Proof that Pope Francis isn't a liberal - why the secular media is wrong about him

[oldcatholicguy]

I didn’t replace his definition with my own, it’s in the dictionary. He used a political definition, I used an older definition. But I didn’t make it up, it’s in the dictionary. Milton Friedman discusses this same thing in one of his books. The Left has taken the word liberal and defined it to mean something else. It doesn’t change the fact that someone who is liberal (adjective) believes in liberty and personal freedom.

-Actually, you provided two different definitions of the term “liberal.” One from dictionary.com and one based on the term “liberty.”
-I provided the definition of the term “liberty” from your source and showed that given your source’s definition the Holy Father can only be called a “liberal” if we are talking about the leave practices and traditions of naval forces.
-The OP was clear on what term she was using. Your repeated attempts to insert your own definition is nothing more than an attempt to either justify your disagreement with the OP’s conclusions or to derail the thread.
-The fact that you have to qualify your definition (“an older definition”) should be an indicator to you that your particular definition is no longer in common usage and that it really has no bearing on the discussion the OP clearly wished to have.
-If you wish to have a discussion around the Holy Father’s belief in liberty (and it’s not an unqualified belief given his personal views and the teachings of the Church), I suggest you start a new thread.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

It is good to provide a balanced portrayal of our Holy Father Francis, as you have sought to do in your OP. There will always be the tendency, however, of letting our personal ideology color the choices we make regarding which papal statements we choose to emphasize. The secular media does this, I do it, and you do it too when you list only those papal pronouncements with which you are most comfortable.

So in the interest of presenting a more complete understanding of Pope Francis, based on his own words, let us not forget, but rather add to the good statements which you provided, these words from his interview in America magazine:

**“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage, and the use of contraception methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the Church is clear, and I am a son of the Church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.”

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does He endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.”

“…I have never been a right-winger. It was my authoritarian way of making decisions that created problems.” **

The overriding theme of Pope Francis’ reign thus far has been his concern for the poor. Again and again, he tells us to care for the poor, the disenfranchised, the oppressed, and those less fortunate than us, in all stages of life. In this regard, his message reminds me and others of the message of Cardinal Joseph Bernadin, of blessed memory.

I would just add that the poor in this case are both the spiritually poor as well as the materially poor.

 

[D_Martin]

That’s why I made this thread. Hopefully, it might make some kind of a difference in getting the truth out. The secular media wants everyone to believe that Pope Francis is Pro-Abortion, for so-called same-sex ‘marriage’ and every other thing the liberals have in their plan for social engineering. The Church says these things are intrinsic evils, and Pope Francis agrees saying he is a son of the Church. Others had posted quotes from Pope Francis here and there which show that he isn’t going along with the liberal agenda. When we actually read all of what Pope Francis has said he actually sounds conservative which shouldn’t be surprising since another word for conservative is orthodox. But I wanted to gather it together into one post to offer an antidote to the secular media spin.

Well unless the Christian community uses the very same media to promote the Christian view then don’t expect anything but the secular view. I don’t mean Christian channels though they do serve there purpose. It is when people are watching some secular program is when advertizing for the Christian view should take place. What is left into strictly secular hands shall be secular.

For example, why isn’t the church putting out commercials that refute the news media’s report of what the church says? Or why doesn’t the church do the same in the case of what secular media says the bible says?

It is foolish to expect the secular to tell the truth about anything except their own desires, they see justification in any means to win.

 

[Abu]

In Evangelii Gaudium some real problems were clouded or evaded. Such imprecision is foreign to Bl John Paul II and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

Reference has been made to Pope Francis and Poverty by Samuel Gregg November 26, 2013 8:08 PM, at:
m.nationalreview.com/corner/365004/pope-francis-and-poverty-samuel-gregg

There is praise of Pope Francis here, but further very important problems arise which cannot just be glossed over. I quote further on the serious problems identified in this Apostolic Exhortation.

1. ‘It hardly need be said that rule of law (mentioned not once in Evangelii Gaudium) is, to put it mildly, a “challenge” in most developing nations. The lack of rule of law not only ranks among the biggest obstacles to their ability to generate wealth on a sustainable basis, but also hampers their capacity to address economic issues in a just manner. Instead, what one finds is crony capitalism, rampant protectionism, and the corruption that has become a way of life in much of Africa and Latin America.
2. ‘Francis adds that some people today find any mention of the distribution of income to be “irksome” (203).
   I don’t find discussions of wealth distribution to be bothersome at all. Catholics, other Christians, and other people of good will should, in my view, enter enthusiastically into such debates. Because it is precisely through these conversations that it can be pointed out that — as Evangelii Gaudium seems, alas, unaware — many poverty-alleviation methods that involve redistribution (such as foreign aid) are increasingly discredited. As the economist and historian of the Federal Reserve Allan Meltzer put it, one of the 20th century’s economic lessons is that “transfers, grants and redistribution did little to raise living standards in Asia, Latin America and Africa.” In other words, the standard wealth-redistribution policies that are often regarded as indispensable to poverty alleviation have failed to achieve their goals. Hence it behooves all Catholics to ask ourselves why such approaches have failed if we’re going to have a serious conversation about wealth and poverty in the modern world.’
3. ‘And attention to particular realities about economic life is precisely what’s missing from parts of Evangelii Gaudium’s analysis of wealth and poverty. If we want “the dignity of each human person and the pursuit of the common good” to be more than what the pope calls a “mere addendum” to the pursuit of “true and integral development” (203), then engaging more seriously the economic part of the truth that sets us free would be a good start.’

