or even suppress, this previously strong element of the Christian worldview). I have thought for some time that much of what Pope Francis says proceeds from a mystical sensibility, a mystical sensibility that goes far beyond the narrow confines of the Miracle of the Mass, but that is just my take.
For additional perspective see the following TED talk:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPh3c8Sa37M
Mark Thomas,
Since you are a left-winger, you obviously support:
abortion, gay marriage, transgenderism, and the sexual groooming of kindergartners.
Have a nice day in Alice of Wonderland World and with the Pope of "Mercy" (unless you are a faithful, traditional Catholic, then you get crushed like a bug)
Post a Comment