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

[Beautiful]

No mention of abortion or same sex marriage. Quite frankly it was a very disappointing speech.

The Pope’s speech to Congress was perfect.

The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development.

Coming from a Catholic Pope, this can only mean one thing.

As far as his comments on same sex marriage…or lack there of…
Again…look at his view point from where he stood.
He is a loving father to all.
Same sex marriages/families and various other family arrangements have been around in one shape or another since the beginning of time. His concern is for all and where they are at this particular time. Yours might be a blessed ideal sacramental marriage and family. Be thankful! So few really have this.

His words were well chosen and did not exclude anyone…absolutely everyone was called to respond positively and lovingly to his message…including and especially the dour looking Supreme Court Justices front row seat who did finally stand for an O at the end.

 

[Seamus_L]

The problem with the Pope’s statement “The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development”. is that so many people now dispute exactly when life begins.

 

[Songcatcher]

I hope you are not referring to Jesus Christ as a “pet social issue,” considering the Pope didn’t mention him once.

He directly quoted him at least once and spent his entire speech delivering Christ’s message.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Maybe this will lift some spirits. (this is another thread)

Pope visits U.S. nuns involved in Obamacare contraception lawsuit
news.yahoo.com/pope-visits-u-nuns-involved-obamacare-contraception-lawsuit-021905130.html

Based on my personal experience, 98% of Western European or South American or Eastern European or Australian/New Zealander (or whatever - nonUS resident) will say to you as an American in essence what the Pope says in this speech about the role of America in the world. Sorry, but there it is. In political terms anyway. I wouldn’t sweat it. I do personally think America does need to play a more aggressive role on the world stage than the Pope does - Benedict did this too - Iraq war. And it is a mistake to read too much into it - this is what a lot of the US secular and even Catholic left will do with it, I agree. Only to hit the same old wall on the moral doctrine with him. (I saw a Democratic Strategist on O’Reilly last night try and argue that the Pope has made no mention of religious liberty and the Catholic Church does not oppose gay marriage - seriously)

 

[Suudy]

The fact that the Church is against wealth inequality is not common knowledge in the US congress. It is important to clarify that in a place, like the US congress, that can do something about it.

Interestingly, Dr Feser has a blog post about exactly this he posted Tuesday:

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2015/09/poverty-no-inequality-si.html

And from that, he makes a great point:
When people complain about economic inequality, this can make sense from a moral point of view only if talk of inequality is really a proxy for something else. Most obviously, it certainly makes sense to lament that some people live in poverty, and it makes sense to call on those who have wealth (and indeed in some cases and to some extent to require those who have wealth) to help those who live in poverty. But the problem here is not that the poor have less than others. The problem is that they have less than they need. The problem, that is to say, is poverty, not inequality.
So, I’m not sure the Church is against wealth inequality per se, but against poverty specifically. But that point gets lost in the rhetoric.

I think it is pretty common knowledge in the US congress that the Church is against abortion in all its forms.

Is it? In all forms? When we have self-professed Catholics, such as Rep Pelosi, talk about it in glowing terms about abortion in the same sentence they talk about their Catholic faith, I’m not so sure. I know of many examples of people thinking abortion is acceptable, even to the Church, for the exceptionally rare “life of the mother” cases.

 

[Alix1912]

Here is a Non Catholic View…(I’m Lutheran MS)

He had an opportunity to speak directly about issues like abortion, SSM, religious freedom etc…and he spoke to it…sort of. His speech was wishy washy, and left hugely open to interpretation. Basically it was a feel good fussy speech. Not that much substance.

It was disappointing. Sadly I’ve seen my own Synod President speak more forcefully and directly to congress.

He squandered a huge opportunity.

I’m hoping he won’t for his UN speech but I suspect he will.

