Skip to main content

View Diary: Pope Francis Blasts "Cult of Money" and Calls for End of "Tyranny" of Global Financial System (381 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think it's fair to say HE means it, (57+ / 0-)

    given his record. What's less clear is whether it'll catch on with the rest of the Catholic hierarchy.

    Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
    Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
    Code Monkey like you!

    Formerly known as Jyrinx.

    by Code Monkey on Thu May 16, 2013 at 07:30:37 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, there are many conservatives in the Church, (36+ / 0-)

      but this helps because it will be heard by the laity.

      Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

      by TomP on Thu May 16, 2013 at 07:32:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The earliest Xtians were (38+ / 0-)

        communists, in the sense that they lived a communal existence, shared duties and goods with each other as needed, took care of each other, etc. They lived the 'least of my brothers' and 'rich man, eye of needle' philosophy.

        Somewhere along the way, those early Xtian values were abandoned, as the Roman Church hierarchy forgot that whole 'brotherhood' thing in it's lust for and pursuit of wealth and political power.
        Maybe this Pope has actually read the gospels?


        Information is power. But; like all power, there are those who want to keep it for themselves. Aaron Swartz ~1986-2013~

        by Lisa Lockwood on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:19:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Money and power corrupt. (12+ / 0-)

          Such are the foibles of man.  Since churches are man-made constructs, many of them fall into the trappings of greed.

          The most violent element in society is ignorance.

          by Mr MadAsHell on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:01:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Worth Remembering (9+ / 0-)
          Somewhere along the way, those early Xtian values were abandoned, as the Roman Church hierarchy forgot that whole 'brotherhood' thing in it's lust for and pursuit of wealth and political power.
          For what it's worth - a mountain of poignancy and fresh irony here at DKos I'll bet - the Western (Roman) Church began this decline when Roman Emperor Constantine found Christianity, and then declared Christianity the state religion.

          This declaration did end the ongoing murder of Christians by the Roman Empire, so one can imagine Christians of the time celebrating this until they realized that non-Christians were now getting persecuted, and that the Church, as an official state religion, was starting to decline as the Body of Christ, who's mission is bringing "Good News to the poor."

          "Treat others as you would like them to treat you." -St. Luke 6: 31 (NEB) Christians are given a tough assignment here: Love the people you don't even like...

          by paz3 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:30:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Jesus of Nazareth; noted communist (8+ / 0-)

          1. Lived communally.
          2. Worked at his trade sporadically.
          3. Mooched off the generosity of others.
          4. Told rich people to give away ALL of their money, no questions asked, to the first needy person they encountered.
          5. Encouraged payment of taxes without protest.
          6. Produced untold numbers of fishes and loaves of bread without paying any tariffs or royalties...and gave them away!
          7. Trashed the moneychangers' tables and gave them a sad.

          If it wasn't for that last one, he might have lived a lot longer. Crossed the wrong guys on that one.

          Last full month in which the average daily temperature did not exceed twentieth-century norms: 2/1985 - Harper's Index, 2/2013

          by kamarvt on Thu May 16, 2013 at 11:37:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not all rich people. (3+ / 0-)
            4. Told rich people to give away ALL of their money, no questions asked, to the first needy person they encountered.
            Several wealthy people (e.g. Joseph of Arimathea) were followers of the rabbi.

            Jesus may have told the rich young man to sell all he had and give it to the poor, but that was because the rich young man was seeking to justify himself and clearly placed his wealth above spiritual values.

            Jesus' advice was directed to the rich young man and was intended to benefit those whose love of money interferes with their love of God and their fellow humans.

            "War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate." ~ Al Cleveland & Marvin Gaye (1970)

            by JBL55 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 01:25:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sounds like a good way of (0+ / 0-)

              explaining away what Jesus plainly said.  Now do you have some other convoluted reason to dismiss his "eye of a needle" parable?

              •  Explaining away? (0+ / 0-)

                The lesson is the same: if you love money (or your possessions, etc.) more than you love God, it will be an impediment to following the Law in its entirety (i.e. loving God and your neighbor).

                Presumably Joseph of Arimathea had his priorities straight.  IOW his wealth was something he used for good and was not an impediment to his adherence to the Law.  If you are aware of any report of Jesus telling these things to J of A, I'd be happy to be corrected.

