Pope's speech to US Congress [full text] [CC]

[JakeWI]

My wife is home on maternity leave for our first child, so she has been watching the Pope speak on EWTN and the likes. Her comment on him is ‘what a humble man’. I have prayed on this all… the emphasis he puts on certain things over others. I do believe while his approach is so different than the previous Popes, maybe this is what we need right now. Someone who meets them on the ground floor at the issues of life between us and on earth… all of God’s gifts to us and each other.

Conversion of hearts will happen when things touch us on the most personal level. I can tell you… even though I am typically very conservative… we need change in our thinking and priorities before we can get on track. I see it everyday at my work: money has such a priority for so many. While I love my job, I hate that part. It seems as if the people making triple my pay are even more consumed. I am here, content making what I am as I know God has provided me with what I need. He has given me a beautiful wife and now a beautiful daughter as well that we can teach the beauty of the Church to so she can also make a difference and serve others with her God given gifts. Which, in the end, is what matters to get us to Heaven when our time on earth is done.

 

[TCEL]

Agreed. He’s inspiring. Not that other popes weren’t effective. But Pope Francis is special…Listening to him brings tears to my eyes.

Reading Pope Benedicts Intro to Christianity brought tears to my eyes. It was then I realized how unjustly maligned he was. Not to mention all the converts he attracted as well. Other Popes are special too to the people they have affected. Frankly, this is one of the things that has left the most sour taste in my mouth about the media’s gushing about Pope Francis, is the terrible injustice they have done to other men. They skew everything, and I’m tired of it. All that said, I definitely shouldn’t let the media taint my vision of Pope Francis either. It’s been a personal struggle and pet peeve.

 

[TCEL]

Reading Pope Benedicts Intro to Christianity brought tears to my eyes. It was then I realized how unjustly maligned he was. Not to mention all the converts he attracted as well. Other Popes are special too to the people they have affected. Frankly, this is one of the things that has left the most sour taste in my mouth about the media’s gushing about Pope Francis, is the terrible injustice they have done to other men. They skew everything, and I’m tired of it. All that said, I definitely shouldn’t let the media taint my vision of Pope Francis either. It’s been a personal struggle and pet peeve.

Granted, this is more due to an innate suspicion of celebrity. I want to reaffirm that I believe Pope Francis is special, and that his celebrity only makes sense.

 

[exnihilo]

Please do not dismay that abortion was only mentioned briefly. I think we will hear much more about it this weekend, when he is at the World Meeting for Families. I noticed that the media completely ignored his statement during the speech to Congress about “respecting life at all stages” even though it garnered him applause. I don’t think they will be able to ignore his statements this weekend.

You are right that we ought to consider the whole work of the Pope, especially on his visit to the US. Folks, including me, often fail to look at the whole picture. Nonetheless I do wish the Pope during the section on marriage and children had at least said every child deserves a mother and father. That is still oblique but a powerful way to be oblique.

 

[Suudy]

How come you get to tell people how to feel?

How did I dictate feelings?

 

[anthrogirl]

They aren’t equally evil. Starvation is an evil condition, not an evil action, unless someone intended it to happen. And the unintentional killing of children in war is an evil event that does not make the one who caused it guilty of murder, as with the intentional killing of children in abortion.

War is inherently evil unless you are fending off a direct attack. For example, Pope John Paul’s call for the US not to invade Iraq was a clear indication that the church thought that the deaths caused by that particular war were not justifiable in the eyes the God. The US did not need to invade. The UN inspectors found no evidence of WMDs prior to the invasion and Pope John Paul knew this, as did the US. One of the inspectors even went on Jay Leno begging the US not to go in, just a week before the invasion. The deaths of soldiers and civilians were a heavy price to pay. And the costs of those deaths, the sins of those murders, lay squarely on the men and women who directly caused them (pulled the triggers, dropped the bombs, fired the missiles) and on the leadership who sent them there. And none of them can hide behind the “Well, he told me to do it” excuse. No one during that war was forced to be in the military. It was and still is a voluntary gig. We’d like to spin death by war as an event. But war is no accident. It is premeditated murder in most instances.

If an angry person is running at you with a crowbar, ready to smash your head in and you shoot him dead, that’s a matter of survival. If someone breaks into your house and steals your big screen TV and you shoot him dead while he’s running out the door, that’s a matter of anger and retribution. And even with that justification, we need to acknowledge that death is a huge price to extract from anyone under any circumstance. Pope John Paul forgave his shooter and Jesus forgave those who crucified him. The bar has been set very very high for us, making it extremely difficult for us to choose war/death over forgiveness/peace. So when we do, it better be because we had no other option.

