Pope suggests Trump: not Christian

[irishpatrick]

It may not contribute much to the debate.

Personally, I do think that a Governor or a President, can be a sort of father figure to the state and to the Nation respectively.

And the Pope, Papa, likewise has that role.

And all of them are leaders. I hope this definition is not going to be argued as well.

You bet.

I feel to look at any politicians as father figures is a mistake and it betrays a huge problem with this nation. We seem to no longer have proper relational perspectives. Politicians should be viewed as public servants and really nothing more.

Also, to constantly create situations in which a Politician has X role, and so does the Pope, does nothing but make the two roles equal in many minds. As important as the President of the USA is, the office is many levels below the Pope in terms of importance.

Priests are called Father for a reason, and while they are to serve as Jesus served, they 100% do fill a role of spiritual father. Likewise, Bishops and Popes.

 

[Theo520]

Jesus has a flock.

The Pope has a flock.

A Bishop or Priest has a flock.

Businessman and politicians do NOT have flocks. Of course, you know that, you just seem to be in a contrary mood.

Both a Politician and a Priest are responsible for their respective constituencies. The term ‘Flock’ seems apropos in making the analogy, since it implies a responsibility to care for and serve.

A US politician is is not elected by nor responsible to Mexican citizens, only the Pope has a global flock.

 

[irishpatrick]

Both a Politician and a Priest are responsible for their respective constituencies. The term ‘Flock’ seems apropos in making the analogy, since it implies a responsibility to care for and serve.

A US politician is is not elected by nor responsible to Mexican citizens, only the Pope has a global flock.

I cannot disagree more strongly. How we use words matters, a lot.

Politicians have constituencies.

Priests, Bishops, and Popes have flocks, or faithful if you’d rather.

There is a huge (canyon size) difference (in real life) between the two.

I realize to some this seems like a silly semantical argument on my part, but as I said, how we use words matters. If we modify the normal use of words with meanings taken from other words, that tends mix-up both words. Politicians and clergy have drastically different roles, and we should not try to blend descriptions used to describe them.

 

[777rak]

immigration is about people, not economics or politics. It’s about children and families who are suffering,” he said.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/archbishop-gomez-the-popes-focus-is-human-suffering-not-donald-trump-62799/

. This is my Archdioceses (not trying to to sound like I am signaling out my/LA Archdioceses, rather making a statement). {I will also be receiving Confirmation here this April}

 

[irishpatrick]

Both a Politician and a Priest are responsible for their respective constituencies. The term ‘Flock’ seems apropos in making the analogy, since it implies a responsibility to care for and serve.

A US politician is is not elected by nor responsible to Mexican citizens, only the Pope has a global flock.

I disagree completely. You are making an (imo) inappropriate blending of the word flock to include citizens under a politician. You can bet that there are a great many millions who would reject any thought of belonging to an Obama flock, just as many millions would reject the idea of belonging to a George W. Bush flock, and they’d both be correct because there is no such thing as a political flock!

Let me say this: when our Lord Jesus walked this world, He had a flock, and there would be no one who would think those people belonged to a Ceasar flock, even if they remained Roman citizens.

Members of a flock (sheep, goats, etc.) follow their Shepherd. Politicians are not Shepherd’s, they are paid public servants and leaders. I follow no politician, though I have supported many.

Christians are unique and different than anything that has ever existed–we are called to stand apart, not to blend in be the same as everyone else and the only flock we belong to is the Lord’s, the Pope, Bishops and Priests. I vehemently reject any notion that I belong to any other flock!

To the Lord, His Church, and His Clergy–not to any other person. Period.

 

[Darryl1958]

Sure, I like brevity, but that brevity needs to make sense. To say Trump has a flock is utterly ridiculous. To say a politician has a flock is ridiculous.

This is getting more weird with every new post.

So, maybe instead of weird, I should say this thread seems to come from an alternate universe in which everything that is up here, is down there, and everything that is wrong here, is right there, and whereas here we have one Pope, in that universe there are infinite Popes and flocks.

Well, I think I did understand what was being implied, but I am not so emotionally invested into it either.

 

[Theo520]

Since the President was elected to be our leader, he is definitely responsible to US Citizens. We’ll just agree to disagree whether Shepherd and flock are a workable analogy.

At least you are acknowledging that US Politicians are not responsible for Mexican citizens (right?)

I disagree completely. You are making an (imo) inappropriate blending of the word flock to include citizens under a politician. You can bet that there are a great many millions who would reject any thought of belonging to an Obama flock, just as many millions would reject the idea of belonging to a George W. Bush flock, and they’d both be correct because there is no such thing as a political flock!

