The Pope agreed to Secularism?

[James_S_Saint]

I heard it announced that the current Pope said, “Secularism is right, but just such a negative perspective”. I didn’t record the event, so I can’t say exactly where I heard it.

But does anyone here know if that is true? Did the Pope really say that?

If so, I have very serious questions concerning the Pope on several accounts.

 

[Areopagite]

Do you know anything about the context? Also, when did you hear this?

 

[Cluny]

I’d be curious to know the context in which he said it.

Secularism, in the sense of the government being neutral towards all religions is certainly more “right” than a triumphalist Islamist government that outlaws all other religions.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Do you know anything about the context? Also, when did you hear this?

It would have been in the last 8 months. I have extremely poor memory for dates.

I didn’t hear much of the other context either, which is why I now have to ask about it. If I had heard the entire address, I’m sure I would remember far more detail and have a clearer understanding.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Secularism, in the sense of the government being neutral towards all religions is certainly more “right” than a triumphalist Islamist government that outlaws all other religions.

There is a big difference between being the lesser evil and being “right”. But then it seems that the CC is supporting the notion that evil is merely the lack of good. That concept is similar.

 

[Betterave]

I’d be curious to know the context in which he said it.

Secularism, in the sense of the government being neutral towards all religions is certainly more “right” than a triumphalist Islamist government that outlaws all other religions.

Government is never neutral towards all religions, but I’ll guess that Benedict would have been talking about freedom of conscience and independence of church and state, i.e., a limited form of neutrality.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Government is never neutral towards all religions, but I’ll guess that Benedict would have been talking about freedom of conscience and independence of church and state, i.e., a limited form of neutrality.

But then the Truth is that there cannot actually be independence between church and state.

So if you are right, you have implied that the Pope does not know this or does not want to admit it in public.

The OP question stuck in my mind ever since I heard it (someone said that he said it, probably on the radio). A greater question that I have led me back to having to address this question.

That other question involves why it is that the CC supports doubt. I know that especially philosophical questions can all be answered and very clearly so, yet the CC does not do so. I am in quest to understand why, for what purpose is this being done.

If the Pope supports Secular authority, I can deduce why the CC supports the continuance and maintenance of doubt and distrust.

 

[Jesus_123]

**I’m sorry . . . but Catholic Answers Forum requires a legitimate source for statements such as the one which is the topic of this thread . . . ** and the quoted statement should have a context . . . this topic doesn’t meet the healthy and sound criteria set up by the owners of this CAF site for thread subjects . . .

To be discussing by inuendo . . . **either pro or con **. . . a vague possibly very detrimental conjecture . . . with no supporting data/context . . . **particularly about the Holy Father in Rome **. . . is neither Christian . . . nor logical . . . nor reasonable . . . nor kind . . . nor just . . . nor fair . . . in any sense of the word . . . **and approaches and invites the vicious sin of calumny on the part of those participating in such a conversation **. . .

Main Entry: cal·um·ny Pronunciation: \ˈka-ləm-nē also ˈkal-yəm-
Function: noun

1 : a misrepresentation intended to harm another’s reputation
2 : the act of uttering false charges or misrepresentations maliciously calculated to harm another’s reputation

— ca·lum·ni·ous \kə-ˈləm-nē-əs\ adjective

— ca·lum·ni·ous·ly adverb

- Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary​

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . St. Michael the Archangel protect the Holy Father+
:angel1:​

 

[James_S_Saint]

**I’m sorry . . . but Catholic Answers Forum requires a legitimate source for statements such as the one which is the topic of this thread . . . ** and the quoted statement should have a context . . . this topic doesn’t meet the healthy and sound criteria set up by the owners of this CAF site for thread subjects . . .

To be discussing by inuendo . . .

Interesting statement coming from someone so vainly using that name.

We are not discussing the issue as though it were real. I have made no implication concerning the Pope based on the thought. I merely straight forward asked IF it was real. We are not arguing whether it was real. I am open to denial of it.

If asking for truth is not allowed. There is an even bigger problem.

It might be something for him to be quite proud of. I wouldn’t think so, but then that is why I have to ask.

It also seems a bit odd that we can quiet freely discuss the very existence of God, yet to ask if the Pope merely made a particular statement would be too disrespectful.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

There was a recent article about a French Cardinal speaking about the Pope’s remarks in France about open secularism. Further back, there was a 2004 remark from Pope John Paul II which said:

The Holy Father referred to his Jan. 12 address to the diplomatic corps accredited to the Holy See and said “a well-understood secularism must not be confused with laicism.”

On that occasion, he said that secularism is the “respect for all beliefs on the part of the state, which ensures the free exercise of worship and of spiritual, cultural and charitable activities of the communities of believers.”

Laicism, he explained, is when the state pretends to ignore this dimension, either at the personal or communal level.

Today, the Pope emphasized in his address to the French bishops that an authentic view of secularism “cannot erase personal and communal beliefs.”

“To try to remove from the social field this important [religious] dimension in the lives of persons and peoples, as well as the signs that manifest them, would go against a well-understood freedom,” he said.

“Freedom of worship cannot be conceived without the freedom to practice individually and collectively one’s religion, or without the freedom of the Church,” the Pope added. “Religion cannot be reduced only to the private sphere.”

 

[James_S_Saint]

Thank You Tantum,

But I am thinking that isn’t likely to be the source of reference because of the comment, “…just seems to be a negative perspective”.

It seems that he was reviewing the logic of some aspect of modern Secularism and agreed to the logic of it, but added that it was a negative view to take. My first reaction was to wonder how he could believe something was accurate yet still negative. If something seems negative, yet is true, then something is being left out.

 

[Betterave]

But then the Truth is that there cannot actually be independence between church and state.

So if you are right, you have implied that the Pope does not know this or does not want to admit it in public.

The OP question stuck in my mind ever since I heard it (someone said that he said it, probably on the radio). A greater question that I have led me back to having to address this question.

That other question involves why it is that the CC supports doubt. I know that especially philosophical questions can all be answered and very clearly so, yet the CC does not do so. I am in quest to understand why, for what purpose is this being done.

If the Pope supports Secular authority, I can deduce why the CC supports the continuance and maintenance of doubt and distrust.

Maybe I should have specified: juridical independence - this is possible and, the Pope believes, a positive requirement at this point in history.

As far as doubt goes, maybe it would be fair to say that the Church has Socratic/Platonic tendencies. She recognizes that there is virtue in dialogue, that dialogue is the way to organic maturation, that this is God’s way, the meaning of his gift of finite intellect that is historically situated yet always able to grow and reach out towards greater understanding (or not - that possibility too is part of being called to be responsible, to attain maturity, as opposed to being created as an already perfected angelic intelligence). One image Jesus used for this was the wheat and the tares growing together - this is part of God’s plan.

 

[James_S_Saint]

I was afraid someone would say something like that. It certainly fits the puzzle pieces together. But it is bad, very bad, extremely bad.

When you combine Secularism and Socialism, you canonize Satanism.

Since this is exactly what America is doing, I take it that the Pope and the rest of the world accept that America is to be the Gehenna for the world ruled by none other than our favorite scarlet crusader.

A true planet of the apes.

 

[Wesley7]

I wouldn’t know except by reading the Papal Encyclicals.

 

[James_S_Saint]

I wouldn’t know except by reading the Papal Encyclicals.

I don’t think those include typical speeches, but rather more formal writings and letters?

 

[Wesley7]

I don’t think those include typical speeches, but rather more formal writings and letters?

Papal Encyclicals address the issues of the ancient Catholic Church.