                "War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate." ~ Al Cleveland & Marvin Gaye (1970)

                by JBL55 on Fri May 17, 2013 at 05:43:32 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  All four Gospels (0+ / 0-)

                  mention Joseph of Arimathea; only Matthew refers to him as a "rich man."  Mark says he was a member of the Sanhedrin.  No source says anything further about him, not even where this supposed place "Arimathea" is.
                  Matthew may have extrapolated the notion that Joseph was rich merely from the fact that he had a tomb (Daniel Harringon, The Gospel of Matthew, via Wikipedia).  There is no further corroboration anywhere that he was rich, let alone how rich, nor what he did with his wealth.

                  More importantly, whether or not Joseph was rich, we know absolutely nothing of what Jesus ever said to him, the nature of their relationship, or even how they met.  We don't even know that Jesus was ever even aware of Joseph.  It is impossible and absurd to try to extrapolate Jesus' attitudes towards wealth based on Joseph.

                  If we want to know what Jesus thought about wealth, he stated his view extremely clearly in his interaction with the rich young man, which is recounted in detail, and consistently, in Mark, Matthew, and Luke.  Barring any contradictory evidence, of which I see none, that interaction is the best representation we have of Jesus' views about wealth.

                  What you have done is take your own ideas, however nice or reasonable they might be, and projected them onto Jesus, with no scriptural or historical evidence.  You are putting words in Jesus' mouth.

                  •  You left out John's Gospel ... (0+ / 0-)

                    ... which describes Joseph asking for, and receiving, Pilate's permission to remove Jesus' crucified body for burial, not the sort of accommodation the Roman Prefect of Judea would necessarily have granted, say, a fisherman, or any old schlub with a few denarii to rub together.

                    Going by the four canonical gospels alone, Jesus said a great deal of things to a good many people.  Some things were said to large groups (e.g. Sermon on the Mount/Plain), others in small groups, and still others one-on-one.  I don't think it's unreasonable to infer that the things he said to individuals were intended to meet those people where they were and as they were, as opposed to generalizing them to apply to absolutely everyone everywhere under all circumstances.

                    The rich young man was a specific person asking a specific question geared to show his piety and devotion to the law.  Jesus, with love, gave an answer that hit the rich young man where he lived: in his wallet.  The follow-up observation about the eye of the needle simply underscored the point Jesus was making, which came from Jesus' own tradition: love of money is the root of all evil.

                    Wealth itself is not intrinsically evil: it's how one gains it and what one does with it.  And when money is ranked higher than God, it will naturally interfere with one's relationship with God.

                    "War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate." ~ Al Cleveland & Marvin Gaye (1970)

                    by JBL55 on Fri May 17, 2013 at 10:42:41 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  still coming up empty (0+ / 0-)

                      1.  The Gospel of John passage makes no difference -- Jesus was a minor, obscure political criminal in Pilate's view.  There is no reason to think the prefect would have cared much what happened to Jesus' body.  And either way, we know nothing of Jesus' relationship with Joseph while he was alive.

                      2.  If you're trying to argue that Jesus didn't condemn wealth, then I don't think you want to bring up the Sermon on the Mount.  Or really, anything Jesus ever said, for that matter.  His words will not help you.

                      3.  Let's look at the eye of the needle parable, in plain old Mark, King James Version:

                      It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
                      Okay, where does Jesus add the caveat that money is only a problem if it is "ranked higher than God," or "interferes with one's relationship with God"?  It doesn't.  The parable is unequivocal: possession of wealth in and of itself is an obstacle to entering the kingdom of God.  This is consistent with Jesus' conversation with the young man -- the man successfully followed all of the laws and commandments, yet STILL, he was not saved, only because he possessed wealth.  You might choose to disagree with the notion that wealth in itself is an obstacle to slavation; that is absolutely your right.  But to argue that, you'll have to disagree with Jesus.
                      •  The original statement to which I responded was: (0+ / 0-)
                        4. Told rich people to give away ALL of their money, no questions asked, to the first needy person they encountered.
                        My original point (and I clearly failed to communicate this effectively, at least to you) was that Jesus is on record as having told one person (not all rich people) to give away ALL his money (to the poor, not to the first poor person he encountered).