This is the speech I would like to hear before the UN would consist of a DEMAND that the UN recognize what ISIS is doing to Christians and Yazidi in the Middle East as Genocide. Thus forcing the world to take action. I would like to see him DEMAND that the UN and the US lift is restriction on refugee visas for Christians and Yazidi fleeing the Middle East (They currently allow no Refugee visas for anyone but Muslims fleeing the Middle East). I’d love to hear him call for aid and support for these groups to help them flee and resettle elsewhere.

The majority of these Christians are Catholic…yet they are getting more aid from Protestants and specifically Mormons than they are from their own Holy Father and frankly I find that disgraceful. Couple that with his uninformed statement that the US could have done more to stop the Holocaust then we did (ironically made from the Vatican, which did some, but could have done more, and made though the 20/20 lense that looking back on these events can give), it is downright SHAMEFUL that he is demanding that European Parishes take in “Refugees” that are Muslim, yet ignores the Christians (one dying every 5 Minutes) in the Middle East.

Instead of a speech to help and protect persecuted Religious minorities through the world…He will probably talk about Climate change, evil air conditioners, and how wealthy nations (meaning the US) should give everything to poor developing nations dictators in power.

But it’s to be expected from a Man who grew up in a socialist country and revered a leader (Juan Peron), who manipulated the poor, and sheltered Nazi’s.

Frankly, there was a time when even as a protestant, I would defend the Pope and the Catholic Church from those who spread stupid unfounded rumors and lies about it. I know my catholic husband pray for me to convert…under JPII (one of the holiest men to walk this earth) or even Benedict it might have been an idea I could have possibly entertained…under this guy…No thanks…not a lot of wise spiritual leadership coming from him.

 

[Neofight]

So very disappointed in this speech. Played right into the hands of the anti-Christian, Liberal Progressive Pro-Abortion Democrats.

He talks about the climate change hoax and talks about immigrants, but never mentions our country is broke ($100,000 debt for every man, woman and child) and how to get the money to pay for all these people. Our U6 real unemployment rate is over 10% and more for African-Americans. So where do we get the jobs for these people?

Why did he not condemn the Democrats for their abortion promotion and killing of babies? Why no attack on Democrats and Obama for failing to try and save the Christians being slaughtered by ISIS?

For a man who is so pro-people, on everything else I am just ashamed to be a Catholic after that speech.

Because he was speaking as our shepherd and not as the spokesman for your political party.

 

[Suudy]

Because he was speaking as our shepherd and not as the spokesman for your political party.

Abortion, same sex marriage, and euthanasia are merely political issues?

 

[FollowChrist34]

Here is a Non Catholic View…(I’m Lutheran MS)

He had an opportunity to speak directly about issues like abortion, SSM, religious freedom etc…and he spoke to it…sort of. His speech was wishy washy, and left hugely open to interpretation. Basically it was a feel good fussy speech. Not that much substance.

It was disappointing. Sadly I’ve seen my own Synod President speak more forcefully and directly to congress.

He squandered a huge opportunity.

I’m hoping he won’t for his UN speech but I suspect he will.

This is the speech I would like to hear before the UN would consist of a DEMAND that the UN recognize what ISIS is doing to Christians and Yazidi in the Middle East as Genocide. Thus forcing the world to take action. I would like to see him DEMAND that the UN and the US lift is restriction on refugee visas for Christians and Yazidi fleeing the Middle East (They currently allow no Refugee visas for anyone but Muslims fleeing the Middle East). I’d love to hear him call for aid and support for these groups to help them flee and resettle elsewhere.

The majority of these Christians are Catholic…yet they are getting more aid from Protestants and specifically Mormons than they are from their own Holy Father and frankly I find that disgraceful. Couple that with his uninformed statement that the US could have done more to stop the Holocaust then we did (ironically made from the Vatican, which did some, but could have done more, and made though the 20/20 lense that looking back on these events can give), it is downright SHAMEFUL that he is demanding that European Parishes take in “Refugees” that are Muslim, yet ignores the Christians (one dying every 5 Minutes) in the Middle East.

