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

[Seamus_L]

Over 2 years later ALOT of people still believe Pope Francis’ words “Who am I to judge” mean it’s ok to be a practicing homosexual. And some people are offended by the thought of asking the Pope to be more clear in his statements.

 

[ringil]

Over 2 years later ALOT of people still believe Pope Francis’ words “Who am I to judge” mean it’s ok to be a practicing homosexual. And some people are offended by the thought of asking the Pope to be more clear in his statements.

He is clear. He’s just not saying what folks want him to say.

 

[Melchior_1]

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.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Of course it is. Who has said he can’t make that choice?

The point, though, is that many of us disagree. And in our disagreement on emphasis we are labeled being ashamed of being Catholic (see post #20 on this thread), or questioning the Catholicity of the pope (see post #44).

As long as we’re citing specific posts: Post #20 was in reference to Post #6, in which a poster DID specifically state that “For a man who is so pro-people, on everything else I am just ashamed to be a Catholic after that speech.”

 

[Mongo]

Listening to the BBC World Hour on NPR. They just had an interview with some congresscritter from Michigan who talked about how emotional this was for her as a Catholic. She stated that she had gone from a Catholic kindergarten to a Catholic graduate school, and the stuff the Pope was saying was stuff the sisters taught her. When the interviewer started pushing her on things like the Pope’s stand on SSM and how she supported it in Michigan, though, she fell back on the argument, “Well, I didn’t hear him condemn it. And I don’t think Jesus, walking among the people, would condemn people for loving each other.”

I almost threw the radio through the window. No, Jesus would not condemn people loving each other. But YES, he would condemn the actions the people would take!

She also talked about how there was an absolute separation between Church and State in America. Not true, but that belief gives people the permission they need to violate Church teachings in voting, because if they vote with what the Church teaches, then we’re letting the Vatican set American laws and policy.

In short, I heard a lot of nice feelings but nothing that struck me as lawmakers actually listening to what he has said. A lot of Protestants I know have asked why His Holiness doesn’t preach fire and brimstone, esp. to the Congress. Hearing the lawmakers responses made me realize that they have become persistent in their sin, and are willfully ignoring the Laws of God.

Please, God, forgive us our sins and lead us back to You.

The pope said nothing particularly Christian, consequently he will be interpreted in line with liberal progressivism.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

The pope said nothing particularly Christian, consequently he will be interpreted in line with liberal progressivism.

There is nothing “particularly Christian” about opposing abortion and SSM, either.

 

[Mongo]

There is nothing “particularly Christian” about opposing abortion and SSM, either.

True, but he wouldn’t be able to be confused as a progressive liberal if he would have spoken clearly on those issues. And it would have been more consistent with the catholic view. No, I am not saying his speech strayed from Catholicism. It was ambiguous. He is the head of the Catholic Church, so it is very reasonable that his speech should be clearly catholic. No political party should be able to confuse him as one of their own, but sadly he will be perceived as a liberal progressive in line with the modern Democratic Party. The democrats will rejoice and the republicans will be flabbergasted that he said everything the extreme left wanted, and nothing they didn’t want.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Listening to the BBC World Hour on NPR. They just had an interview with some congresscritter from Michigan who talked about how emotional this was for her as a Catholic. She stated that she had gone from a Catholic kindergarten to a Catholic graduate school, and the stuff the Pope was saying was stuff the sisters taught her. When the interviewer started pushing her on things like the Pope’s stand on SSM and how she supported it in Michigan, though, she fell back on the argument, “Well, I didn’t hear him condemn it. And I don’t think Jesus, walking among the people, would condemn people for loving each other.”

I almost threw the radio through the window. No, Jesus would not condemn people loving each other. But YES, he would condemn the actions the people would take!

She also talked about how there was an absolute separation between Church and State in America. Not true, but that belief gives people the permission they need to violate Church teachings in voting, because if they vote with what the Church teaches, then we’re letting the Vatican set American laws and policy.

In short, I heard a lot of nice feelings but nothing that struck me as lawmakers actually listening to what he has said. A lot of Protestants I know have asked why His Holiness doesn’t preach fire and brimstone, esp. to the Congress. Hearing the lawmakers responses made me realize that they have become persistent in their sin, and are willfully ignoring the Laws of God.

Please, God, forgive us our sins and lead us back to You.

What’s a congresscritter? Or in the spirit of the Papal message did you mean person or woman?

I agree though not many lawmakers nor even perhaps people in general may agree with the totality of the Holy Father’s speech. He said a whole lot. A couple of things liberals might have had a problem with in what he was perceived to be speaking about in terms of life and marriage. But a whole lotta things conservatives might have had a problem with… on the immigrants coming north, human roots of climate change that he is sure we can do something about, abolishment of the death penalty, on the distribution of income for the common good, taxes sustaining society, and legislating for the care of people. MLK, and Dorothy Day of the Catholic Left, founder of the Catholic Worker movement.

To me he spoke the entirety of the Catholic faith. About life and marriage, yes, but so so much more. And no political party reflects every issue in the Catholic way.

But if people disagree on what they make of or take from the Pope’s speech, let us pray that at least there is one thing that most everyone can agree on and take from it. Or at least strive better to do so. And that would be The Golden Rule.

 

[Tim_D]

No political party should be able to confuse him as one of their own, but sadly he will be perceived as a liberal progressive in line with the modern Democratic Party. The democrats will rejoice and the republicans will be flabbergasted that he said everything the extreme left wanted, and nothing they didn’t want.

