Is Pope Francis a Populist?

[kozlosap]

It makes you wonder whether the gay lobby have already got their grip on the higher levels of the institution.

Your statement is outrageous. Pope Francis is not an academic, he is a missionary to the entire world as he is making more clear in each day since his election. His answer about our gay brothers and sisters that was given in the news conference absolutely follows what is found in the CCC. Do “you” judge what is in other peoples hearts? I certainly hope not. I think that we should focus more on Pope Francis’ request that the Church spend more time helping “the least of us” and being more welcoming. Following the Gospels and walking in the shoes of the Fisherman is his calling given to him by the Holy Spirt. In a wonderful way he is continuing the worldwide parish that Blessed JPll started, albeit in a different manner.

 

[pnewton]

LOL, I do trust in God, but evil a force about too who want to compromise our standards. Mr Moore’s automatic interpretation symbolizes the ‘public’, this is what they infer because they have no knowledge of catholic doctrine. He must be clear about what he means, is my point.

It’s important for the Pope to teach VERY CLEARLY.

He is very clear, but not just about sin. There is more to the gospel than fire and brimstone. Doctrine is more than a list of sins. There is also a whole lot of “good news”.

I have not idea what that first sentence says, but I would be slow to believe anything Michael Moore says. He is a propagandist by trade.

 

[Julian_Bashir]

The basic thrust of your point I think is well intended. I would say that many blogs will be hammering out your point in many differing ways. It is a type of problem with no easy solutions. Even the last Pope had the same issues. The condom comment is a perfect example. He said what he said and you had 20 different orthodox sources all claiming to know what he really said and intended. Some contradicting others. The same will happen here and probably more into the future. You have instant access to communication. You have sources that are often biased. You have different people hearing different things. And you have the para experts claiming to inform you what he “really” said and intended.

What is the solution to this confusion? Read actual Church sources I guess.

The problem is most people are not reading Church documents.

Topics as weighty as the Church’s stance on homosexuality should not be addressed with two line snippets. As a world leader, the Pope needs to be aware of how his supporters and enemies hang on every word. He didn’t clearly state Catholic teaching with any specificity that IMO does a service to those listening. He did not actually (that I saw) mention the Church’s teachings on homosexuality, even though that was the topic at hand. That, coupled with his recent appointment of Monsignor Ricca the Prelate of the Vatican Bank (apparently not being aware of Ricca’s ongoing encounters (breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/07/21/Francis-Gay-Scandal)) send the wrong message. Many people who live in sin believe they seek God and are doing His will. People who skip Mass do so because they believe it isn’t a big deal. People who use contraception do so because they believe it isn’t a big deal. They don’t do it to throw it in God’s face; in many cases, they simply do it and believe He still loves them. Which, of course He does, but that is not a synonym for “you don’t have to stop what you are doing.”

Like it or not, the impression of what is said is as important as what is being said. Different Popes have different styles, and some are better at certain areas than others. Time will tell with Pope Francis what His unique gifts are, but I think in this case, he didn’t help clarify anything, but may have muddled the issue for many people.

 

[Mary_Fleurdelis]

My advice: stop reading the news, and only believe what you SEE and HEAR (simultaneously, sound bites can be edited) the pope say. The media manipulates and skews the smallest facts. The media has an agenda, and even if it’s not a grand orchestrated agenda, individual members of the media are less religious and more hostile to religion compared to the average population.

The pope said everyone is redeemed, btw. Redemption and salvation are different. I would suggest a read-up on those, as I was never taught the distinction. It now saves my behind in fights with fundamentalists. Not going to even comment on the homosexuality quotes. Read Catholic Register.

The main problem I see here is not the pope’s choice of words, the media, or Church teaching, but lazy lay people not knowing their own religion. We should have the background enough to squash 90% of Christianity-bashing (and the guts to speak up about it). We’re all guilty of that, and hopefully we’re willing to change that because we’re all right here on this forum.

 

[fix]

The problem is most people are not reading Church documents.

Topics as weighty as the Church’s stance on homosexuality should not be addressed with two line snippets. As a world leader, the Pope needs to be aware of how his supporters and enemies hang on every word. He didn’t clearly state Catholic teaching with any specificity that IMO does a service to those listening. He did not actually (that I saw) mention the Church’s teachings on homosexuality, even though that was the topic at hand. That, coupled with his recent appointment of Monsignor Ricca the Prelate of the Vatican Bank (apparently not being aware of Ricca’s ongoing encounters (breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/07/21/Francis-Gay-Scandal)) send the wrong message. Many people who live in sin believe they seek God and are doing His will. People who skip Mass do so because they believe it isn’t a big deal. People who use contraception do so because they believe it isn’t a big deal. They don’t do it to throw it in God’s face; in many cases, they simply do it and believe He still loves them. Which, of course He does, but that is not a synonym for “you don’t have to stop what you are doing.”

