In this photo, imagine Pope Francis saying, “Talk to the hand, Dorito.”
As you’ve probably seen the news coverage by now, you know that Pope Francis was on a multi-day trip to Mexico, where he said mass for tens of thousands of people, visited the border and fussed at some dirtbag who basically pulled him onto a dude in a wheelchair. As the Pope was concluding his Mexico trip, he did a press conference for the media outlets trailing him. He was asked about the Church’s stance on birth control, given the outbreak of the Zika virus and the medical recommendations that men wear condoms to avoid infecting their partners. Francis was basically like “I can’t technically tell people that it’s fine to wear condoms, but it’s not really all that sinful in this particular case.” Which, hey, is a good first step. Then Francis got a question about Donald Trump. And the Pope did not hold back.
Inserting himself into the Republican presidential race, Pope Francis on Wednesday suggested that Donald J. Trump “is not Christian” because of the harshness of his campaign promises to deport more immigrants and force Mexico to pay for a wall along the border.
“A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian,” Francis said when a reporter asked him about Mr. Trump on the papal airliner as he returned to Rome after his six-day visit to Mexico.
Mr. Trump has staked out controversial positions on immigration, vowing to force Mexico to build a wall and also increase deportations. He has also made inflammatory comments accusing Mexican immigrants of being rapists and criminals. Asked whether he would try to influence Catholics in how they vote in the presidential election, Francis said he “was not going to get involved in that” but then repeated his criticism of Mr. Trump, with a caveat.
“I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that,” Francis said. “We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt.”
Sure. And guess who has orange skin, a bouffant wiglet, no self-control and two thumbs? THIS GUY. So of course Donald Trump had to respond. Trump told a crowd in South Carolina that ISIS’s “primary goal is to get to the Vatican. That would be their ultimate trophy.” Is it though? And: “If and when the Vatican is attacked… the pope would only wish and have prayed that Donald Trump would have been elected president. Because this would not have happened.” Will Francis really be praying for that specifically? Trump also said:
“No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man’s religion or faith. They are using the Pope as a pawn and they should be ashamed of themselves for doing so, especially when so many lives are involved and when illegal immigration is so rampant.”
Yeah. So Donald Trump and Pope Francis are boy-beefing. How does that make you feel? For what it’s worth, I don’t think Francis was really questioning Trump’s faith as much as Francis was making a larger plea for understanding and compassion for immigrants. But whatever. BOY BEEF.
.@realdonaldTrump responds to #PopeFrancis’ comments on building walls https://t.co/jOTsn7Hopt
— CNN (@CNN) February 18, 2016
Photos courtesy of WENN.
My God that is an ugly man.
How does it make me feel? Like a character in those comic books Kristen is whining about, except everytime the page is turned Trump isn’t revealed to be Lex or Dr. Doom and Hulk doesn’t appear to give him the beating of a century.
Smh, life is freaking ridiculous. I’m starting to hate this man so much I find myself wishing for some divine intervention in something shutting him up.
just think about it this way: if he keeps being idiotic, Hilary has even MORE chances to win. I’m not even American and I sooo want her to win.
But his alternatives are equally bad. Is Ted Cruz really better?
If I was American I’d vote for Bernie, but any Democrat will do.
@Locke Lamora
Ugh, Ted Cruz is the worst. I might dislike him even more than Trump. But really, in all fairness, they all suck. The entire GOP is a clown car at this point and they have no one to blame but themselves for The Rise of the Dorito.
ETA: I’d vote for Bernie too if I were American, but if he doesn’t get the nomination, Hillary is still loads better than the best Republican candidate (as to who that might be, I’m stumped).
Ted Cruz is FAR worse IMO. While I agree that Trump is a garbage human being, I think socially he would probably be a bit more open-minded than Cruz, who is completely and utterly batshit crazy.
Ted Cruz is worse. Yes Donald Trump is a racist buffoon, but Cruz is an actual politician. He knows how to play the game and use every dirty political trick to his advantage.
I know – I can’t believe I am saying that if it comes down to it (which I fervently hope it does not) I would prefer Trump to Cruz, only because I don’t think that Trump necessarily believes the hateful things he spews whereas I believe Cruz does.
I hope Sanders wins. But I’m enjoying Trump’s campaign. He’s hilarious.
TEAM POPE!