The precision and depth of both Bl John Paul II and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI need to be emulated.

 

[freeRadical]

-Actually, you provided two different definitions of the term “liberal.” One from dictionary.com and one based on the term “liberty.”
-I provided the definition of the term “liberty” from your source and showed that given your source’s definition the Holy Father can only be called a “liberal” if we are talking about the leave practices and traditions of naval forces.
-The OP was clear on what term she was using. Your repeated attempts to insert your own definition is nothing more than an attempt to either justify your disagreement with the OP’s conclusions or to derail the thread.
-The fact that you have to qualify your definition (“an older definition”) should be an indicator to you that your particular definition is no longer in common usage and that it really has no bearing on the discussion the OP clearly wished to have.
-If you wish to have a discussion around the Holy Father’s belief in liberty (and it’s not an unqualified belief given his personal views and the teachings of the Church), I suggest you start a new thread.

So liberty only applies to naval practices? What do you think the word “liberty” means in the Declaration of Independence? Were they referring to naval practices?

 

[livingwordunity]

I didn’t replace his definition with my own, it’s in the dictionary. He used a political definition, I used an older definition. But I didn’t make it up, it’s in the dictionary. Milton Friedman discusses this same thing in one of his books. The Left has taken the word liberal and defined it to mean something else. It doesn’t change the fact that someone who is liberal (adjective) believes in liberty and personal freedom.

-Actually, you provided two different definitions of the term “liberal.” One from dictionary.com and one based on the term “liberty.”
-I provided the definition of the term “liberty” from your source and showed that given your source’s definition the Holy Father can only be called a “liberal” if we are talking about the leave practices and traditions of naval forces.
-The OP was clear on what term she was using. Your repeated attempts to insert your own definition is nothing more than an attempt to either justify your disagreement with the OP’s conclusions or to derail the thread.
-The fact that you have to qualify your definition (“an older definition”) should be an indicator to you that your particular definition is no longer in common usage and that it really has no bearing on the discussion the OP clearly wished to have.
-If you wish to have a discussion around the Holy Father’s belief in liberty (and it’s not an unqualified belief given his personal views and the teachings of the Church), I suggest you start a new thread.

Great post oldcatholicguy. But, I’m a he and not a she.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

So liberty only applies to naval practices? What do you think the word “liberty” means in the Declaration of Independence? Were they referring to naval practices?

What, the context of a discussion and the implied definition of a term suddenly matters?

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Great post oldcatholicguy. But, I’m a he and not a she.

Oops.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

He’s not a liberal by today’s definition of the word. It’s a red herring to try to reach back to some historical definition of the word. Pope Francis is the current Pope. We aren’t talking about a Pope from hundreds of years ago. Therefore, it only makes sense if the current definition of “liberal” is what is used.

My titles as liberal and Catholic have less to do with affiliations and more to do with how I choose to live my life. I’m liberal because that I’m pro-liberty/social justice and I’m Catholic because I’m pro-liberty/social justice. The labels fit me, not the other way around.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

Nobody seems to get it but Pope Francis is playing words the press exactly how Jesus did with the Sadducees and Pharisees. Every time he says something and the press runs off on a tangent I can’t help but think of them.

The Vatican maintains a PR group that ensures that translations are made available to news media outlets and it works to ensure that the Pope’s message is going out correctly. It certainly knows how the Pope is being received in the US by the media and citizens.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

My titles as liberal and Catholic have less to do with affiliations and more to do with how I choose to live my life. I’m liberal because that I’m pro-liberty/social justice and I’m Catholic because I’m pro-liberty/social justice. The labels fit me, not the other way around.

Which is how it should be. The problem is that society in general thinks in terms of a person fitting a label and does its best to force people into them. Hence the massive media coverage of the Holy Father being a “liberal” despite the fact he really hasn’t stated anything new or out of line with what the previous two “conservative” Popes stated.

 

[livingwordunity]

Which is how it should be. The problem is that society in general thinks in terms of a person fitting a label and does its best to force people into them. Hence the massive media coverage of the Holy Father being a “liberal” despite the fact he really hasn’t stated anything new or out of line with what the previous two “conservative” Popes stated.

Well said.