And here is the entire problem wrapped up in a nutshell.

If you can only see in terms of liberal vs. conservative or democrat vs. republican, then you will forever be disappointed in Pope Francis. He transcends politics in the same way that Jesus Himself did.

There is more to being Catholic than opposing abortion and gay marriage.

 

[Mongo]

And here is the entire problem wrapped up in a nutshell.

If you can only see in terms of liberal vs. conservative or democrat vs. republican, then you will forever be disappointed in Pope Francis. He transcends politics in the same way that Jesus Himself did.

There is more to being Catholic than opposing abortion and gay marriage.

He didnt transcend politics with his speech. That is the whole point.

 

[LongingSoul]

And here is the entire problem wrapped up in a nutshell.

If you can only see in terms of liberal vs. conservative or democrat vs. republican, then you will forever be disappointed in Pope Francis. He transcends politics in the same way that Jesus Himself did.

There is more to being Catholic than opposing abortion and gay marriage.

Yes, it might turn out that the Pope was imparting Gods will through the guidance of the Holy Spirit rather than playing politics. Well unless God is a republican that is.

 

[Sy_Noe]

And here is the entire problem wrapped up in a nutshell.

If you can only see in terms of liberal vs. conservative or democrat vs. republican, then you will forever be disappointed in Pope Francis. He transcends politics in the same way that Jesus Himself did.

There is more to being Catholic than opposing abortion and gay marriage.

Amen. I’ve said the same myself. And I readily admit I don’t share the whole faith. But there was a whole lotta things in that speech in which I agree with than disagree.

 

[Thorolfr]

And here is the entire problem wrapped up in a nutshell.

If you can only see in terms of liberal vs. conservative or democrat vs. republican, then you will forever be disappointed in Pope Francis. He transcends politics in the same way that Jesus Himself did.

There is more to being Catholic than opposing abortion and gay marriage.

 

[Thorolfr]

I especially like the Pope’s homily yesterday at the canonization Mass for Junipero Serra:

Jesus sends his disciples out to all nations. To every people. We too were part of all those people of two thousand years ago. Jesus did not provide a short list of who is, or is not, worthy of receiving his message, his presence. Instead, he always embraced life as he saw it. In faces of pain, hunger, sickness and sin. In faces of wounds, of thirst, of weariness, doubt and pity. Far from expecting a pretty life, smartly-dressed and neatly groomed, he embraced life as he found it. It made no difference whether it was dirty, unkempt, broken. Jesus said: Go out and tell the good news to everyone. Go out and in my name embrace life as it is, and not as you think it should be. Go out to the highways and byways, go out to tell the good news fearlessly, without prejudice, without superiority, without condescension, to all those who have lost the joy of living. Go out to proclaim the merciful embrace of the Father.

nytimes.com/2015/09/23/us/pope-francis-homily-at-the-canonization-mass-for-the-rev-junipero-serra.html

What a nice message after all the outrage from some people over a few gay Christians having been invited with thousands of others to greet the Pope at the White House.

 

[Path_Finder]

I tend to think a problem is people politicizing this.

We already know those pro-choicers have hearts hardened so that they will not listen.

The Pope spoke on Capital Punishment, that is a good point but all the same, is not binding.

So, I think those making this a political football won’t be too successful, The Pope also visited the Little Sisters of the Poor per the topic of those trying to force Americans to violate their conscience.

 

[Seamus_L]

I’m not going to post a link, but retired judge, Fox News analyst, and Traditional Catholic Andrew Napolitano, absolutely blasted Pope Francis in a column today.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

We already know those pro-choicers have hearts hardened so that they will not listen.

The Pope spoke on Capital Punishment, that is a good point but all the same, is not binding.

I appreciate the irony of this.

 

[PTL]

True, but he wouldn’t be able to be confused as a progressive liberal if he would have spoken clearly on those issues. And it would have been more consistent with the catholic view. No, I am not saying his speech strayed from Catholicism. It was ambiguous. He is the head of the Catholic Church, so it is very reasonable that his speech should be clearly catholic. No political party should be able to confuse him as one of their own, but sadly he will be perceived as a liberal progressive in line with the modern Democratic Party. The democrats will rejoice and the republicans will be flabbergasted that he said everything the extreme left wanted, and nothing they didn’t want.

I agree with you. It is too bad that he is very clear on illegal immigration, global warming, and death penalty, but very ambiguous on marriage and family. That is the way it is.

 

[Romans615]

I haven’t seen a single suggestion that Papa Francis do any finger pointing. Rather, there have been exhortations to use the same explicit language for all moral issues. Being “very clear and very gentle” when discussing climate change and immigration can also extend to abortion and SSM.

Yes, because abortion and SSM are the only important things Christianity should comment on, right? The born are just as important to God as the pre-born, you know. And yes, I’m pro-life.

I didn’t say that the Pope was finger pointing, nor did I accuse anyone of suggesting that he should do so.

 

[Melchior_1]

I agree with you. It is too bad that he is very clear on illegal immigration, global warming, and death penalty, but very ambiguous on marriage and family. That is the way it is.

Here’s this.

Also this.

Plus this.

Additionally, this.

I’m noticing a trend here.

I won’t bother giving links on Abortion, that’s too easy to search for.