I’m with you completely but what is worse is how many people immediately went after the Pope – seriously if one more person compared “Trump’s wall” to the walls built in 200 AD around the Vatican my head was going to explode. This man is a narcissistic moron but the supporters that always rationalize his statements are truly the worst kind of people.
It’s not an either/or proposition. Not sure why people have to pick “Team Trump” or “Team Pope”. It is possible that they’re both wrong. In fact, they ARE both wrong and they ARE both hypocritical. Speaking as a Catholic, it’s cringe-worthy to hear the Pope (of all people) judging or even idly speculating on who/what is and isn’t a Christian. Bad, bad move. On the flip side, Trump is hardly in a position to be criticizing the Pope for judging him given that he (Trump) has been questioning Cruz’s Christianity non-stop for nearly a week. By the same token, it is quite undeniably hypocritical for the Pope to be criticizing the US’s immigration policy or the desire to build a wall when he not only lives in a city that’s completely walled-off, but has THE most restrictive immigration policy in the world.
So in this case, I give both Trump and the Pope a resounding “F”. Fail.
@LaurieH, AS THE pope, it’s his job to comment on humans who use religion to get ahead, especially when they are full of it! If the a Pope can’t comment, who can??????
JIB – that is actually NOT the Pope’s job. The Pope is the spiritual leader of the Roman Catholic Church. He’s not a politician. He is not a judge. What he says ex-cathedra is infallible. Everything else he says is just as a man (not the Pope). So no, it is NOT the job of the Pope to comment (i.e. judge) other humans. Not even close.
No leader should have the right to question another man’s faith? Uh…seriously, Dorito? (Love that nickname for Trump, BTW). I seem to recall him wanting to ban an entire group based on their faith, but I guess that doesn’t count because they’re Muslims? Oh, and it’s technically not questioning their beliefs, so it’s okay?
Man, this guy. I’m not even Catholic and I’m all like “yay Pope!” I fear for those of you in the USA if he actually does get elected.
Plus many is his party have spent the past 8+ years questioning the “true” faith of President Obama, always implying he is not a Christian. Trump was actually one of those doing that subversively through the guise of questioning President Obama’s birthplace/citizenship.
I’m from a super Catholic country and we had an atheist Prime Minister and an agnostic President. We also had a divorced single mother as the head of the biggest right wong party. Why a politicians faith matters that much inthe US is quite strange.
Exactly…I see so many people posting on my FB wall about how the Pope can’t say what he said…same people who have been backing the likes of “religious leader” Franklin Graham and all the stupid things he’s said about Obama.
not to mention Trump himself has questioned Cruz’s faith many times.
The fact that President Obama seemed to keep his religion personal is one of the reasons why he appealed to me.
Cruz just called POTUS a “faithless, lawless man” lol.
Lawless? Ugh. These people are so effin stupid it hurts.
Lady, exactly! First thought that popped into my head. Trump is so dishonest. It makes my skin crawl.
I long for the day an outright, upfront atheist can run for President and nobody gives a fig, when it’s no more important than eye color. So sick of the Bible thumping hypocrites who would undoubtedly run Jesus out of town on a rail if he ever showed up.
It will never happen…
why won’t this man go away? don’t we suffer enough with the kardashians of the world. we need donald trump to also make us miserable?
Miserable? He’s funny.
#TeamPope
Most politicians spin their beliefs so that it suits their voting base, Donald isn’t any different. I remember Santorum, the great Catholic who supported the death penalty, the war in Iraq and didn’t believe in evolution which are all against the beliefs of the Catholic Church.
It’s sound like a Southpark episode. The Pope vs Donald Trump. But of course #TeamPope
Exactly. Donald plays up his Christian faith when it suits him. He’s a hypocrite of the highest order.
Locke Lamora said-
“I remember Santorum, the great Catholic who supported the death penalty, the war in Iraq and didn’t believe in evolution which are all against the beliefs of the Catholic Church.”
FYI, capital punishment and war are allowed per the Catechism-under certain conditions. Evolution is not a belief, doctrine etc. of the Church. This is very different from statements that a theory of evolution is not incompatible with Church teaching.
The Catholic Church isn’t against evolution. I’ve gone to Catholic schools and universities and Darwin was taught there.