Let me say this: when our Lord Jesus walked this world, He had a flock, and there would be no one who would think those people belonged to a Ceasar flock, even if they remained Roman citizens.

Members of a flock (sheep, goats, etc.) follow their Shepherd. Politicians are not Shepherd’s, they are paid public servants and leaders. I follow no politician, though I have supported many.

Christians are unique and different than anything that has ever existed–we are called to stand apart, not to blend in be the same as everyone else and the only flock we belong to is the Lord’s, the Pope, Bishops and Priests. I vehemently reject any notion that I belong to any other flock!

To the Lord, His Church, and His Clergy–not to any other person. Period.

 

[meltzerboy]

And–so it continues–“Rod…Rod Serling, are you there?”

I’m channeling him as we speak! Love the TZ. And you’re right that this thread is becoming weird and uncharitable. I think the moderators might consider shutting it down for the good of all of us.

 

[johnnyc176]

I’m channeling him as we speak! Love the TZ. And you’re right that this thread is becoming weird and uncharitable. I think the moderators might consider shutting it down for the good of all of us.

What has been uncharitable? It’s gone off topic.That can be easily fixed by deleting irrelevant comments.

 

[sallybutler]

IMHO, I believe that many Catholics feel alienated by this Pope.

He only talks about the poor, 24/7. He seems to have nothing to say to those middle class and affluent Catholics that support the Church and carry her forward, and we need to hear from him. He is an important voice, especially in these confusing and dangerous times, when middle class people are so financially and morally stressed out and feeling so shaky about the future of the West. He seems to be very one-dimensional, and unable to speak to the whole flock.

I believe if he was more balanced, comments like the one we are discussing here, wouldn’t become such a major issue…

As someone who is currently middle class, but has also had nothing, I feel that he is reminding me that I should be grateful for what I have and should help those with less.

Do you not trust God to provide you with what you need, as opposed to what you want? Like Jesus, Pope Francis is harsher on those who have their physical needs met but are not having their spiritual needs being met. In the long run, which is more important?

 

[Path_Finder]

Both a Politician and a Priest are responsible for their respective constituencies. The term ‘Flock’ seems apropos in making the analogy, since it implies a responsibility to care for and serve.

A US politician is is not elected by nor responsible to Mexican citizens, only the Pope has a global flock.

Yes, it only is in regards to leadership.

I hope one day, all of Christianity can be one big flock.

 

[bekalc]

I think this attitude and thinking is perhaps the way to go. It strikes a good balance.

But on the issue of St. Paul chastizing St. Peter – you need to note, there’s a difference between two Apostles, people personally hand-picked by God to be key players of the early Church, hashing things out for the general good of the early Church; and the successor of St. Peter (who right now is Pope Francis) and the people commenting on this issue, who for the most part, are lay people (including myself, by the way).

Didn’t St. Catherine of Sienna call the Pope out to leave France? I really don’t think it’s the case that we cannot express our concern’s to the Pope. I know that someone mentioned to him that he hasn’t really talked to the concerns I believe of the Middle Class. And he actually thanked him for this. The Holy Father is not perfect and I think it is problematic if we pretend he is. I agree with the heart of what he is saying too. How things are said though and expressed matter though.

My biggest concern is how things were said. Because I personally am horrified frankly about the anger I am hearing. I am horrified that the reason Marco Rubio may lose the nomination is because he tried to make immigration reform happen. Horrified.

The way that people want to show a lack of mercy to immigrants.

But people need to understand the reasons why. I have heard many say that the rich in America want cheap labor and so they want open borders. But that the working class does not because cheap labor hurts their jobs. (in their mind) This needs to be understood. Then there are Americans who say the Democrats want open borders for votes. (horrible)

In reality we need immigration reform. We need to stop people from coming here illegal so they are not expoited. And if they have jobs they get paid the same as Americans. So there’s no unfair advantage to the exploiting companies.

Reality is we need GLOBAL ECONOMIC REFORM…

Controlling our borders IS part of this. I think someone like Rubio understands this and when its done we can start dealing fairly with folks who are here. Control our borders stop illegal immigration and then maybe Americans will start to think about dealing fairly with the people who are here. And opening their hearts to more.

So in a lot of ways the wall is important. As sad as it is. Sometimes doors and fences makes good neighbors. (My understanding is Rubio has mentioned wall and fencing) so it is not straight wall.

So that’s why I am concerned about the wall comments. Because the wall may be very well the key to fixing the situation. To allow real immigration reform.