Like it or not, the impression of what is said is as important as what is being said. Different Popes have different styles, and some are better at certain areas than others. Time will tell with Pope Francis what His unique gifts are, but I think in this case, he didn’t help clarify anything, but may have muddled the issue for many people.

I think you make a very balanced point.

Words matter for sure. The problem is so multi faceted that there is no perfect answer. I think Popes mostly read from prepared documents for a reason. They know whatever they say will be dissected. Off the cuff remarks often get sanitized by the Vatican after they are said to clarify things for the masses. It is sad that Catholics fail to grasp the most basic and fundamental teachings though.

 

[Elizabeth502]

The problem is most people are not reading Church documents.

Correct. And for many Catholics, their “Catechism” is too often the secular news media.

Topics as weighty as the Church’s stance on homosexuality should not be addressed with two line snippets…Like it or not, the impression of what is said is as important as what is being said. Different Popes have different styles, and some are better at certain areas than others. Time will tell with Pope Francis what His unique gifts are, but I think in this case, he didn’t help clarify anything, but may have muddled the issue for many people.

(Shortened for space)

Yes.

And just a side note, but perhaps pertinent in this case as well: There have been many celebrities in many fields who have refused to do interviews – many of them precisely for this reason.

 

[Robert_Sock]

He has also said other things like " atheists can go to heaven", which undermines scripture and the church. How can atheists go to heaven if they don’t acknowledge Christ. It’s written time and time again and in our creed.

I believe that some self-proclaimed atheists unwittingly worship Christ more than some self-proclaimed Catholics. I also believe that these atheists unwittingly share in the suffering of Christ more so than some Catholics. So, yes, I too believe that some atheist do indeed go to Heaven.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Sending out ambiguous messages will lead people to the church on a false premise.

I think he is trying to build bridges (as opposed to walls).

He has also said other things like " atheists can go to heaven", which undermines scripture and the church.

From the conversations that I’ve read in this forum even before he made that statement there seemed to be a view that it is not entirely impossible for an atheist to find him or herself in heaven.

Also, this idea of social networking following the Pope on twitter/retweets and indulgences, again, this trivializes what acting on the faith is about.

I thought it was engaging a form of communication that many people use.

It encourages us to be lazy behind out screens instead of doing volunteering work and spreading the word to our friends.

I share your opinion when social media is used as a way to rake in likes. Such as an image with the caption “like this image if you want to stop child abuse.” As pointed out in an advertisement made by Publicis Singapore, Likes don’t help!. However, that doesn’t mean that action can’t be inspired or organized through social media.

 

[livingwordunity]

It makes you wonder whether the gay lobby have already got their grip on the higher levels of the institution.

They don’t have him because if they did he would have come out and sided with them fully from day one. And if the Pope were one of them he would have definitely taken the opportunity with his first encyclical to approve of so-called “same-sex marriage”. But instead, he says this in his encyclical:

“The first setting in which faith enlightens the human city is the family. I think first and foremost of the stable union of man and woman in marriage.” - Lumen Fidei, Pope Francis

And in the context of questioning on the way back from Brazil, he says (off the cuff):

“The problem is not having this tendency [SSA], no, we must be brothers, because this is one, but if there’s another, another. The problem is to lobby for this…” - Pope Francis, Press Conference in Return Flight from Brazil (Google Translate, “SSA” added by me)

I interpret this as him saying that SSA by itself isn’t a sin as long as homosexuality isn’t lobbied (actively promoted). This is essentially no different than what it teaches about homosexuals in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

And in return flight from Brazil, Pope Francis says Church has perfect teaching on abortion and homosexuals.

PRESS CONFERENCE OF POPE FRANCIS IN RETURN FLIGHT FROM BRAZIL (Translation by Google Translate)

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Patricia Zorzan:

Speaking on behalf of the Brazilians. Society has changed, young people have changed and you see so many young people in Brazil. You have not talked about abortion, marriage between same sex. In Brazil, a law was passed that extends the right to abortion and allowed marriage between persons of the same sex. Why did [you] not talk about this?

Papa Francesco:

The Church has already expressed this perfectly. It was not necessary to go back, as I have not even talked about the fraud, deceit or other things which the Church has a clear doctrine!

Source

But even if he would have completely renounced the whole faith in speaking off the cuff it would have caused scandal, but it would not have counted as anything binding. So, those who are waiting are still waiting (in vain). I think two basic rules to live by are this: The first rule is we should always trust that the Holy Spirit will prevent the Pope from doctrinal error when teaching according to the Church’s norms for Papal Infallibility. The second rule is we should never trust the media.

 

[njlisa]

Before you judge anything the Holy Father said, please view this video, in which the context is made perfectly clear.

youtube.com/watch?v=ZDCPEjnKuco&list=HL1375125116

 

[Gia_B]

The popular opinion now is that homosexuality (the act and marriage) is to be embraced. Therefore it is populism. IF you state anything against homosexual acts or same sex marriage, the public will condemn you for have another opinion.