Peanutbuttr-
Just to clarify my statement, ” a theory of evolution is not incompatible with Church teaching. ” I used a double negative. to indicated that it might be acceptable, although it is not explicitly stated as belief, doctrine etc.
@Amelie, the Vatican stated at the time that the war in Iraq did not meet the exceptionally narrow criteria. The situations in which the death penalty would be allowable under Catholic doctrine are pretty much extinct and have been for several decades now and definitely don’t apply to the US. We can build strong prisons.
Lilacflowers:
Something that I think is confusing to Catholics and non Catholics alike is interpreting ANY public statement by the Vatican/Pope. Just because a Vatican spokesman or frankly a priest who teaches theology at the university level makes a statement, it does not mean that this is the teaching of the Church.
The best resource is the Catechism of the Catholic Church as a first step. I would recommend then talking to a priest who is in good standing with the Church. The fact is, many folks are surprised at what the Church really teaches after they receive the correct information. Having said all this,for properly schooled Catholics, there is the entire issue of conscience and understanding of Catholic Moral Theology. For example, one is taught never to do the ‘wrong’ thing to achieve a greater good.’ I am including the specific section of the Catechism concerning just war in this post and many may think, well what the heck is going on? My point is that the Catholic faith is complex and subtle and often distorted.
“Avoiding war
2307 The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war. [Cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes 81, 4] All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.
However, “as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed.” [Cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes 79, 4]
2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
– the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
– all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
– there must be serious prospects of success;
– the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine. The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.”
Again, Amelie, the Vatican ruled that George W Bush’s invasion of Iraq, which resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians along with the deaths of more than 4,000 US troops was NOT a just war and the Pope told Bush that to his face. Those quotes of yours also demonstrate that Bush’s bloody debacle was not a just war. As a Catholic, I believe Bush and his supporters will answer to an angry but just God for all those murders.
There is no such thing as a Vatican ruling.
George Bush is not Catholic so why are you referencing him in relation to the Vatican, Catholic teaching? A Jew for example follows the tenets of his faith. Is a Jewish person to be condemned for doing something his faith says is just, because another faith believes it is unjust? Full disclosure, I never believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and I was against invading Iraq.
The Pope speaks to the Catholic community first and foremost… although he may be a wider symbol of morality in the world. In the past, I enjoyed listening to the radio preaching of a Scottish evangelical minister. But, I was well aware in listening to his teaching that they were based on the theology of his religion not mine.
So ashamed of my country that this idiot has gone this far. At this point he’s probably going to win the nomination. The Republican Party should be ashamed and appalled at itself.
Can you believe that party had eight full years to think about how to do better and this is what they came up with?
They literally haven’t been able to come up with an idea of any substance in those 8 full years so not terribly shocking.
“No Obamacare! What do we have to replace it with? Uh…”
Like the stories read they’ve become the party of ‘NO’.
@SideEye I also despise trump and don’t see any good choices, but saying republicans have no ideas is unfair. Just because you don’t like or aren’t listening to their suggestions doesn’t mean they’re not there. Also, if a republican had been in the White House for 8 years and it was election time, then the democrats would also look like the party of “no” because they would also be opposed to what had been transpiring.
Somebody needs to make a comedy TV show out of all these GOP shenanigans. And I’m not talking about SNL-style skits. I want a proper sitcom. Get on it, Hollywood!
@PinaColada, it’s not like the GOP was never in the White House. Even as recently as during Bush 41’s term, bipartisan agreements could and were reached frequently. I also don’t think the GOP gave Bill Clinton that much of a hard time during his two terms. It’s when Dubya took office that everything went to hell. He was the first president to act only in the interests of his own party, without ever trying to compromise. He spoiled the GOP rotten and revolutionised the presidency in that sense (never thought I’d use the word ‘revolutionise’ in connection with George Bush), so when Obama took office, the Republicans were pissed because they were no longer getting special treatment. And Obama did and does try to compromise with them and meet them in the middle, but that’s just not good enough for them anymore. If they’re not getting their way 100%, it’s a no from them. Kind of hard to see how they wouldn’t be considered obstructionists.
What happened to Romney? He seemed more solid than what they’re rolling with at the moment. But then again Christie seemed like a pretty good option compared to the other nominees too but the GOP voters didn’t want him.
I don’t understand how you can possibly think to fight with the Vatican on Faith.
How crazy is that?