Instead of a speech to help and protect persecuted Religious minorities through the world…He will probably talk about Climate change, evil air conditioners, and how wealthy nations (meaning the US) should give everything to poor developing nations dictators in power.

But it’s to be expected from a Man who grew up in a socialist country and revered a leader (Juan Peron), who manipulated the poor, and sheltered Nazi’s.

Frankly, there was a time when even as a protestant, I would defend the Pope and the Catholic Church from those who spread stupid unfounded rumors and lies about it. I know my catholic husband pray for me to convert…under JPII (one of the holiest men to walk this earth) or even Benedict it might have been an idea I could have possibly entertained…under this guy…No thanks…not a lot of wise spiritual leadership coming from him.

I was afraid you guys would say this. We still have the family conference tomorrow. Hold on. If nothing tomorrow I am more or less headed your way (figuratively speaking of course!).

 

[ToeInTheWater]

“Wahhhhh! The Pope didn’t mention my favorite pet social issue! Wahhhhhh! I’m so ashamed to be Catholic!”

This forum is showing its true colors day by day.

While I think slamming the whole forum is a little excessive, I do think that some CAFers are just as guilty of seeing the Pope as a politician, as some “secular” media outlets are. They seem to think the Pope should “speak his mind” like Donald Trump does.

But the Pope is not a politician running in a primary election, making stump speeches to appeal to his “base” but that aren’t really meant to be heard and reacted to by possible opponents in the other party. (And even if he was – his approval ratings are actually double those of Mr. Trump.)

This Pope, especially, seems to see himself as a pastor, one who does not see fraternal correction as something to be done indiscriminately and harshly, just so the self-righteous who already agree with him say “Atta boy! Go get them!” Simply screaming at people about how sinful they are, usually does NOT inspire them to repent.

A principle that it seems most Catholics actually do follow in their own lives, is that you only apply fraternal correction when it would actually accomplish something. When people post to ask if they are obligated to constantly harangue family members, co-workers, friends, fellow Church-goers, or others about their sins, the answer is usually “no, you might be scrupulous”.

So what if the Pope had delivered some kind of jeremiad against SSM and abortion in his speech? Would it have changed anyone’s mind? Would it have accomplished anything positive BEYOND validating the concerns of the Catholics who obsess over SSM and abortion 24/7? Or would it have simply invited the secular media to turn on the Pope and start to viciously attack him? (Though I am sure this will happen eventually, anyway.)

Now, I know many on CAF think abortion and SSM are the only social issues that matter, but I doubt the Pope thinks this. As others have posted, he DID refer to these issues, though obliquely. And while I am far from pro-choice, I also think that the pro-life side has to have a good reply to the accusation that “You pro-lifers only care about children BEFORE they are born, you don’t care if they suffer and starve afterwards.” I doubt, however, that a pro-choice person would be comfortable telling the Pope something like that. Because obviously he cares about everyone who suffers.

 

[Lormar]

Just curious - were you not proud before?

I am starting to notice a lot of talk like that too. It’s an insult to not only all previous popes, but to God Himself for seemingly not knowing what we needed when we needed it until a little over two years ago.

 

[Brandon_Cal]

Each poster’s opinion is their own and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Catholic Answers, Catholic Answers Forums, their affiliates, or subsidiaries.

Understood. “This forum” should be interpreted as the aggregate opinion of its posters, not those who actually run the forum.

It’s not a mere “pet social issue.” It is THE social issue of our country. The murder of innocent children should be a source of consternation for all Catholics, indeed, all people. The fact that some people are more offended by immigration policy, capital punishment, or climate change than the murder of millions of innocent children is troubling to many here on CAF.

It’s troubling to you because it’s a pet issue. It’s all what matters evident in the frequency of posts here of late that call into question the catholicity of a Roman Pontiff for not reaching his quota of talking points set by none other than the peons in the pews.