 

[Path_Finder]

War is inherently evil unless you are fending off a direct attack. For example, Pope John Paul’s call for the US not to invade Iraq was a clear indication that the church thought that the deaths caused by that particular war were not justifiable in the eyes the God. The US did not need to invade. The UN inspectors found no evidence of WMDs prior to the invasion and Pope John Paul knew this, as did the US. One of the inspectors even went on Jay Leno begging the US not to go in, just a week before the invasion. The deaths of soldiers and civilians were a heavy price to pay. And the costs of those deaths, the sins of those murders, lay squarely on the men and women who directly caused them (pulled the triggers, dropped the bombs, fired the missiles) and on the leadership who sent them there. And none of them can hide behind the “Well, he told me to do it” excuse. No one during that war was forced to be in the military. It was and still is a voluntary gig. We’d like to spin death by war as an event. But war is no accident. It is premeditated murder in most instances.

If an angry person is running at you with a crowbar, ready to smash your head in and you shoot him dead, that’s a matter of survival. If someone breaks into your house and steals your big screen TV and you shoot him dead while he’s running out the door, that’s a matter of anger and retribution. And even with that justification, we need to acknowledge that death is a huge price to extract from anyone under any circumstance. Pope John Paul forgave his shooter and Jesus forgave those who crucified him. The bar has been set very very high for us, making it extremely difficult for us to choose war/death over forgiveness/peace. So when we do, it better be because we had no other option.

Likewise, if Saddam was carrying out genocide which he was convicted of and one says go ahead, we won’t do anything, that doesn’t speak well for the non-interventionists who should share blame.

Inspectors were not granted access to nuclear sites, saying differently appears divergent from the facts.

It’s not as clear as what is asserted above which ignores intelligence reports conveniently.

Even Obama’s own security chief James Clapper has thought the WMDs in Iraq were ferried off to Syria.

Iraq Chemical Weapons Moved to Syria Before 2003 Invasion?

James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence in the Obama Administration, thought so.

From the Daily Beast:

Whether or not sensitive weapons technology was moved to Syria is a hotly disputed question in the intelligence community. James Clapper, now the Director of National Intelligence and formerly the director of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, said in 2003 that he believed materials had been moved out of Iraq in the months before the war and cited satellite imagery.

If the Bashar al-Assad regime falls, and should the securing of the chemical and biological stockpiles of Syria be necessary, what would be the effect if some of those materials and munitions bear Iraqi markings?

Former Iraqi General Sada asserted that Saddam’s chemical stockpile was lifted, in his book “Saddam’s Secrets” and summarized by Investor’s Business Daily:

As Sada told the New York Sun, two Iraqi Airways Boeings were converted to cargo planes by removing the seats, and special Republican Guard units loaded the planes with chemical weapons materials.

There were 56 flights disguised as a relief effort after a 2002 Syrian dam collapse.

blog.usni.org/2012/07/20/iraq-chemical-weapons-moved-to-syria-before-2003-invasion

Non-Interventionist need to also weigh in Hussein’s conviction on genocide of the Kurds. This could have well continued if Hussein was not toppled.

 

[anthrogirl]

Reading Pope Benedicts Intro to Christianity brought tears to my eyes. It was then I realized how unjustly maligned he was. Not to mention all the converts he attracted as well. Other Popes are special too to the people they have affected. Frankly, this is one of the things that has left the most sour taste in my mouth about the media’s gushing about Pope Francis, is the terrible injustice they have done to other men. They skew everything, and I’m tired of it. All that said, I definitely shouldn’t let the media taint my vision of Pope Francis either. It’s been a personal struggle and pet peeve.

I’m a Catholic Review subscriber. I also teach RE to middle schoolers so I frequently scour various Catholic resources for relevant and timely info. And yes, I do put on CNN from time and I also subscribe to the NY Times and my local paper. So my perceptions are not solely main stream media. You must admit that even the Catholic media is on fire with Pope Francis. Pope Benedict was the green pope, laying the groundwork for climate change initiatives that are aligned with the church’s mission on protecting life. And he put climate change on par with abortion when it comes to life issues. I can and do acknowledge that his work in the name of God was exceptional. But he did not have the same appeal as Pope Francis. Francis is touching the hearts of Catholics and non Catholics alike. It feels like Pentecost in a way.

 

[sarah_j]

Please do not dismay that abortion was only mentioned briefly. I think we will hear much more about it this weekend, when he is at the World Meeting for Families. I noticed that the media completely ignored his statement during the speech to Congress about “respecting life at all stages” even though it garnered him applause.

I am dismayed!
If the Pope does speak out more against abortion at the Bishops’ meeting,
he is merely “preaching to the choir”. He should have spoken out more
clearly to Congress, where the real debate about abortion is taking place.
Presumably, there won’t be a debate on the merits of funding abortion at
the World Meeting for Families !