How unfortunate that such a large portion of Republican voters are so prejudiced that an unqualified candiate can use that as a platform.
Sometimes I really like what this pope has to say. This is one of those times, and it should extend to a few other candidates as well.
I’m guessing trump didn’t have a problem with people insisting Obama isn’t Christian, because if there is one thing he is consistent on, it is his hypocrisy.
Yes, Cruz managed to dodge this one but the Christians he courts don’t listen to the Pope.
Yes, the christians he courts LOATHE the Pope. First, theres that whole Pope is the anti Christ bullshit they’ve been peddling for as long as I have been alive. Then there is the fact that this Pope epitomises everything they are not. Those Churches are all about “get money” Prosperity Gospel, Pope Francis is about humility and care for others. He shames those christians just by existing and they hate him for it.
Naya, is that true? I am a Christian and I have not heard anyone say anything against the Pope. I quite like him. We may not agree on every doctrine, but I hate it when Christians squabble amongst themselves about points that don’t really matter in the long run.
But then I suppose I am not one of the Christians he is courting.
I recently found out that some denominations don’t think Catholics are Christians at all.
@Locke Lamora: Most Catholics don’t believe Christians are Christians either. I assume that probably extends to the Pope. Catholics think they are the only ones going to heaven. I say this as an insider. I almost married a man who is now a Catholic priest.
I don’t think that’s true. I went to religion classes for 12 years and we always considered all Christians Christians. Our priest reffered to them as our brothers in Christ. Heck, he also said that atheists won’t go to hell either.
Locke – I think this is an American thing? Didn’t one of the Duggars get written about on here for going off on Catholicism? There’s been plenty of historical infighting between Catholics and Anglicans here in Britain, but no side ever accuses the other of not being Christian. I get confused with the denominations in the US and what each preaches.
Crumpet, that’s a generalization.
There are good and bad people, as well as fanatics, in every religion.
I was following the Pope news on a USA news site and the things I read against Catholics in the comments section were appalling.
@Sixer, some people adamantly claim that Catholics aren’t christians because of technicisms that I do not want to get into (saints, the holy Trinity, virgin Mary), and I am not an expert, but some people look for paragraphs in the bible for things to attack the other religion.
I still do not generalize, and say: hey all christians hate Catholics, because I know many Christians of different denominations and they are ok, not judge, at lest not to my face, I even have atheist/agnostic family who are not trying to “convert” us/see the light, everyone is respectful towards the others.
Even when I work with teens, the ones that question me about religion out of the blue, are sometimes teens who are not Catholic, but I show them that I try to be a good person even if I belong to a different religion than them, hoping they learn to be tolerant.
In my country,the priests call them “our separated brothers and sisters” =hermanos separados=from the same father/God.
@Sixer, yes, one of the Duggar son in laws made some nasty anti-Catholic statements. The Republican Party courts Catholics aggressively with its anti-abortion stance but often just pulls single issue voters because it’s positions on the death penalty, war, and social programs run counter to Catholic teachings. Large Catholic areas like New York, California, Massachusetts tend not to support Republicans in presidential elections
Thank you, ladies.
Here, we basically have Church of England Anglicans and Catholics. There are a few other denominations but in tiny numbers. And a few evangelicals, but again, tiny numbers. So Christianity is quite easy to understand here! One of two tribes! And neither has much to do with specific political issues, aside from various archbishops or cardinals popping up from time to time to decry poverty or bad prison conditions or similar, in general, not party political, terms.
The only boy in this beef is Trump. And for a boy, he has a lot of power at his hands.
I applaude Pope Francis with all my being. Finally, finally, a religious figure of that importance spoke up! It’s his right, it’s not like he’s getting involved in american politics. And who else but him could judge a christian? Especially an idiot who only spreads hate and then call himself that.
Also, I’m sure the Pope (or anybody) would ever cry for Trump’s help. lol, please, get off your high horse.
Now, if only the Pope would do something about those walls that have been erected to protect all the pedophile priest….
Yes, it really is appropriate for someone like the pope (or anybody, really) to point out that certain statements are simply not in line with Christian belief or what we know about Jesus. If not him, who else? He was pretty gentle in the way he worded it. I think he was allowing for the possibility that there were misunderstandings. But he was pointing out the problem with certain statements and actions. He doesn’t have a gun to Trump’s head and nobody is obligated to agree with him. But he has the right and actually the duty to say it. It’s a pastoral thing.