There are loads and loads of quotes from His Holiness speaking against SSM and abortion. He’s made it evidently clear that he is Catholic. Anyone paying attention knows exactly where he stands.

You don’t have to be here. If you don’t like it, head over to the National Catholic Reporter’s website where I’m sure they are gleeful that the pope didn’t emphasize this “pet social issue.”

Why? So I can hear the opposite side of the echo chamber? No thanks. I’m against both abortion and SSM so I’ll begrudgingly tolerate this end, thank you so much!

 

[exnihilo]

Wading into history is always dangerous. I was put off by:

This year marks the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, the guardian of liberty, who labored tirelessly that “this nation, under God, [might] have a new birth of freedom”

This is historically inaccurate. I know the myth of Lincoln is strong in the US. I guess it must be in other countries as well.

He talks about the climate change hoax and talks about immigrants, but never mentions our country is broke ($100,000 debt for every man, woman and child) and how to get the money to pay for all these people.

It should be considered a great sin to burden your children with such massive debt as we do.

Oh, and on the death penalty. You can never keep anyone locked up forever. Even the tightest prisons have people escaping. The convicted even kill other convicts in prison. The ONLY measure to stop evil criminals from killing again is the death penalty. It is 100% effective at stopping future murders of the innocent. Again, the Pope was wrong on this issue.

We have some nasty criminals in this country. Putting them in prison for life endangers guards and other prisoners. It seems to me the death penalty is very much called for.

Perhaps. But when I hear language like:

“Recently my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of the death penalty. Not only do I support them…”

I’d also like to hear language like:

Recently my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of abortion. Not only do I support them…
Or:
Recently my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of assisted suicide. Not only do I support them…
Or:
Recently my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of gay marriage. Not only do I support them…

As the leader of the Catholic church, I’d like to hear language that explicitly states Church teaching. If he can be explicit on some issues, he can be explicit on all issues.

This is exactly my sentiment. I don’t see why you’d be explicit about the death penalty, which is not intrinsically immoral, and not explicit about SS’M’ and abortion which are. The explicit statements were for leftist causes. The oblique statements were about things that are grave evils that threaten the very foundation of society.

 

[Beautiful]

The problem with the Pope’s statement “The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development”. is that so many people now dispute exactly when life begins.

This is true. Catholic Answers put together a very nice and informative short video about this recently. catholic.com/video/when-does-a-human-life-begin

It is common knowledge though that a Catholic Pope interprets life to begin at conception. He did not need to spell this out to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg or anyone else there this morning.

 

[FollowChrist34]

catholicworldreport.com/Item/4193/pope_promotes_human_dignity_and_the_common_good_in_address_to_congress.aspx

Catholic World Report’s spin on it (CNA feed) - and it is a bit of a spin but not entirely. Remember the left are not hearing everything either. The social issue comments ARE there. The Pope is not Ted Cruz - sorry. But he is not Ted Kennedy or Barack Obama either, far from it.

 

[Alix1912]

I was afraid you guys would say this. We still have the family conference tomorrow. Hold on. If nothing tomorrow I am more or less headed your way (figuratively speaking of course!).

The fact that the US State Department is actively denying Refugee Visas to anyone who isn’t Muslim, and those few Middle Eastern Christians who have managed to get in through other types of visas have had their immigration lawyer jailed and are being deported back to areas in Iraq where they will most certainly be killed is WRONG.

The fact the UN refuses to declare the torture, rape, selling of sex slaves and killing of Christians and Yazidi Middle East GENOCIDE, thus forcing the member of the UN to act is WRONG.

The fact that ISIS is raping and selling girls as young a 3 into sexual slavery is WRONG.

The face the Pope seems more concerned about helping the Muslim Invasion Force (aka Refugees) coming into Europe, that his own people (most Christians in the Middle East are Catholic or Coptic) who are DYING is SHAMEFUL. ISIS chopped up a Catholic Priest and sent the pieces to his family as a warning…Pope Francis says NOTHING.

