A Latino pope : a problem for USA?

  • Thread starter Thread starter marie3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

marie3

Guest
"In some American circles, Francis was not sufficiently orthodox and could even be heretical, because the pope had started to speak of the poor, of mercy …

John Paul II and Benedict XVI also spoke of the poor and of mercy …

M.F.: Certainly, but it’s totally different because whoever speaks of the poor comes himself from the Church of the poor in Latin America. The American mentality that a Latin American Jesuit could be pope was a shock, and it still is. On the one hand because in the United States there is a certain anti-Jesuitism. On the other hand, because in the eyes of François, the United States is not the center of the world but a country like any other.

Basically, even when Francis quotes the exact words of John Paul II or Benedict XVI, from the moment it comes out of his mouth, it is immediately perceived as coming from a dangerous pope, who has an idea unorthodox of Catholicism. For us Europeans, this pope is not different from the others; for Americans, it is the opposite of its predecessors. The first reactions written on this pope in 2013 evoked “an anti-American pope”, “revolutionary” … even before his first most important decisions! And over the years, it has gotten worse."
La Croix .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
marie3 said:
Basically, even when Francis quotes the exact words of John Paul II or Benedict XVI, from the moment it comes out of his mouth, it is immediately perceived as coming from a dangerous pope, who has an idea unorthodox of Catholicism.
Click to expand...
I do not know a single person, even among the rad-trads and anti-Francis’, that believes he’s heretical for calling for aid to the poor and mercy for everyone. This is a non-issue. Whoever wrote this is making stuff up, and has no clue what they’re talking about.
 
Last edited:
A bit of context would be helpful. My initial reaction is that whoever it is that’s saying this stuff has no clue what he’s talking about and is unfortunately inclined to name-calling.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know, I’m just glad that we have an Italian Argentinian Pope, so that people know Hispanics and Latinos are an ethnicity, not a race. Latin America is diverse, y’all. By the way, I don’t give two rips about the fact that Pope Francis is from Argentina, the Pope is the Pope.
 
Last edited:
marie3 said:
The American mentality that a Latin American Jesuit could be pope was a shock, and it still is.
Click to expand...
I have no idea why this would be “shocking” to anyone unless they had a pre-existing bias against Jesuits connected to “liberation theology”.

Most Americans don’t care.
 
The race card idea is silly. What people criticize Pope Francis for are his gaffes and his seemingly unorthodox statements and actions.
 
Last edited:
No, that is complete rubbish. I believe that liberation theology, which appears to be something that Pope Francis accepts, is at the heart of a lot of issues.

Race has nothing to do with it. That sounds like something Cupich would say.
 
I really don’t think Americans, unless they are Hispanic themselves, regard Pope Francis as being “Hispanic”. Argentina is only arguably Latino or Hispanic. It is an incredibly diverse country where Spanish is the lingua franca, just as English is in the United States. It was also poised to be a phenomenally wealthy country, but things went wrong (I know that is a gross simplification) and the country is not economically what it could or should be. A very large percentage, possibly a majority, of Argentinians are actually ethnic Italian. Spanish and Italian are very similar languages, and are to some extent mutually intelligible. (I have a basic knowledge of Spanish and I can pretty much decipher written Italian.)

So it is not as simple as saying “Francis is a Hispanic Pope from a poor country in Latin America”. And don’t ever refer to Argentina as “Third World”. The reaction of any self-respecting Argentinian would not be a good one at all. Many Argentinians actually regard themselves as displaced Europeans in the Western Hemisphere. (To some extent I share this attitude, but then again I’m kind of weird for an American. I skewer European anti-clericalism and American presumptuousness and anti-intellectualism with equal gusto.)
 
Last edited:
Liberation theology? I thought that movement was born in the 1970’s and nearly defunct by the 1990’s.
 