That’s not what “populist” means . . . :ehh:

 

[njlisa]

That’s not what “populist” means . . . :ehh:

That’s correct … It’s vital that we define our terms in a discussion such as this one.

According to Merriam Webster, populist means

“a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people.”

According to Wikipedia,

Populism is a political doctrine where one sides with “the people” against “the elites”.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism

 

[bcuster]

We are allowing the secular media to place fear in our hearts and to divide us. READ the whole interview. READ what the Holy Father has written. SEE how he behaves toward the poor and the lowly. Pope Francis is imitating Jesus.

 

[njlisa]

We are allowing the secular media to place fear in our hearts and to divide us. READ the whole interview. READ what the Holy Father has written. SEE how he behaves toward the poor and the lowly. Pope Francis is imitating Jesus.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

I would suggest you stop getting your news about what the Pope says from the secular media…

I was reading through the thread and this is the exact answer I was going to state.

The press will hand onto anything from the Pope that supports their agenda. You typically see the press quote a sentence or two and then effectively write an opinion piece, and a very inaccurate on at that.

One thing that is very, very obvious about the press: Most of the press simply does not understand Catholicism in its most basic form. Much of the western press believes that every entity is malleable, be it governmental entities, secular private organizations, or even Christian organizations (as evidence by Protestant Churches allowing female priests, etc.). The concept of a Church having absolutes is completely foreign to them. When they report/write things about the Catholic Church, the fact that an absolute exists is not part of their mindset, which is why these fluff pieces are almost always flat out wrong.

 

[onthisrock]

It makes you wonder whether the gay lobby have already got their grip on the higher levels of the institution.

I think he did not listen or get paid by any lobby. He is a very humble man, giving up Prada or Gucci red shoes and taking public transportation. This shows he wants to be more like the people, as Christ did. He asked them to pray for him. More people want equal…not special rights for gays rather then there are actual gay people. I think if we trust Christ and His Church then we need to see out what unfolds. ONLY matters of faith and moral become dogma and after a LONG time.

Be at Peace…

 

[mitchell_s]

Pope Francis never condoned homosexual activity, he simply said he’s not going to judge people. He has also stressed that anyone can repent of their sins. So even if a person has committed the sin of homosexual acts, Jesus is always ready to forgive, that’s why he gave us the sacrament of reconciliation. No sin is to big for God to forgive. Any sex outside of marriage, the use of contraceptives, and missing mass on Sundays are all examples of grave sin, and they can all be forgive through the sacrament of reconciliation. I don’t think a big deal would have been made if Pope Francis had made the same comments about any of these other sins. People would have just assumed his message was about forgiveness. That’s what it was in this case, it was not about condoning sinful activity. And he also never granted indulgences for following him on twitter, this was also something the media got wrong.

 

[Emerald_Isle]

Judging from some of the commentary on this side of the Atlantic it seems that certain people enthused by Pope Francis’ adoption of a simpler lifestyle etc got the notion that he would also ‘modernise’ Church Teaching on social issues. There is little point in trying to explain to such folk that core teachings are not subject to passing whims. If anything the demand for change in relation to ‘gay marriage’ , abortion and so on merely shows how the devil is succeeding. He hasn’t gone away, you know!

I think we should pray that Pope Francis continues to live the Gospel and that we all might hold fast to our faith and with God’s help defeat the evil one.

Michael

 

[MasterWooten]

I don’t know about him being a populist. What I do know is that since his persona is one of a more charismatic leader than say Benedict XVI before him and he seems to have a more emphasized history with social justice issues and being a “simple man”, he risks being used by many secular progressives as a validation of their values as opposed to those of the church.

For example 2 weeks ago he essentially reiterated that Catechism’s teaching on homosexuality which is that while the orientation itself isn’t bad, acting on that orientation is sin or “disordered” as the Catechism teaches. He also went on to say that treating homosexuals badly because of their sexual disposition is not “Christ-like” behavior which to me is totally consistent with “love the sinner hate the sin” conservative Christian teaching on these issues. Well from this the mainstream media ignored the whole “acting on homosexuality is a sin part” and announced that the Pope had just announced a new church policy on gays from aboard an airplane, which based on the widespread knowledge of how we as church devise policy makes one look utterly ignorant if they were to believe such malarkey.

This always has me thinking about how progressives and secularists love to quote John 8 verses 7 to 10 “let he who is without sin cast the first stone”, but conveniently leave off verse 11 where he says "“Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
It’s all selective listening. Taking what you came to hear and then announcing to the world that the unlikeliest of candidates shares your agenda. Pope Francis didn’t announce that a “Pride Parade” will be coming to Vatican City in 2013, but taking his statements, either in pieces or out of context is the next best thing. Everybody knows that the Roman Catholic Church did not elect “Bishop” Gene Robinson as its Pope so really who are the secular progressives particularly in the media aiming to fool, but the truly misinformed.