                        I am unaware of him directing anyone else specifically to do what he told the rich young man.  He enjoyed the hospitality of his friends (e.g. Mary and Martha) and his disciples' relatives (e.g. Peter's mother-in-law) in their homes, but nowhere in the four canonical Gospels does he instruct them to sell all they had and give the proceeds to those poorer than themselves.

                        My takeaway from Jesus' teachings on money is  broader than shekels or denarii or dollars.  It doesn't matter how wealthy or poor one is: placing more emphasis on the material life over the spiritual life is a key obstacle to salvation.

                        You are free to disagree with my interpretation, of course.

                        "War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate." ~ Al Cleveland & Marvin Gaye (1970)

                        by JBL55 on Mon May 20, 2013 at 06:18:55 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Your interpretation (0+ / 0-)

                          might be plausible, if not for what Jesus said during and after the interaction with the rich young man.  One might see that as just one interaction with one idiosyncratic individual.  However, Jesus turns to his disciples and specifically tells them that what he just said is a generalizable principle.  He wished to dispel any notion that his instructions for that rich young man were only applicable to that one case.  It is as impossible for a rich man -- not just this particular rich man -- to get into heaven as it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle -- ie, it's impossible.  Simple, unequivocal, and general.

                          Your summation of Jesus' teachings --

                          It doesn't matter how wealthy or poor one is: placing more emphasis on the material life over the spiritual life is a key obstacle to salvation.
                          fails immediately on the first clause.  Jesus absolutely never said it does not matter how rich or poor you are.  He said the opposite, as plain as day, repeatedly.  Consider a couple of beatitudes from Luke:
                          Woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.
                          Not, "you who are rich, and value money more than spiritual things."  Just rich.  I don't think it's persuasive to try to explain that away by putting words in Jesus' mouth.
                          Or:
                          Woe to you who are well fed now, for you will go hungry.
                          The condition that Jesus condemns is not being preoccupied with wealth, but just the brute material fact of being well-fed.
                          I suppose my question ultimately would be, what more could you possibly want Jesus to say to be more clear?  Do you expect him to repeat his same spiel every single time he sets foot in a moderately nice house, such as Martha's?  And if not, then everything he has said about wealth goes out the window?  And regardless, how do you know  that he did not give his anti-wealth spiel to all of these people?  He very well may have, it just is not recorded.  In the absence of contradictory evidence, we must go by what Jesus is actually recorded as saying, not what we prefer to imagine he might have said.
                          I hope you can forgive my being a stickler on this topic; I am just frustrated sometimes by the way people of all political persuasions can twist and contort religious writings into absurdities.
    •  I know it is early in his papacy... (14+ / 0-)

      So I am willing to give him the benefit of doubt.  But until I see real action behind the words, I am reserving enthusiasm.

      'Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost' - Ronald Reagan, Communist

      by RichM on Thu May 16, 2013 at 07:40:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He's the Pope. Words are pretty much his thing. nt (34+ / 0-)

        Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
        Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
        Code Monkey like you!

        Formerly known as Jyrinx.

        by Code Monkey on Thu May 16, 2013 at 07:42:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Pope JP II (17+ / 0-)

          Roundly condemned the Iraqi invasion.  But that did not trickle down to the US Bishops.  There was not a peep out of them when it came to condemning politicians that voted for it.  But, hey, the ACA says your insurance must cover birth control and the US Bishops want to create a board of inquisition to excommunicate everybody who voted for that (only partial snark).

          'Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost' - Ronald Reagan, Communist

          by RichM on Thu May 16, 2013 at 07:53:52 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, right, that's what I'm saying. (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TomP, sawgrass727, Onomastic, cotterperson

            I guess I'm not that familiar with the sprawling political organization that is the Catholic Church's upper hierarchy, but what does the Pope really do besides say things? I don't get the impression he's like a CEO. (Or at any rate it doesn't seem that Popes generally want to exercise that much low-level control, even if one could.)

            Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
            Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
            Code Monkey like you!