You tell him, Frank!
And of course, because Francis criticised him, Trump is now yammering about how no religious leader should be able to question another person’s religion or faith. However, several religious leaders in the US have already come crawling out of the woodwork to defend Dorito (I just about lost it when I read that first sentence), so I’m guessing it’s only a matter of time until he starts retweeting or repeating those compliments. I suppose an opinion on the Donald’s religion or faith CAN be expressed as long as it’s positive.
“You tell him, Frank!”
I loved that SNL skit so much! “You know it, Chairman!”
“They are using the Pope as a pawn”
Who is this they he refers to?
Mexico. Literally.
Complete question and answer from the in flight press conference with international reporters:
.
Phil Pullella, Reuters: Today, you spoke very eloquently about the problems of immigration. On the other side of the border, there is a very tough electoral battle. One of the candidates for the White House, Republican Donald Trump, in an interview recently said that you are a political man and he even said that you are a pawn, an instrument of the Mexican government for migration politics. Trump said that if he’s elected, he wants to build 2,500 kilometers of wall along the border. He wants to deport 11 million illegal immigrants, separating families, etcetera. I would like to ask you, what do you think of these accusations against you and if a North American Catholic can vote for a person like this?
Pope Francis: Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as ‘animal politicus.’ At least I am a human person. As to whether I am a pawn, well, maybe, I don’t know. I’ll leave that up to your judgment and that of the people. And then, a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the Gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/full-text-of-pope-francis-in-flight-interview-from-mexico-to-rome-85821/
“No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man’s religion or faith.”
But it’s totes okay to condemn an ENTIRE sector of humanity because of their religion or faith because a group of evil pricks say they’re carrying out their acts of terror in the name of that religion or faith, supposedly. I guess it only counts if you’re a white Christian dude.
Dorito logic.
Thanks be to the infinite universe that I’m an atheist. That’s all I got.
Atheism saved my sanity and if we are being honest, my life. That said, if I must live in a world of religious people then I’m glad that at least one of their leaders is a person with common sense and compassion (even though its apparent that he is essentially powerless).
powerless, but influential. If h weren’t Trump would’t have his panties in a bunch trying to milk this.
+1,000,000 to you and Sixer.
Naya: I’m not like a Dawkins or anything, honest. Quite happy to respect other people’s faith(s). And this Pope seems a nice guy and Trump seems an arse, as everyone is saying. But the thought of mention of God creeping into a political campaign really does make my skin crawl.
You wouldn’t last a day out here, Six.
No true separation of Church and State in these parts. Infuriating on every level.
You’re not wrong, Kitten! I almost posted on the John Oliver thread yesterday to that effect, actually, then ran out of time! I have a decent idea of what it’s like to live in California and Texas – see? I pay attention to you and am differentiating between areas/cultures! – as I have relatives living in both and have visited many times. A HUGE difference between both and the UK is that you are CONSTANTLY tripping over God. Here, I could go months without ever hearing a single word about religion, and I’m friendly with our local vicar as we sit on committees together! I’m sure there are plenty of religious Brits: they just don’t bring it up in public.
@Sixer-It’s the same in France.
It can be done, but it will never happen in the good ol’ USA.
What is that comment about religion being like a d*ck: great that you have it but no need for you to wave it around all the time?
I think God is so prevelant to Americans because the American Pledge of Allegiance contains the sentence, One nation under God. Is the P of A still spoke every morning in the classroom? It’s almost ingrained in children. I remember when we used to have to say the Lord’s prayer every morning, in elementary school. My son started school in ’93 and it wasn’t a requirement anymore.
What’s sad about all of this is that our founding fathers while very religious themselves, actually fought to keep the Constitution secular because they saw the religious wars that were being fought in the rest of the world and wanted to avoid that. Yet with the passage of time and religious people’s own vested interests in spreading their faith, religion slowly started to creep in.
@Lady D-Religion didn’t truly take hold of our government until the Cold War when we put “In God We Trust” (the American “motto”) on our money in response to the Soviet Union’s communism and “state atheism”. But I do think that you’re right about the Pledge being another example of the insidious promotion of God. That sounded a lot darker than I meant it to lol.