I’m pretty sure that the Christian woman being raped by Islamic Militants while her husband is tortured and killed and her children are sold into sexual slavery could care less about global warming and wealth redistribution. She is crying out for someone, anyone to help her, and her cries are being heard…not by the Pope, her church’s Holy Father, but by Protestants and Ironically a Mormon man (Glenn Beck) who are trying to raise 10 Million to rescue Christians and Yazidi from the Middle East. I’m not the biggest Beck fan (I don’t hate him either), but at least he and his charity are trying to do something.

When my husband prays for me to convert and asks our kids be raised Catholic what am I supposed to say…Follow the church lead guy rambling on about seemly nothing in Congress…or the guy who says this:

youtube.com/watch?v=blFVL68s4-Y

Yeah…I’m going with the Lutheran Synod President.

At least for me personally Pop Francis is driving me away, not towards the Catholic Church.

 

[Suudy]

While I think slamming the whole forum is a little excessive, I do think that some CAFers are just as guilty of seeing the Pope as a politician, as some “secular” media outlets are. They seem to think the Pope should “speak his mind” like Donald Trump does.

No. I think the pope, like any other teacher and shepherd, should be clear and unambiguous. Clearly he can be, as he was with capital punishment. So why tip toe around issues that do far more damage?

But the Pope is not a politician running in a primary election, making stump speeches to appeal to his “base” but that aren’t really meant to be heard and reacted to by possible opponents in the other party. (And even if he was – his approval ratings are actually double those of Mr. Trump.)

Who said he was a politician? Who here is even talking about these issues as political issues? They are all moral issues. And if Papa Francis can speak explicitly about apparently moral issues like capital punishment, immigration, and climate change, to a political body, why not other issues?

This Pope, especially, seems to see himself as a pastor, one who does not see fraternal correction as something to be done indiscriminately and harshly, just so the self-righteous who already agree with him say “Atta boy! Go get them!” Simply screaming at people about how sinful they are, usually does NOT inspire them to repent.

Well, that’s what he did with capital punishment, immigration, and climate change, no? He provided explicit guidance on these issues. So why not on other issues?

A principle that it seems most Catholics actually do follow in their own lives, is that you only apply fraternal correction when it would actually accomplish something. When people post to ask if they are obligated to constantly harangue family members, co-workers, friends, fellow Church-goers, or others about their sins, the answer is usually “no, you might be scrupulous”.

So, why the fraternal correction on immigration, capital punishment, and climate change? Do you really think the Republicans (the party in power) are any more willing to listen on these issues than the Democrats are on abortion and same sex marriage?

So what if the Pope had delivered some kind of jeremiad against SSM and abortion in his speech? Would it have changed anyone’s mind?

Do you really think his “jeremiad against” capital punishment would have changed anyone’s mind? Why is speaking about these other issue more likely to invoke change than any other issue?

Would it have accomplished anything positive BEYOND validating the concerns of the Catholics who obsess over SSM and abortion 24/7?

People “obsess over SSM and abortion” because they are issue that do significant damage to society and lives. More children are killed every single day due to abortion than are convicted criminals in a year. Which do you think is the more destructive issue? Abortion? Or capital punishment? Now think about why people “obsess.”

Or would it have simply invited the secular media to turn on the Pope and start to viciously attack him? (Though I am sure this will happen eventually, anyway.)

Gee. The Pope is Catholic. Who woulda thought it?

Now, I know many on CAF think abortion and SSM are the only social issues that matter, but I doubt the Pope thinks this.

Name a single poster on CAF that thinks these are the “only social issues that matter…” Just one. I don’t. I just think it is the most significant social issue.

As others have posted, he DID refer to these issues, though obliquely.

Thank you. That’s been the exact point. Why was he explicit on these other issue, but vague on abortion and SSM?