With pro-life Congressmen fighting so hard at this moment in time to defund
Planned Parenthood the Pope could have clearly verbalized the Church’s stand
against abortion to the U.S. Congress but didn’t take the opportunity to do so.

The Holy Father could have extended his support to the courageous men
in the audience who are fighting tooth and nail against abortion (such as Ted Cruz
and Daleidon) but instead made only a vague statement about respect for life
at all stages.
VERY disappointing.

 

[ringil]

EWTN radio following Pope Francis with Raymond Arroyo said that it can be “merciful” to execute a criminal and was arguing why capital punishment is a legitimate practice in our country, despite what the Holy Father said to congress.

Am I the only catholic who thinks Raymond’s argument is extremely stupid? The pro-abortionists use the same stupid logic to defend abortion as well. EWTN is doing our church a disservice by overtly politicizing our faith to the benefit of the GOP.

Raymond Arroyo and his show are merely a vehicle of Rightist politics first, and Catholicism wedged in there somewhere.

 

[Path_Finder]

Raymond Arroyo and his show are merely a vehicle of Rightist politics first, and Catholicism wedged in there somewhere.

He is the long time anchorman and newsman for EWTN, the world’s largest Catholic broadcaster and one is calling this “rightist politics”. Wow. Everyone should take note of such an observation. So, since Arroyo is a mainstay of EWTN, that must mean they are “rightist politics”. Whom are we to make such judgements?

By the way, since I have seen no transcript of what Arroyo said, I’d want to read his exact words instead of just accepting that he said the death penalty was merciful.

 

[Path_Finder]

The Pope loved Boehner during the speech. You can tell the two men have a deep respectful relationship.

 

[Path_Finder]

I am dismayed!
If the Pope does speak out more against abortion at the Bishops’ meeting,
he is merely “preaching to the choir”. He should have spoken out more
clearly to Congress, where the real debate about abortion is taking place.
Presumably, there won’t be a debate on the merits of funding abortion at
the World Meeting for Families !

With pro-life Congressmen fighting so hard at this moment in time to defund
Planned Parenthood the Pope could have clearly verbalized the Church’s stand
against abortion to the U.S. Congress but didn’t take the opportunity to do so.

The Holy Father could have extended his support to the courageous men
in the audience who are fighting tooth and nail against abortion (such as Ted Cruz
and Daleidon) but instead made only a vague statement about respect for life
at all stages.

 VERY disappointing.

This is well put.

Cruz certainly has a conscience; all Catholics should be adamantly against abortion as is Church teaching and the position of the Left taking life for granted is abhorrent. The administration mirrors this immorality in supporting Planned Parenthood. Some Catholics seem to ignore this.

 

[Thomas_White]

… we need change in our thinking and priorities before we can get on track. I see it everyday at my work: money has such a priority for so many. While I love my job, I hate that part. It seems as if the people making triple my pay are even more consumed.

Perhaps most of us have seen this. I know I have. And I frequently ask myself, “But are they happy?”

 

[Joe_5859]

I’m under the impression that some had certain expectations regarding this address, and when these expectations were not met they are now concerned and upset.

Sometimes you need a jackhammer, sometimes you need a rock hammer. It depends on what rocks are present, and what you wish to do. In this specific instance, it’s possible that this was neither the time nor the place to discuss same-sex “marriage” and the slaughter of the unborn. By speaking on the topics he did, it could be he wants to make liberals more receptive to his other messages. This is something that should be readily obvious to all.

For the Catholics who wanted more on abortion, doctor assisted suicide, and same-sex marriage, there’s still a twofold message. The first is that there are other issues that are pressing, not just those three. His Holiness has mention that before, this could be his way of doing so again. The second message is that we are called to evangelize, and if we feel this strongly about some of these topics we could act on those emotions in a constructive manner - rather than focusing on what was and wasn’t said. Have our own words be spoken.

Make no mistake; Pope Francis has commented on abortion and same-sex marriage before. The media has refused to highlight these things because they seek to paint him as a “liberal Pope”. Laughably, some “traditional” Catholics are buying that narrative - not necessarily due to the media, but due to the Pope not aligning with their perceptions of what he “should” be talking about.

Remember that in addition to being Pope, he’s a South American who took on the name of Francis of Assisi. Although he may be a Jesuit, he obviously has an appreciation of Franciscan spirituality. When reflecting on these sensibilities, we shouldn’t be surprised that there is a lot of focus on the poor and the lost. We also shouldn’t be surprised he highlights certain messages in certain situations; remember the strong words he had on abortion when talking to medical professionals? I’d rather he do that here in North America; if the doctors begin to realize the holocaust of abortion then there will be no one to carry them out.