@ Sixer and everyone
Oh I completely agree. I’m restraining myself from going into a Kanye-esque rant on how absurd it is to insert their personal beliefs into public life. I love the British take on things. Also I like to privately imagine that Vicar of Dibley and Father Ted are actually documentaries and that church leaders there really are that awesome.
The Pledge contained no reference to God when written. “Under God” was inserted in the 50s. A few years ago, I attended a 4th of July event with my grandmother and her sister, both in their 80s at the time. They said the Pledge as they learned it in Catholic elementary school in the 1930s with no mention of God. A family next to us was horrified. So patriotic that they didn’t know the history of what they were reciting
I’m just sitting here thinking that perhaps there are advantages to being an uptight, stiff upper lip, keep yourself to yourself Britisher, after all! Whoever would have thought it! I am honestly only really comfortable with the idea that faith, or lack of faith for that matter, is a private thing – something you can discuss, yes, but not something you would ever impose on other people or let government anywhere near.
Naya: our vicar is not unlike a male version of Dawn French in Vicar of Dibley, in that he appears to spend most of his time mediating various petty village rivalries – Which is the premier wedding reception venue in the village? The old village hall or the new community centre? Respective caretakers Mrs A and Mrs B would duke it out in the middle of the Post Office if it weren’t for the vicar – than anything along God lines. I. Am. Not. Joking.
Amen
Ok I’m an Italian atheist but Pope Francisco is a super bad ass rioter!
He’s not afraid to tell it like it is!
Have you guys seen the video of him in Mexico, scolding a child because he was dragging him down and he was about to fall over a kid in a wheelchair? “DOn’t be so selfish!!”
I saw it live on TV, and he was giving away small rosaries with the help of his security team, and the teens were fighting for them. Then he was with the boy in the wheelchair and the other just wanted his blessing or his attention, they were disregarding the disabled boy in the middle when they pulled the Pope’s hand.
His security team was really too nice, the kid crossed the line, the pope is already 79 years old.
I love Pope Francis. He’s far from perfect but he has done many things that are considered progressive in the contest of the Church, and I say this as a Catholic. He’s been promoting and pushing for interreligious dialogue and has been meeting with many religious leaders recently so of course he couldn’t agree with Donald ” No muslims in the US” Trump.
I also like that he said loud and clear that the Vatican shouldn’t interfere with Italian politics, I wish the other messy cardinals would listen to him.
As a fellow Catholic, I love this Pope too. I think he would do even more if the bureaucracy in the Vatican wasn’t blocking him.
I adore Pope Frank.
“If and when the Vatican is attacked… the pope would only wish and have prayed that Donald Trump would have been elected president. Because this would not have happened.”
It sounds like Trump doesn’t think he’s going to win.
My first thought when I heard Trump’s response to the Pope (when speaking with Cooper) was the fact the Pope is one of the few that intimidate Trump ie the power which surrounds the Pope.
You could tell Trump just wanted to keep the peace and not push the issue. Good idea.
It seems as if there is a war of culture in the U.S. It is between those who believe in biblical concepts like censure of gay folks, racism based on the dying culture of the historical South and its mix with religiosity, creationism and its subsequent denial of evolution and global warming – and that of progressives who are anxious to tackle the major issue of wealth and distribution, while it is still addressable as a concern that can be dealt with. This is a problem that can become structural and intractable if don’t fix it now. If addressed, all Americans will feel the benefit.
Calling people Christian, or non-Christian can obscure the cultural shift.. Do folks deal with what is in front of their faces or try to run back into a past that no longer exists in form, because of scientific inquiry?
Both have no credibility. Donald Trump is a fear mongerer, hateful and divisive. Same words I could use for the Catholic Church. Lately the PR team for the church has been doing a great job, but the rules are still the same. A Christian doesn’t build walls and the Catholic Church has built so many of them literally and figuratively that the pope needs to only look outside his window and history.
Recently watched spotlight it only underscores for me I have no faith in any person, don’t give any human that power over me. Look at a persons actions not only their words.
Agree wholeheartedly. The pope talks about not building walls but building bridges but it seems they’ve built walls when it comes to dealing with the child abuse committed by their priests. I can’t see any bridges being built in this respect either.
I can’t wait to see Spotlight. I just listened to the Fresh Air interview with Walter Robinson so I’m all hyped up for it.