 

[FollowChrist34]

The fact that the US State Department is actively denying Refugee Visas to anyone who isn’t Muslim, and those few Middle Eastern Christians who have managed to get in through other types of visas have had their immigration lawyer jailed and are being deported back to areas in Iraq where they will most certainly be killed is WRONG.

The fact the UN refuses to declare the torture, rape, selling of sex slaves and killing of Christians and Yazidi Middle East GENOCIDE, thus forcing the member of the UN to act is WRONG.

The fact that ISIS is raping and selling girls as young a 3 into sexual slavery is WRONG.

The face the Pope seems more concerned about helping the Muslim Invasion Force (aka Refugees) coming into Europe, that his own people (most Christians in the Middle East are Catholic or Coptic) who are DYING is SHAMEFUL. ISIS chopped up a Catholic Priest and sent the pieces to his family as a warning…Pope Francis says NOTHING.

I’m pretty sure that the Christian woman being raped by Islamic Militants while her husband is tortured and killed and her children are sold into sexual slavery could care less about global warming and wealth redistribution. She is crying out for someone, anyone to help her, and her cries are being heard…not by the Pope, her church’s Holy Father, but by Protestants and Ironically a Mormon man (Glenn Beck) who are trying to raise 10 Million to rescue Christians and Yazidi from the Middle East. I’m not the biggest Beck fan (I don’t hate him either), but at least he and his charity are trying to do something.

When my husband prays for me to convert and asks our kids be raised Catholic what am I supposed to say…Follow the church lead guy rambling on about seemly nothing in Congress…or the guy who says this:

youtube.com/watch?v=blFVL68s4-Y

Yeah…I’m going with the Lutheran Synod President.

At least for me personally Pop Francis is driving me away, not towards the Catholic Church.

I agree. What can I say. And I love the Rev Harrison stuff - God bless. I honestly can’t think of anything else to say in defense of the Pope here, I mean in reference to the speech.

 

[HCTC]

The issues that divide us in this country are pretty clearly drawn - virtually black and white. In my humble opinion, in his speech today to Congress the Holy Father attempts to remind us of the values that unite us, and he warns us of really the one thing - the temptation “to feed the enemy within” - that will preclude our success as we address the very serious problems that face our country and the world today.

Pope Francis recommends that the resolution of these serious national and global matters should be addressed through dialogue, and he asks us to “summon” our courage and our intelligence.

Many people are disappointed that Pope Francis did not articulate the Church’s position on issues such as abortion and SSM. In my humble opinion, His Holiness spoke today to the leaders of our country, as well as to us, to help us bring some resolution to these national disputes and other critical matters of a global nature by providing us with a roadmap and with tools that will enable our success. He is so impressive - in so many ways. When the cardinals were choosing a pope, I asked God to send a pope for my grandchildren- for all the children of the world really because all loving parents and grandparents really want pretty much the same things for their children. To me, Pope Francis is the beautiful, graceful answer to my prayer.

 

[Suudy]

It’s troubling to you because it’s a pet issue.

So you say. But using the word “pet” has a connotation that implies a whimsical interest.

It’s all what matters evident in the frequency of posts here of late that call into question the catholicity of a Roman Pontiff for not reaching his quota of talking points set by none other than the peons in the pews.

I’ve not seen the kind of posts to which you are referring. I’ve seen nobody question whether Papa Francis is Catholic. But what I have seen is frustration that he is not giving abortion, SSM, and euthanasia the importance it deserves. I understand he wants to elevate other issues. But it seems he is underemphasizing abortion, SSM, etc as he elevates the other issues. And that’s the point. While he was explicit with capital punishment and climate change, he was vague on abortion and SSM. The criticism is that he was not explicit on both.

There are loads and loads of quotes from His Holiness speaking against SSM and abortion. He’s made it evidently clear that he is Catholic. Anyone paying attention knows exactly where he stands.

Similarly with capital punishment and climate change. So why be so explicit on these and so vague on abortion and SSM?