pope Francis in bolivia
#11
Bolivia’s President Evo Morales drew a rebuke from Pope Francis when he presented the Pontiff with a crucifix mounted on a hammer and sickle.

“That’s not right,” the Pope said when he saw the crucifix combined with the symbol of Communism. The incident occurred during the traditional exchange of gifts as the Pope paid a courtesy call on the Bolivian leader.

Morales—who has a penchant for mixing Communist ideology and pagan rituals with Catholic symbols—has had a tense relationship with the Church since becoming president of Bolivia in 2006. He once referred to the Church as his “main enemy.”

Pope Francis appeared to be taken aback by the unusual gift. Bolivian officials explained that it was a replica of a crucifix made by Father Luis Espinal, a Jesuit human-rights activist who was killed in 1980. The Pope had paused to pray at the site of the priest’s death before arriving at the presidential palace.

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/head...ryid=25477
Reply
#12
"That's not right" ??  Then why accept it?  Some "rebuke"... Eye-roll  More ambiguity from Papa Frank Eye-roll Eye-roll.

He may be pope, but he stinks at it.  Just my opinion.  I really must restrain myself from reading/watching things by and about him--it only seems to provoke in me anger, despair, and a sense of hopelessness.
Reply
#13
There's debate about whether he actually said, "That's not right" when given the item.
Reply
#14
(07-10-2015, 01:51 PM)ermy_law Wrote: There's debate about whether he actually said, "That's not right" when given the item.

Which, if he did not say that, makes it even worse!  And if he didn't say it, what did he say, if anything?
Reply
#15
I just skimmed through his discourse to the “popular movements” of Latin America (the video Estevao posted; and, btw, WT… why is the pope meeting with these people which the majority, I know for a fact, hate the Church?).
All he talked was money, money and money. Alright, the economy is an important piece of the world, but its not all. He is pretty emphatic (and this comes out very strongly) about change: deep structural changes on the world. But changing the economy will not turn people good—that the Marxist/Libertarian illusion. He barely speaks of Jesus or God, as if they are an afterthought, an ornament (BXVI was strongly opposed to this, in almost all his writings; heck, JPII is the double a man Francis is)--the only time he mentions the Virgin is in her example of being a poor lady.
At one point (while making side mentions to jihadists) the pope says the faith is under persecution because its “revolutionary”, because it disrupts money. No. The faith is hated because ”For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved.”, not because it says this or that about money. People hate the Church because it defends the centrality of God, traditional structures of family, morality, etc. And while some people can claim some interest groups are behind these revolutionary movements, they simply use (and thus the hate comes mostly from) people who hate all those stuff, not because of money (heck, the useful idiots of communism are mostly sincere—though everyone thinks they will be parts of the Nomenklatura—and they hate the Church not because of distributism).
Times are very dark here in South America, with dictatorships lurking on just at every corner. This talk of the pope could not be worse. This pope has proven to be very weak in his analysis of history and society. He should not be meddling with them (at least not in this global scale).
Reply
#16
(07-10-2015, 04:44 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote: I just skimmed through his discourse to the “popular movements” of Latin America (the video Estevao posted; and, btw, WT… why is the pope meeting with these people which the majority, I know for a fact, hate the Church?).
All he talked was money, money and money. Alright, the economy is an important piece of the world, but its not all. He is pretty emphatic (and this comes out very strongly) about change: deep structural changes on the world. But changing the economy will not turn people good—that the Marxist/Libertarian illusion. He barely speaks of Jesus or God, as if they are an afterthought, an ornament (BXVI was strongly opposed to this, in almost all his writings; heck, JPII is the double a man Francis is)--the only time he mentions the Virgin is in her example of being a poor lady.
At one point (while making side mentions to jihadists) the pope says the faith is under persecution because its “revolutionary”, because it disrupts money. No. The faith is hated because ”For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved.”, not because it says this or that about money. People hate the Church because it defends the centrality of God, traditional structures of family, morality, etc. And while some people can claim some interest groups are behind these revolutionary movements, they simply use (and thus the hate comes mostly from) people who hate all those stuff, not because of money (heck, the useful idiots of communism are mostly sincere—though everyone thinks they will be parts of the Nomenklatura—and they hate the Church not because of distributism).
Times are very dark here in South America, with dictatorships lurking on just at every corner. This talk of the pope could not be worse. This pope has proven to be very weak in his analysis of history and society. He should not be meddling with them (at least not in this global scale).

RF, keep your head down, pray, pray, pray, pray, and pray, receive the Sacraments, try not to sin, pray, pray, go to Church, fast when and as you can and as is asked of you by the Church, pray some more.  And try to avoid reading/watching/hearing things by this man called Pope.  Or...become Orth....well, never mind. Smile
Reply
#17
(07-10-2015, 04:44 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote: (...) People hate the Church because it defends the centrality of God, traditional structures of family, morality, etc. (...)
Yes, and that is the reason why they try to adapt the teaching to the zeitgeist.
Reply
#18
Did you see that Francis vested for Mass in a Burger King? If that alone doesn't symbolically showcase just how far the papacy has fallen into decrepitude I don't know what does! This man Pope Francis really plays the buffoon. I don't know how else to say it. Benedict XVI had his moments of bad statements and buffoonery but nothing like this. I miss him now.

Francis is an embarrassment to the exalted nature of his office.

His statements on unbridled capitalism sound decent, but there is so little of the supernatural in his approach. I wonder if today the Church must speak more in terms of politics and economics or if this approach is just part of a profound loss of a sense of the supernatural even in the hearts of the highest authorities in the Church.
Reply
#19
(07-10-2015, 06:33 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: Did you see that Francis vested for Mass in a Burger King? If that alone doesn't symbolically showcase just how far the papacy has fallen into decrepitude I don't know what does! This man Pope Francis really plays the buffoon. I don't know how else to say it. Benedict XVI had his moments of bad statements and buffoonery but nothing like this. I miss him now.

Francis is an embarrassment to the exalted nature of his office.

His statements on unbridled capitalism sound decent, but there is so little of the supernatural in his approach. I wonder if today the Church must speak more in terms of politics and economics or if this approach is just part of a profound loss of a sense of the supernatural even in the hearts of the highest authorities in the Church.

I couldn't agree with you more that Frank "...is an embarrassment to the exalted nature of his office."  Hopefully that is the worst of it.

There are forces in and of the world, though,  that are out to destroy the Church.  Far too many members of the hierarchy, imho, are either consciously or unwittingly complicit in this.  I believe the Pope is amongst them, but whether his complicity is of the former or the latter form I cannot judge.  Again, this is just my opinion (so it's GOT to be right!! Grin  Crazy!).

Reply
#20
I prefer a Benedict IX or an Alexander VI over this Pope.

Give me the most licentious and worldly of all the Renaissance and Late Medieval popes over this unfortunate embarrassment.


N.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)