I think this is fair and balanced. What do you think? The first half hour is dedicated to the unprecedented brouhaha we are witnessing which is not unifying Catholics but causing more polarization. And yes, the media and politicians are seizing it for their own political reasons, pernicious as these may be:
14 comments:
Several years ago, Pope Benedict XVI said something about Islam, and it was a very brief comment, in an academic presentation which offended many in the Muslim community. In fact it sparked violence leading to several deaths. Pope Benedict ended up making a public apology in person, not in writing.
Pope Leo, who is continuing off-the-cuff interviews, often when leaving Castel Gondolfo (maybe Pope Francis was right in not going there?) goaded President Trump by telling Americans to write or contact their congressmen about what President Trump is doing in Iran, let their voices be heard. As the video posted comments on, these words taking a moral principal and telling people what to do in a political sense, rubbed the President wrong. This was on the heels of the three Cardinals on 60 minutes and what some perceive as their partisan politics mingles with Catholic principles. I would say that perhaps Pope Leo would do well to apologize for that off-the-cuff remark about specifically calling your congressman. An apology, similar to Pope Benedict’s might help things and calm the waters? And please, please, please Pope Leo and all future popes, STOP THE OFF-THE CUFF COMMENTS! DON’T DO IT—ANSWER QUESTIONS GIVEN TO YOU AHEAD OF TIME! PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE!
The president would have done well to just let the pope have his say. Sometimes, listening is the best approach to humility.
Agree, the pope would do well to not engage off the cuff. It compromises his authority. Just teach. Avoid street level debate.
At least as it regards Pope Leo XIV: There is not a "feud" between Pope Leo XIV and President Trump.
Anti-President Trump news media folks have portrayed various remarks by Pope Leo XIV as having been directed at President Trump.
Pope Leo XIV has addressed President Trump by name.
When His Holiness has not done so, then there has not been any reason to have believed that this, or that, Papal comment had served as a veiled attack against President Trump.
I find it unimaginable that Pope Leo XIV has any intention to engage President Trump in a war of words.
That does not mean that His Holiness will shrink from his powerful promotion of the Culture of Life. But I find it preposterous to believe that Pope Leo XIV is determined to pursue a contentious verbal approach to President Trump.
=======
President Trump's uttered nasty, preposterous remarks against Pope Leo XIV.
In regard to certain matters about which President Trump has disagreed, and will continue to disagree, with Pope Leo XIV:
I hope that President Trump will do so in charitable fashion.
There is not any reason why President Trump should not accommodate Pope Leo XIV as Mister Trump had accommodated Pope Francis (requiescat in pace).
That is, in charitable fashion, disagree with Pope Leo XIV in regard to this, or that issue.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Pope Benedict XVI did not apologize for his Regensburg-related comments. Rather, he was careful to have expressed sorrow for negative "reactions" to his remarks in question.
The negative reactions, as Pope Benedict XVI had declared, resulted from his having quoted "from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought."
Pope Benedict XIV:
"At this time, I wish also to add that I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims.
"These in fact were a quotation from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought."
=======
AI Overview:
"Following his September 2006 lecture at the University of Regensburg, Pope Benedict XVI...did not apologize for the remarks themselves, nor did he formally retract them."
=======
NBC News:
"But the statement stopped short of the apology demanded by Islamic leaders around the globe, and anger among Muslims remained intense."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
If "off the cuff" remarks are solidly based in doctrine, and those of Pope Leo are, then such remarks can't compromise his authority.
The pope cannot requir any Catholic to write his congressman about anything, do so compromises his authority. And authority is in the eyes of the beholder.
Did he say we were required to contact our Representatives?
“And we all want to work for peace, people want peace,” Pope Leo said. “I would invite the citizens of all the countries involved to contact the authorities, political leaders, congressmen, to ask them, tell them to work for peace and to reject war.”
“I would invite the citizens of all the countries involved to contact the authorities, political leaders, congressmen, to ask them, tell them to work for peace and to reject war.” There is nothing doctrinal here. Popes and Bishops have regularly encouraged/challenged Catholics to be involved in politics at all levels. That includes contacting Representatives.
There is nothing that compromises the pope's authority in his repeating that encouragement.
Did Pope Paul VI compromise papal authority when he said, "If you want peace, work for justice"?
No because he didn’t also write your political leaders and invite them to work for justice. Thanks for making my point. Kudos!
Yes, precisely, the operative words being “of ALL the countries involves.”
Although I agree with much that the Prayerful Posse has to say, whenever I watch them, I detect a very "conservative" bias:
They, too, for example, make it sound like the Pope was only urging Americans to contact their political leaders. Not so.
Why, for example, do they discuss only two of the criteria of the just war doctrine and omit discussion of the other two?
Why do they mention only one of the many occasions Pope Leo has forcefully spoken out against the persecution of Christians?
Why don’t they address why he didn’t visit Nigeria (one has to be invited by the country’s leader, and it seems he wasn’t).
When talking about religious persecution, why don’t they mention fanatical Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank?
Why don’t they mention that the Catholic Church called consistently for the overruling of Roe v. Wade (was that not an interference in the political arrangements of the United States?), but instead make it sound like the Church just spoke abstractly about the evils of abortion, contrasting this with Pope Leo’s intervention into the politics of the United States?
These are just a few concerns I have about their lack of objectivity in this video.
Mark J.
Holy Mother Church calls Her spiritual children, whose hearts and minds have been formed by Her, to enter into the public square.
In turn, Pope Leo XIV had every right and reason to have invited "the citizens of all the countries involved to contact the authorities, political leaders, congressmen, to ask them, tell them to work for peace and to reject war."
======
The Church, in Her quest to have war "completely outlawed by international consent" has called for "the establishment of some universal public authority acknowledged as such by all and endowed with the power to safeguard on the behalf of all, security, regard for justice, and respect for rights."
"...everyone must labor to put an end at last to the arms race, and to make a true beginning of disarmament..."
"Everyone."
Therefore, the Pope acted properly to exhort citizens to "contact the authorities, political leaders, congressmen..." to work to outlaw war...to development the establishment of a "universal public authority acknowledged as such by all and endowed with the power to safeguard on the behalf of all, security, regard for justice, and respect for rights."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Glad you like the Grand Mullah approach to the papacy…
Post a Comment