            Formerly known as Jyrinx.

            by Code Monkey on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:00:09 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Pope COULD have defrocked (10+ / 0-)

              the Bishops if he'd felt so strongly re: Iraq. But he didn't.

              The Pope COULD defrock today's Bishops who pay lip-service to Christian principles, then turn around and serve Wall Street's chosen politicians whilst dining on fine food in their fine palaces. But he doesn't.

              The fact that the Pope is not "CEO of the Catholic Church" (you are correct, his role is far less direct as a rule) doesn't mean that words are the only tool available to him.

              "Violence never requires translation, but it often causes deafness." - Bareesh the Hutt.

              by Australian2 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:09:34 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's a fair point. (8+ / 0-)

                But when was the last time a Pope defrocked someone? Especially someone who didn't do anything illegal? All I mean is he's doing quite a bit of good with those words, and expecting him to turn the Church upside-down is probably unrealistic.

                Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
                Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
                Code Monkey like you!

                Formerly known as Jyrinx.

                by Code Monkey on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:12:15 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  We'll probably be able to judge (13+ / 0-)

                  more by looking at the Cardinals he brings in -- considering his age, he might not be able to totally undo the work of his predecessors in loading the College of Cardinals with theological conservatives, but he can probably get a small start and perhaps his successor will be cut from a similar cloth.

                  There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

                  by Cali Scribe on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:17:22 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  How about the Curia? (5+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    3goldens, native, mmacdDE, jabney, cotterperson

                    Sure it is just one step, a start, but at face value it is quite revolutionary.  And the people he has appointed may be up to the revolutionary decision:

                    The Italian church historian Alberto Melloni, writing in the Corriere della Sera, called it the "most important step in the history of the church for the past 10 centuries".

                    ...

                    Several of the group's members will come to the job with a record of vigorous reform and outspoken criticism of the status quo.
                    http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

                    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

                    by Satya1 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:26:02 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Raymond Lahey in Canada (6+ / 0-)

                  was defrocked just last year, over possession of child pornography. The right thing to do, IMO, and it proves that it CAN be done if the Pope feels strongly enough about a Bishop's actions.

                  And while your point is well-taken (that the words are doing some good), ultimately, the proof is in the pudding. And until I see what (if anything) is served up as a result of His Holiness' words, I'll reserve judgement.

                  "Violence never requires translation, but it often causes deafness." - Bareesh the Hutt.

                  by Australian2 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:22:34 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Right now it's unrealistic (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  cotterperson, AoT, libnewsie

                  but we don't know what's happening at the Vatican.

                  Like all big organizations, it's very possible the guy at the top is shuffling people, reassigning them, bringing in new blood.

                  We won't know that unless we pay very close attention, and I'm not Catholic and don't pay ANY attention to the Church's doings unless it's right in front of me (like this diary was).

                  I think Pope Francis is a smart man, and has a better handle on how the cardinals and bishops think and will react than any of us.

                  And I also think that as a Jesuit, he's probably had more rigorous training in science, logic, and philosophy than almost all of them.

                  That's going to have a huge bearing on how he does things, and the direction he takes the church.

              •  Australian2: would he need the support (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Onomastic, cotterperson

                of some clergy to overcome the entrenchment you describe?

                IANAC, so I don't know how that works.

                LBJ, Lady Bird, Van Cliburn, Ike, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

                by BlackSheep1 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:24:39 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Not really. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT, BlackSheep1

                  Laicization can be performed on any priest, any time, by the Pope for any reason.

                  If His Holiness were in the habit of laicizing everyone with divergent political views, it wouldn't be long before he met with an "accident" (Popes holding their offices for life), but once or twice, to people who particularly egregiously spit in his face? Yeah, he can do that.

                  As a practical matter, could he laicize the US Conference of Catholic Bishops? Not under the present circumstances - and neither could have JPII. That doesn't stop me hoping.

                  "Violence never requires translation, but it often causes deafness." - Bareesh the Hutt.

                  by Australian2 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 11:48:21 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Ah no, he cannot defrock them (0+ / 0-)

                He can appoint new bishops to take their place, but no, he cannot laicize any bishops or priests over the war in Iraq or just because they don't act the way he wants them to act in terms of their politics. This is just as bad as those that want to refuse communion to pro-choice Catholics.

                Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

                by absdoggy on Thu May 16, 2013 at 10:56:17 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  At the very least, he could publish an (0+ / 0-)

                  encyclical or a Bull against pro-Wall Street policies, which would draw a line in the sand for the Bishops. I note that he hasn't done that, either.

                  "Violence never requires translation, but it often causes deafness." - Bareesh the Hutt.

                  by Australian2 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 11:49:15 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  For crying out loud, the man was just elected (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JBL55, libnewsie

                    An encyclical in 2 months, really?

                    It takes a good 3 miles to do a 180 degree turn for an aircraft carrier. Pope Francis just started to turn the rudder.

                    Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

                    by absdoggy on Thu May 16, 2013 at 11:56:26 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Let's hope that he's moving toward this (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      absdoggy, maybeeso in michigan

                      I'd like to see a return to an anti-usury position by the church. I certainly don't expect it tomorrow. I also don't have any say in the church as an outsider, but this is at least a hopeful development.

                      If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                      by AoT on Thu May 16, 2013 at 12:13:34 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Bishops have been defrocked (0+ / 0-)

                  for political reasons before. Podesta being the most recent.

                  If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                  by AoT on Thu May 16, 2013 at 12:16:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well . . . (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT

                    He was having a relationship with a woman.  And, he resigned as bishop - although you can take your pick as to why (Vatican said health reasons, there was the relationship with the woman, and yes, there was his politics).

                    From there, he got into an actual fight with the Papal Nuncio which was the reason they defrocked him, although,  the Vatican probably had it out for him anyway.

                    In the end, if he had not had the relationship with the woman, I don't think they could have gotten his resignation, and they wouldn't have had grounds to remove or defrock him.

                    Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

                    by absdoggy on Thu May 16, 2013 at 02:25:36 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  What The Pope Can Do (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mmacdDE, RichM, OhioNatureMom, melo
              I guess I'm not that familiar with the sprawling political organization that is the Catholic Church's upper hierarchy, but what does the Pope really do besides say things?
              Yes, the Pope mainly just says things, but the Pope can convene councils of all bishops, summon any bishop for a "talk," and, if the Pope speaks "ex cathedra" (from the 'throne,' that is, as an official Papal position on any Catholic teaching) those words are then considered infallible, and a required teaching for all Roman Catholics.

              Lots of potential there.

              "Treat others as you would like them to treat you." -St. Luke 6: 31 (NEB) Christians are given a tough assignment here: Love the people you don't even like...

              by paz3 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:47:23 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  This Pope has chosen to change (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              cotterperson, AoT

              the power structure of the Vatican Curia:

              the most important step in the history of the church for the past 10 centuries
              http://www.dailykos.com/...

              I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

              by Satya1 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 10:10:41 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  That Pope had far less moral authority (25+ / 0-)

            In order to have a powerful message, one first has to demonstrate it is not hypocrisy. The last Pope had very dubious credentials with regard to condemning aggressive international policy.

            One of the very few things known about this Pope is that he chose a very simple lifestyle. This is significant, many of the upper echelon of bishops and cardinals live like princes and indeed think of themselves as princes.

            Therefore, on THIS issue, THIS Pope has tremendous power. I agree that it should go beyond words, it should be supported with international travel and outreach on his part. He should call out pols and plutocrats specifically on specific economic issues. But, it all begins with the message and this is a fantastic beginning.

            Blessed are the peacemakers, the poor, the meek and the sick. Message to Repug Fundies: "DO you really wonder "what would Jesus do?" I didn't think so.

            by 4CasandChlo on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:13:08 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  But did it trickle down past the bishops (8+ / 0-)

            to the parish level, priests and laity, thus helping the anti-war effort?

            We're seeing the Pope at least try to get the Church back to its "core values" of taking care of the poor..."the least of these" as Jesus put it in Matthew 25. Almost like a company that's over-diversified and has to refocus their efforts. I see this as a positive step...a baby step to be sure, but as the Chinese adage says, "the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."

            Whether the US Bishops take this to heart and start threatening to withhold Communion from politicians who support draconian measures like Paul Ryan's budget and other "austerity measures" remains to be seen.