Ultimately, the address he did ties into the narrative of his papacy. Abortion and doctor assisted suicide will be spoken of, have been spoken of, and will be spoken of in the future - those too tie into the narrative. The narrative that is we live in a disposable culture; where the poor, the disabled, the the elderly, the unborn, the imprisoned, the Earth itself - they are all threatened in so many different ways. In a sense, he is continuing the legacy of the Prophet Paul VI through the transcendent encyclical Humanae Vitae. Pope Francis seeks to highlight this and fight this, and he does so through his words and actions. In his address he did this for the poor, the Earth, the imprisoned and for the family unit. In other addresses he will speak of abortion and same-sex marriage.

For now, temper the expectations on hearing specifics. Set your expectations that Pope Francis will speak about the disposable culture, and may not speak about the one that is closest to your heart. He is continuing the legacy of the Prophet, and as someone whom is impacted greatly by society’s zeal to terminate those who they deem unworthy or disposable via doctor assisted suicide, I am thrilled with his work.

May the Lord continue to bless and guide the Holy Father in his fight against the disposable culture.

Well put.

If we pay attention to what the Holy Father is saying, the thread that weaves through everything is all about the dignity of the human person and the need for us to reject the prevailing the “culture of waste.” That culture is manifested in many ways, including abortion, divorce, greed, poverty, hopelessness, etc. He cannot possibly mention every single example at every single moment. And there is no need to do so.

We need to listen for the message rather than just doing a word search of his comments for particular phrases.

 

[adawgj]

He is the long time anchorman and newsman for EWTN, the world’s largest Catholic broadcaster and one is calling this “rightist politics”. Wow. Everyone should take note of such an observation. So, since Arroyo is a mainstay of EWTN, that must mean they are “rightist politics”. Whom are we to make such judgements?

By the way, since I have seen no transcript of what Arroyo said, I’d want to read his exact words instead of just accepting that he said the death penalty was merciful.

Plus having watched his show Arroyo is good friends and has interviewed Democrats like James Carville, and they were pretty good.

 

[Thomas_White]

I am dismayed!
If the Pope does speak out more against abortion at the Bishops’ meeting,
he is merely “preaching to the choir”. He should have spoken out more
clearly to Congress, where the real debate about abortion is taking place.
Presumably, there won’t be a debate on the merits of funding abortion at
the World Meeting for Families !

With pro-life Congressmen fighting so hard at this moment in time to defund
Planned Parenthood the Pope could have clearly verbalized the Church’s stand
against abortion to the U.S. Congress but didn’t take the opportunity to do so.

The Holy Father could have extended his support to the courageous men
in the audience who are fighting tooth and nail against abortion (such as Ted Cruz
and Daleidon) but instead made only a vague statement about respect for life
at all stages.

 VERY disappointing.

Congress already knows the position of the Church on abortion as well as its wider teaching: Respect for life in all its stages. I don’t believe Pope Francis spoke to Congress with any intent of wading into the partisan politics of the moment. Catholic teaching transcends partisan politics, and I think that was his message.

 

[lynnvinc]

I am absolutely shocked that he did not talk more directly about SSM and abortion…??? …

And I was surprised he didn’t mention climate change, which is the mother of all pro-life issues.

But then I figured his goal was to try and bring the polarizing sides together so that they can compromise and get the work done – maybe the pro-choice folks softening to a stronger stance to work against abortion, and the anti-environmental, climate-change denialist folks to take some baby steps in the direction of policies that would encourage people to do the needful re climate change and the environment in ways that save them money and strengthen the economy.

I’m praying that much good come out of his talk. Souls are also at stake.

 

[Suudy]

Congress already knows the position of the Church on abortion as well as its wider teaching: Respect for life in all its stages. I don’t believe Pope Francis spoke to Congress with any intent of wading into the partisan politics of the moment. Catholic teaching transcends partisan politics, and I think that was his message.

And Congress already knows the position of the Church on capital punishment. And I’m quite certain they were aware of Papa Francis’s position on immigration and climate change as well. So why be explicit on the latter two, but be vague on the former? The mere fact that Congress being aware of the Church’s position on abortion isn’t the reason. And if it was to transcend politics, why be explicit on some issue but not others?

I admit, I don’t get why he used the tactic he did. It doesn’t make sense to me to have different emphases on issues.

 

[Suudy]

And I was surprised he didn’t mention climate change, which is the mother of all pro-life issues.

Only if climate change will lead to the death of human beings, and if there’s anything we can do to prevent it. I’m not sure this is the case. Further, abortion is the intentional destruction of innocent human life. Climate change–even if man made–does not intend the end of any human being. I think efforts to curb climate change fall below intentional acts of murder. So, no, I do not think think climate change is the mother of all pro-life issues.