And its the same with the issue with the Middle East. Is it unfair to say that people don’t have reasons to be concerned? That nations even Germany only have a limited amount of resources themselves. And yes there is the fact of ISIS. Yes we need to care for migrants but surely also the legitimate concerns of others need to be addressed.

My biggest concern here is that the way thing were said closed so many ears and hearts…

 

[grotto]

Good grief Charlie Brown! Everyone seems to be getting upset over Trump’s fear his plan for a border “wall” was going to mean he was not a Christian. Is that a fair assessment?
The media jumps to off the cuff, comments out of context, etc. The very title of this thread is not correct. The Vatican has cleared the matter up - Trump has cleared up his choice of the “disgraceful” adjective. Let’s get past this. Let’s discuss Super Delegates! Look for the new thread!

 

[abucs]

My biggest concern here is that the way thing were said closed so many ears and hearts…

I am concerned that when people raise criticism of the way things were said that in some people’s minds they automatically become a Trump supporter and are putting politics above religion.

That is super reach and completely untrue.

If i believed the pope wrongly criticised Ben Carson’s Christianity because of his stand on the secular issue of US immigration law would I then become a Ben Carson supporter?

I am not going to vote for Trump or Ben Carson. The issue is what the pope said and how it was said. It was never about taking some sort of stand of an all encompassing rejection of the pope in obedience to Trump or any other politician.

As you rightly point out, Francis has thanked people who have previously spoken up about the views of the middle class with respect to former comments from the pontiff.

I think the pope really needs to sit down and think whether these on-the-fly interviews with reporters are achieving good fruits.

 

[Good_Tidings]

You bet.

I feel to look at any politicians as father figures is a mistake and it betrays a huge problem with this nation. We seem to no longer have proper relational perspectives. Politicians should be viewed as public servants and really nothing more.

Also, to constantly create situations in which a Politician has X role, and so does the Pope, does nothing but make the two roles equal in many minds. As important as the President of the USA is, the office is many levels below the Pope in terms of importance.

Priests are called Father for a reason, and while they are to serve as Jesus served, they 100% do fill a role of spiritual father. Likewise, Bishops and Popes.

You bet! I think if one is looking toward a politician as a father figure there is something wrong. I had a great father. One good one is enough. No comparison. Priests are spititual fathers, politicians, not so much. And I agree, we are entering the Twilight Zone.

 

[queenofheartscv]

You bet! I think if one is looking toward a politician as a father figure there is something wrong. I had a great father. One good one is enough. No comparison. Priests are spititual fathers, politicians, not so much. And I agree, we are entering the Twilight Zone.

Why should it be such a sensitive thing to use the word “flock” to describe people under a strong leader? I remember often reading posts on this forum of people desiring to see a president who can inspire sacred values such as compassion, solidarity, peace and integrity. If people are looking for those things in a president, then indeed that role takes on a significant meaning. Perhaps it’s been so long since we had an inspirational president we have lost that sense.

 

[Path_Finder]

You bet! I think if one is looking toward a politician as a father figure there is something wrong. I had a great father. One good one is enough. No comparison. Priests are spititual fathers, politicians, not so much. And I agree, we are entering the Twilight Zone.

I consider saying “Twilight Zone” and likewise, as to simply be a way to intimidate people and abrasive.

Secondly, you see a state and city flooded, sure, the Governor is the leader and in a sense, can be a father figure.

Likewise, saying the Pope is Shepherd or Papa, are two different descriptions.

It would be good to hear some real reasoning; instead of just interjecting some description that in my view, seemingly casts others in a negative light.

Oh, and Ronald Reagan or Bernie Sanders have never been described as Grandfather figures, especially with young voters, we’ve got it. The news media and others are in the “Twilight Zone” for even suggesting such.

 

[Path_Finder]

Why should it be such a sensitive thing to use the word “flock” to describe people under a strong leader? I remember often reading posts on this forum of people desiring to see a president who can inspire sacred values such as compassion, solidarity, peace and integrity. If people are looking for those things in a president, then indeed that role takes on a significant meaning. Perhaps it’s been so long since we had an inspirational president we have lost that sense.

Bernie Sanders and Ronald Reagan undoubtedly, have been likened to as Grandfather figures.

 

[queenofheartscv]

Bernie Sanders and Ronald Reagan undoubtedly, have been likened to as Grandfather figures.

George Washington is called father of our country, and Lincoln can be safely called father of our nation for winning the civil war and restoring unity.

 

[Good_Tidings]

Oh, for goodness sake!!! You should be happy to know that “daddy” won South Carolina.