            There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

            by Cali Scribe on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:14:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Trickle down to the parishes? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ahumbleopinion, sawgrass727

              When they are all a lather about Equal Marriage, Abortion Doctors and Women Priests?

              I'll wait to see...

              Ugh. --UB.

              "Daddy, every time a bell rings, a Randian Libertaria­n picks up his Pan Am tickets for the Libertaria­n Paradise of West Dakota!"

              by unclebucky on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:01:55 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  don't confuse (5+ / 0-)

                catholic churches with protestant fundamentalists. It's nearly on the same level as confusing Sufi's with Salaafists.

                For example, the latest stats I've seen show that catholics support abortion and equal marriage at nearly the same rate as the general public. Myself, I could care less about whether or not women are or are not allowed to be priests in a particular religious denomination. Some do, some don't. I have no problem giving a particular religion control over it's own dogma. Forcing a church to have women priests is on the same level as forbidding peyote to Native American worshipers imho.

                47 is the new 51!

                by nickrud on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:16:29 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  In my parish front door, there is a sign... (0+ / 0-)

                  as to the mandated birth control blah blah...

                  I don't trust the local parish that does that.

                  Meh. RCC.

                  Ugh. --UB.

                  "Daddy, every time a bell rings, a Randian Libertaria­n picks up his Pan Am tickets for the Libertaria­n Paradise of West Dakota!"

                  by unclebucky on Thu May 16, 2013 at 10:21:18 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  People are people. (0+ / 0-)

                  There is nothing about a penis or a vagina that gives or removes theological insight.  Sexism with respect to clergy qualifications is necessarily suspect.

                  -7.75 -4.67

                  "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

                  There are no Christians in foxholes.

                  by Odysseus on Thu May 16, 2013 at 01:04:53 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  says you and your theology if you have one (0+ / 0-)

                    The entire point of theology is it isn't open to external review or inspection. If one's theology says to offer burnt fat and thigh bones it says to offer burnt fat and thigh bones and any external analysis is irrelevant.

                    47 is the new 51!

                    by nickrud on Thu May 16, 2013 at 02:57:32 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  American bishops opposed Iraq War, too (5+ / 0-)

            Obviously, no one drew lines in the sand w/ it a la abortion.  There was, however, pretty uniform opposition to pre-emptive war.  Were the issues not so grave, I would've found it more entertaining to see William Bennett and the other Defenders of the Faith suddenly morphing into devout Cafeteria Catholics.

            Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

            by RFK Lives on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:43:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I recall no such opposition (0+ / 0-)

              and I was looking for it. I was very VERY disappointed in the church leadership. Not for the first time, not for the last time.

              -5.38, -2.97
              The NRA doesn't represent the interests of gun owners. So why are you still a member?

              by ChuckInReno on Thu May 16, 2013 at 03:12:58 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The Conf. of Catholic Bishops sent 11/02 letter (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                libnewsie

                which stated as follows:

                With the Holy See and bishops from the Middle East and around the world, we fear that resort to war, under present circumstances and in light of current public information, would not meet the strict conditions in Catholic teaching for overriding the strong presumption against the use of military force.*

                Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

                by RFK Lives on Thu May 16, 2013 at 07:34:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  He acted before the papacy (13+ / 0-)

        He's had a long history of concern for the poor, and living a modest lifestyle when he could have had much grander accommodations. There's no reason to doubt his sincerity on the issue, and as pope about all he can do is "words" (other than his own personal example).

        “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

        by Catte Nappe on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:45:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't know that it is his personal (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JBL55

          sincerity that I question - although opposing women's reproductive rights and supporting the alienation and discrimination of a group of people on the grounds that they are gay is, imo, counter-productive to the quest to reduce poverty - I question whether or not this will really take hold as a priority of the church as an organization.  Can this organization accept the scientific data that proves that birth control and women's reproductive rights help to keep women and children out of poverty?

          •  I'm reserving judgment as well. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            inclusiveheart

            I'm not RC but I appreciate the power of the papacy to act as a force for good in the world.

            Still, as long as women are seen by official RC eyes as lesser than men and mere vessels for babies (i.e. future tithers), I have my doubts about how much good they can actually do while disenfranchsing over half the human race.