I absolutely agree with Sarah01. I was born, raised, parochial schooled in the Catholic faith. I consider myself now an “all-theist.” I believe in a little of everything. The Catholic church has excluded gays, women being priests, people who are divorced, etc., from its congregation. What’s the scripture saying about “don’t cast stones if you are not without sin….”
People who are divorced and gays are not driven away from the church. Trust me. Daughter of a second marriage, my mom was a catechism teacher to adults for decades. She participated in everything, she could not participate in communion per se, she did an act of contrition instead. Gays are also active participants if they wish to. Supposedly if they are sexually active they should not be taking communion either, but I do not see them being driven away or anything like that, at least where I live. People are not meddling into others’ lives.
Yes this from a man who lives behind a wall and has their own city. Hypocrisy at its best. Why do media and so many people misconstrue and leave out important parts of comments when repeating them? Trump said we should ban Muslim immigration until we can figure out who the good ones are and who is hiding behind them as a jihadist. What is wrong with that? People make Fun of repub candidates but, truthfully, the deems have no better candidates to offer. I am unimpressed with all the candidates.
How does Vatican city having walls equal hypocrisy? I understood the pope’s walls and bridges comment to be a metaphor. You’re cherry picking comments to fit your argument. Trump also said all Mexicans were rapists and we should close the borders. You left that one out.
I see how people find it hypocritical.
The wall in the Vatican was built to protect the Pope and church officials and the holy city. The wall Trump is proposing is allegedly to keep out terrorists and criminals and keep the American people safe (even though it’s insulting BS). The wall keeps the Pope safe, but he’s saying that walls are bad. It probably was metaphorical but I don’t think the Catholic church is in the best position to be making metaphors about building bridges and not putting up walls.
But eh. I have no dog in this fight. Can’t stand Trump even if he really is a democrat, and I can’t stand organised religion either (the institution, not faith itself before anyone gets upset).
Only–Trump never said “all Mexicans are rapists.” He said that among the 11 million illegal Mexican immigrants here, a percentage of them are rapists—and he’s not wrong. No, there are not *more* Mexican rapists than there are rapists of any other country, and he never suggested that. There is a percentage of rapists of *every* nationality, and we in the U.S. have far too many rapists (of EVERY RACE AND ETHNICITY) who are also U.S. citizens as it is. Why should we have to be endangered by them AND by the rapists who aren’t even legal citizens here to begin with? I don’t like Trump at all–I loathe him, in fact–and yes, I believe he’s a racist. But it would have been truly ludicrous of him (not to mention *completely* self defeating!) to have said something so preposterously false and deranged as “ALL MEXICANS are rapists.”
The wall was built in the middle ages, and it is a historic thing that you cannot just tear up.
The Vatican is practically open, it is a building, practically, not a country with great extensions of land.
The church /Vatican there helps homeless people a lot, including having clothes changes, barber shops and showers for them. The italian church also helps refugees. It more, dare I say, that what is done by the governments for Christians in some middle eastern countries, where they are being persecuted.
In general, the “walls” Francis talks about are in our mind. He is speaking in metaphors. Even I know that walls, in the case of Trump means also that he is very close-minded (in general, not just about immigration).
My two cents, the pope has city+walls because he used to be the temporal ruler of a sizable state, and he still is the chief of the Vatican state. Besides, he has to live somewhere, don’t you think?
As to you question, what’s wrong with that?, maybe you want to talk with a preacher/priest/shaman about it (or your preferred MJ provider).
“What is wrong with that?” Do you really need someone to explain racism and bigotry to you?
Cruz also said we should “carpet bomb” ISIS, which is probably the most assinine, out-of-touch thing any candidate has said thus far.
…and I’m supposed to buy that this dude knows his ass from his elbow when it comes to foreign policy?
Hell, he doesn’t even understand that members of ISIS are EMBEDDED in the Syrian population. That’s like Foreign Policy: 101. So Cruz is either for the mass killings of innocent Syrian civilians or he’s actually dumb enough to think that ISIS has camps set up saying “Welcome to ISIS!”
One common theme I see among the GOP is their persistent underestimation of terrorist’s intelligence. They are FAR more savvy than they give them credit for.
Other religions have bad people too. If you’re stopping immigration to figure out who the bad ones are, you stop it for all.
white male christians are more of a threat to a US citizen than a muslim refugee.
so, I propose we ban/deport all white male christians until we can “figure out what’s going on”.
