Given my positive review of the Papal Encyclical "Laudato Si" a couple of screeds ago (http://www.dailykos.com/...), some of you (okay, maybe one or two) may have been wondering about my take on Papa Francesco's current visit to the U.S. Yeah, I'm kind of wondering about that myself.
First, I'm admiring and envying his energy and stamina. I'm in the same age group, and I certainly couldn't keep up his schedule. Second, he is shrewd and savvy. His use of quotes from American icons like Rev. Martin Luther King is a great way to relate to his American audience, both Catholic and non. Third, his speech to Congress was well-crafted, and his delivery was passionate and affecting.
Slight digression here. Given the U.S. wall of separation between church and state, porous though it may be, there can be some question as to the propriety of a religious leader addressing a secular governmental institution. Technically, the Pope is a head of state as well as leader of his church, so technically appearances are preserved. More importantly, it appears the invitation came from Speaker John Boehner, and one can hardly expect the pontiff to turn down such an opportunity. So--okay.
Getting back to the speech itself, it dealt with a large number of issues in a way I fully approve. Wealth inequality and poverty: check. Environmental damage and climate change: check. Evil of arms trade: check. And so on.
But I have some reservations, and they stem from topics Papa Francesco did not address. There was, as nearly as I can tell, no reference, even obliquely, to the situation of the LGBT segment of society. While his emphasis on the Golden Rule could conceivably apply here, the failure even to mention these people leaves me distinctly uneasy.
Even more unsettling, the Pope failed utterly to deal with the problem of over-population. That was, of course, pretty much predictable, but it was still disappointing. I dealt with the overwhelming importance of the problem in my prior screed, so I won't repeat it here. But I have to say the Church's position on birth control and abortion can only exacerbate the problem and, in the end, defeat all attempts to keep the planet inhabitable for humans.
So--I still admire the man, and I give him credit for having his heart in the right place. But his blind spots, I fear, render his good intentions futile. Too bad.