FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Was the Pope Set Up?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2

From Breitbart:




Reporter Caricatures Trump as Ogre, Pope Says He Would Give ‘Benefit of the Doubt’
By Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D.
18 Feb 2016635



On the plane trip home from Mexico to Rome, American journalist Phil Pullella depicted Republican candidate Donald Trump as an odious person who would heartlessly split up families and thinks only of building walls, and then asked the Pope whether American Catholics can vote for him.

The Pope responded to the Reuters reporter that anyone who thinks only of building walls and never of building bridges is no Christian, since this way of thinking is foreign to the gospel. But he also questioned the accuracy of the reporter’s depiction of Trump.

“I would only say: if he said these things, this man is no Christian,” Francis said. “But we’d have to see whether he said these things. And in this matter, I would give him the benefit of the doubt.”

Pullella set the Pope up by praising him for the “eloquence” of his messages on the immigration problem while contrasting him with Trump, who openly criticizes the pope as a pawn of the Mexican government and wants to build an immense wall, deport 11 million immigrants and tear their families apart.

The journalist then proceeded to ask “what you think of these accusations against you” and “whether an American Catholic can vote for a person like this.”

The pope answered first with humor, saying that “thank God he said I am political, since Aristotle defines man as a political animal: At least I am a human being!”

Regarding “whether or not I am a pawn, I really don’t know,” he continued. “I leave that up to your and other people’s judgment.”

Francis said that “a person who only thinks of building walls, whoever he is, wherever he is, and not about building bridges, is no Christian. This is not in the gospel.”

“And what you asked about whether I would advise you to vote for him or not, that’s none of my business,” Francis said. “I would only say: if he said these things, this man is no Christian. But we’d have to see whether he said these things. And in this matter, I would give him the benefit of the doubt.”

In an email to Breitbart News, William Donahue of the Catholic League said he thought “the pope was set up” and that “the question to the pope inaccurately reflected Trump’s views.”

Donahue noted that Pullella told the pope that Trump “wants to deport 11 million illegal immigrants, thus separating families” which is “patently false.”

On August 16, 2015, Chuck Todd, on “Meet the Press,” asked Trump, “You’re going to split up families. You’re going to deport children?” To which Trump said, “Chuck—no, no. No, we’re going to keep the families together. We have to keep the families together.”

When asked where they would go, Donahue noted, Trump said, “We will work with them.”

“So the pope was misled,” he said.

There are other walls besides ones that one may find at national borders. Walls of hatred. Walls of racial segregation, walls were you and I can stand at opposite corners of a room and where we could stare daggers at each other. 
(02-19-2016, 03:40 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ]“I would only say: if he said these things, this man is no Christian,” Francis said. “But we’d have to see whether he said these things. And in this matter, I would give him the benefit of the doubt.”

This 2d part of the statement, about "the benefit of the doubt," is what has been left out of reporting.  That part of the quote completely changes the context from the widely reported quote of "he is no Christian."

(02-19-2016, 05:42 AM)Poche Wrote: [ -> ]There are other walls besides ones that one may find at national borders. Walls of hatred. Walls of racial segregation, walls were you and I can stand at opposite corners of a room and where we could stare daggers at each other. 

Well stated.  I'm 100% for border and immigration control.  That being said, my issue with a large part of the immigration debate is that the human element gets left out, and sadly, when not conducted in a civilized manner, it often leads to people assuming that anyone with olive skin and dark hair is here illegally or "not American."  I've witnessed this on occasion with how people have treated my wife, who was born here and fits the olive skin description, and her family, who migrated here legally from Argentina and Chile.  Few things will infuriate a husband more than overhearing some comment about the "wetback" over there.  I'll leave my reaction to y'alls imagination...
This sounds a lot like what Pope Francis called the terrorism of gossip.
I feel bad for Billy-boy Donahue.  Must be tough to come up with excuses for this pope.  Eye-roll

But what do you say?  The Pope's wrong?  The Catholic Defense League would be crucified by the Media and the Vatican.
(02-20-2016, 10:16 AM)austenbosten Wrote: [ -> ]I feel bad for Billy-boy Donahue.  Must be tough to come up with excuses for this pope.  Eye-roll

But what do you say?  The Pope's wrong?  The Catholic Defense League would be crucified by the Media and the Vatican.

I think the Pope is right, but I believe that the walls that are more important are the invisible wails that we tend to build. For example the walls that are built up by gossip and hatred. These are the walls that we should be tearing down.
In front of the wall of racial hatred I say, "Tear down this wall!"
In front of the wall of social hatred I say, "Tear down this wall."
In front of the wall of calumny and gossip I say, "Tear down this wall."

There are more than one type of wall that separate us and I think we should be thinking more about how we can remove those types of walls than whether there is a big wall at the border of this country with Mexico.
Pope Francis does not intervene in the Italian controversy about “civil partnerships”, because he does not want to "interfere in the political matters" of another Country.

Weeks later he celebrates Mass at the very boundary between Mexico and USA, and calls “not a Christian” someone (= Trump) who builds walls instead of bridges. A more blatant intervention in the affairs of another foreign Country is unthinkable; and this, even without considering the obvious attack against Trump.
This last papal disaster was not about walls. It was about the Pope's inability to think carefully before speaking. All over the world heads of state are asked tricky questions. They hedge their answers, they avoid confrontational answers, they avoid sounding like amateurs. Our Pope is a man with a very good heart, who was set up, but not by the journalist: he was set up by the cabal that pushed him into the ring to become the Successor of Peter, the one least prepared technically to deal with the pressures of his office. I pray that his strong points, that is, his sort of tenacity insistence on getting his way, will be used by the Holy Spirit at some point during this pontificate for the greater glory of God.

Surely, Our Lord's words to Saint Peter apply to all popes, that Satan asks to sift them like wheat. That is a lot of pressure. But Our Lord added that after Peter has converted, he is to strengthen his brothers. I believe this moment will happen in this pontificate. Perhaps I am too naive, but I have to have faith that it will happen.
(02-22-2016, 10:08 PM)maldon Wrote: [ -> ]...
Surely, Our Lord's words to Saint Peter apply to all popes, that Satan asks to sift them like wheat. That is a lot of pressure. But Our Lord added that after Peter has converted, he is to strengthen his brothers. I believe this moment will happen in this pontificate. Perhaps I am too naive, but I have to have faith that it will happen.

Without a doubt he will have a Pauline conversion while heading to Sweden to celebrate the protestant reformation.
Or while he decentralizes the papacy. Or at least before his papal resignation.



The papal resignation might be the conversion . . . ?
Pages: 1 2