            "War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate." ~ Al Cleveland & Marvin Gaye (1970)

            by JBL55 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 01:32:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Right. Words are nothing. (0+ / 0-)

        And words are less than nothing from a cleric.

        The Vatican needs a "Action" Pontiff, and not the action of the Holy Inquisition.

        Meh. RCC.

        Ugh. --UB.

        "Daddy, every time a bell rings, a Randian Libertaria­n picks up his Pan Am tickets for the Libertaria­n Paradise of West Dakota!"

        by unclebucky on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:59:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Suggestions for actions by the Pope? (4+ / 0-)

          That he actually has the means to enforce? You'd be surprised at just how little actual control the Pope has. This ain't Gregory VII's church.

          47 is the new 51!

          by nickrud on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:20:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  How come when the left's orgs use (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jabney, absdoggy, AoT, Domestic Elf, libnewsie

          their voices we all rejoice with 'hear, hear...someone said it, out loud, to the media even! Fantastic!' and no test of action is necessary...as long as some lefty said it keep sending those donations! The Pope has said some pretty strong and blunt condemning words here that really are backed up by a lot of RCC's own dogma in helping the poor. This IS the action Pope's do and they travel to spread that message. To say they have to prove they mean it when you don't ask that from other orgs shows a bias toward religion. Why should they have to prove they mean it when For centuries the Church was the only institution that sought to relieve the plight of suffering for the poor and disadvantaged. That some churches' laity or politicians who are part of those religions do a poor job of upholding the tenets of those religions doesn't make those religions bad, per se. It means they were crappy Catholics, Protestants, Baptists, etc.

          •  Well, it's unclear as to Pope Bergoglio's (0+ / 0-)

            programming.

            JP2 might have come in fresh, but he got brainwashed after a bit.

            I would like him to charge (give orders to) parishes to cut the dogma crrrap and start doing the work of Jesus, not of Christ.

            And as far as Liberals, which do you mean?

            I go with Liberation Theology, and I wonder what this Pope is going to say about that.

            Best,

            --UB.

            "Daddy, every time a bell rings, a Randian Libertaria­n picks up his Pan Am tickets for the Libertaria­n Paradise of West Dakota!"

            by unclebucky on Thu May 16, 2013 at 10:17:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Well, skepticism is warranted (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            melo

            In the late 1970's, quite a few Catholic priests and laity really did support the poor.  There was a dirty war over that, and this Pope sold a couple of those priests to the Generals.  One survived and forgave him years later... but this is a Pope who talks about poverty and the tyrrany of Capitalism on one hand, but there's a pretty good case to be made that he backed the temporal power of the economic elite at a  key point in his nation's history.

            Don't get me wrong; I'm glad he's talking about poverty and doubly glad he's talking about structural issues in the economy.  Good for him.  Let's see where this goes.  I am going to sit on the sidelines and watch for a little while as he is a man with a very mixed background, allegations of serious cowardice, and a history of backing those very economic elites he is now condemning. But redemption is key in Christian theology and he may be able to redeem himself.

            “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

            by ivorybill on Thu May 16, 2013 at 12:51:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Well, when the organization has been (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JBL55, ahumbleopinion

            working most aggressively on trying to limit women's reproductive health services and can't even find a way to "bless" the use of birth control, it is hard to imagine how they are going to fight poverty by continuing to encourage women to have five or ten babies regardless of whether or not those women are able to support those children.

            Anti-Poverty programs that are successful are based on a systematic process that deal with a multitude of factors at a multitude of levels - that's really why it is such a tough problem to address.  There are issues that need to be addressed at the personal level - education, job training, life skills, math - and then there are societal issues including job opportunity, living wages, decent housing, affordable food, low cost loans and more.  

            Assuming that there will be some design in the plan that the Church will put together - assuming also that there will be an actual plan - the specifics of that plan will be important to understand.

            Time will tell.

        •  With kung-fu grip? n/t (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          happymisanthropy
    •  Code Monkey: if enough of the Catholic (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens, cotterperson

      flock believe their shepherd is sincere ... faith the size of a mustard seed.

      LBJ, Lady Bird, Van Cliburn, Ike, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

      by BlackSheep1 on Thu May 16, 2013 at 09:23:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site