StudentMI said:
The race card idea is silly. What people criticize Pope Francis for are his gaffes and his seemingly unorthodox statements and actions.
Click to expand...
I agree, and the race card doesn’t make much sense for Francis because while he’s culturally Argentinian, he is clearly of Italian ancestry on both sides of his family, a second-generation immigrant from Italy on his dad’s side and a third-generation immigrant on his mom’s side. He is not in any sense of the word a typical “Latino” of Hispanic and/or indigenous ancestry.
HomeschoolDad said:
So it is not as simple as saying “Francis is a Hispanic Pope from a poor country in Latin America”. And don’t ever refer to Argentina as “Third World”. The reaction of any self-respecting Argentinian would not be a good one at all. Many Argentinians actually regard themselves as displaced Europeans in the Western Hemisphere.
Click to expand...
Also a good point. Latin American countries aren’t all the same, and Argentina is more developed than most.
 
Last edited:
The key is in your first sentence — some American circles.

And no, it’s not a bigot/racist or whatever issue. I like Pope Francis. But sometimes when he talks he seems a bit tone deaf.
Or it could be a translation problem because English is not his first language.
Or maybe the media takes some of his statements out of context and runs with it.
 
0Scarlett_nidiyilii said:
Or maybe the media takes some of his statements out of context and runs with it.
Click to expand...
Seems they like to make a liberal Democrat of him, but don’t like talking about his Catholicism.
JimG said:
Liberation theology? I thought that movement was born in the 1970’s and nearly defunct by the 1990’s.
Click to expand...
I would say you’re half right. It probably was born in the 1970s but has thoroughly infected the American Church as a watered down “liberation theology lite” in which there’s lots of talk of social reform and little of personal reform.
 
Me too.

Also tired of the Liberation Theology card being played all the time:
Tis_Bearself said:
I have no idea why this would be “shocking” to anyone unless they had a pre-existing bias against Jesuits connected to “liberation theology”.
Click to expand...
The amount of nit picking and vitriol slung at our Holy Father is disgusting.

In my own experience of interacting with various Catholics over a number of years there has been considerable attacks on both Benedict XVI and Francis. Pope St. JPII seems to be the last pope that had universal appeal from most Catholics.

> The next time you are tempted to scrutinize, criticize, or questions something the Supreme Pontiff says or does – take that opportunity to pray for him instead.

God bless the Servant of the Servants of God,
Deacon Christopher
 
Last edited:
StudentMI said:
40.png
StudentMI:
The race card idea is silly. What people criticize Pope Francis for are his gaffes and his seemingly unorthodox statements and actions.
Click to expand...
I agree, and the race card doesn’t make much sense for Francis because while he’s culturally Argentinian, he is clearly of Italian ancestry on both sides of his family, a second-generation immigrant from Italy on his dad’s side and a third-generation immigrant on his mom’s side. He is not in any sense of the word a typical “Latino” of Hispanic and/or indigenous ancestry.
Click to expand...
My point exactly. Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay are not “Hispanic” in the same way that, say, Mexico, Guatemala, or even Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic are. Taken as a group, they are more like a “Spanish-speaking Brazil”. Cuba is also entirely its own “thing”, for both obvious geopolitical reasons as well as cultural ones unto itself.
 
JimG said:
Liberation theology? I thought that movement was born in the 1970’s and nearly defunct by the 1990’s.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure of the exact time frame when it originated. However, it appears to be prevalent in some circles and I believe it is an ideology held by some clergy in central and South America. It could be born out of their personal experiences, stemming from poverty and other factors in that region.
 
MikeInVA said:
You would think the Pope could find someone to make sure he is quoted correctly after a while…
Click to expand...
The Vatican is kind of notorious for its poor English translations. You’d be surprised.
 
Last edited:
marie3 said:
In some American circles, Francis was not sufficiently orthodox and could even be heretical, because the pope had started to speak of the poor, of mercy …
Click to expand...
It may be a thought within “American circles” (although I am uncertain of the context of “American”…I am assuming it means the United States and not inclusive of all the Americas, but I could be wrong)…but I digress…

The fact is that NOTHING is more orthodox than speaking out about (or more appropriately, acting to care for the needs) of the poor.

And, because of that, “heretical” seems to be a woeful characterization of speaking out about or providing for the needs of the poor… the entire Gospel is replete with messages from our Lord, who if we are to imitate as we are called to do, to have consideration for the poor…therefore, because it is orthodox, and not contrary to Church teaching, it CANNOT be considered heresy.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top