A wall built many years ago in a very different time, it is apples and oranges. But if we want to argue that point, I’d note that both the White House and the US capital have security forces and fences.
Pope Francis, is in my opinion, a pontiff who makes public statements that are less judicious than his predecessors. One example, is a comment re: judgement of homosexuality. I won’t state anything more specific because his comment was spun and misreported out of context and led to much comment about a change in Church teaching.
This supposed comment re: Trump is IMO in the same vein. Public condemnation by clergy of a specific person who is causing scandal -a calling out,if you will-is not done out of hand. There is a prescribed process. The first step would be to address that person privately. The idea is to counsel that person and bring him back into alignment with the fold, versus shaming. Who knows what Pope Francis said? The media is having a field day with this. Methinks, he should be more prudent with his public statements.
I don’t know of any prescribed process reserved to the popes’ public utterances. Sometimes there’s a script, a more or less salient line to follow, and sometimes popes drop the hammer. When Benedict 16 blasted Bush 2 for the war in Iraq right in front of him, it was clear that the president had not been warned, as he was turning all shades of green and yellow. On the contrary, I wish Francis would be less prudent in his public statements, nobody’s going to impeach him.
I was not referring to a specific process for the Pope’s public utterances, but to the concept of Charity and Christian behavior taught by the Church. It is rooted in Scripture. The following verse is one-in my experience- which is quoted most often:
From Mathew 18: 15-17…
“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”
The pope is the church.
Lambda:
The pope is not the Church-the Church is composed of much more- and he certainly wasn’t speaking ex cathedra.
Someone on this thread posted the exact text of his comments…the text contains, “if-then” statements. The problem is that what he stated was more subtle than what is being reported. “If then” statements are conditional and indicate something called, ‘the subjunctive mood.’ The subjunctive is not fact, but indicates possibility as ONE example.
Hence, the point of my previous post, Francis-for whatever reason-makes statements that are less judicious than other pontiffs. If I were asked to make a suggestion to him, I would counsel that he stop with the off- the- cuff statements to reporters on the plane and stick to written, vetted statements. I honestly feel that this is something he needs to work on.
Bush expected to be applauded and hailed as a saint for opposing abortion. He thought his war and his executions would all be absolved.
Amelie, my reply was in reply to your quote, take the sinner to the church, and whatnot, well, unless you’re thinking St. Peter, the sinner is facing the foremost figure in the church. I know Francis was not speaking ex cathedra, though it would be fun if he did it from a plane.
Judicious prior popes? JP 2 was too deliberate to bow to the Curia, and Benedict was quite the blunderer (he called Islam a religion spread by sword, for – sake). Plus, your suggestion that he limit (subjunctive!) to prepared statements is a bit outrageous and impractical. Should the pope be a puppet? and there really isn’t a unified body that preps the pope’s public appearances. His Secretariat of State usually puts out fires after a press bomb such as this one.
Lamda:
It’s still not clear what your comment “the Pope is the Church means.” I would ask you to detail your meaning if you would like to pursue this.
Re: prior Popes and the judiciousness of their public statements.. Pope Benedict’s comments on Islam were part of a prepared speech made at Regensburg University in which he quoted a14th century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” What you haven’t mentioned and what was the issue when this quote was reported was that the speech was about the interrelationship of faith and reason. To critique his inclusion of this quote without this framework is in my opinion quite unfair. i would further say that if one looks at the form of Islam, Wahhabism that is fueling ISIS, Benedict was prescient. I have great regard for JPII and Benedict.
I don’t have anything else to add about the Pope making off-the-cuff statements as I have covered that in previous posts.
I don’t want to pursue what I said because, when it comes to your quote, we’re talking at cross purposes. I’m aware of the the Regensburg context, the pope indeed was quoting a medieval critique, not endorsing it, but hey, you want to open a dialogue with Muslims by quoting insults against the prophet, good luck to you, pal. The press ran with it, and why not? And we’re not talking about tabloid journalists, but about people like Pullella, veterans of Vatican journalism.
(I don’t want to add fuel to an unwanted fire, but I don’t hold JP and Benedict in high regard, the popes, not the individuals. One helped create that climate that sheltered abusers, see the Maciel case, the other might as well have been from Pluto, as disconnected as he was).
Lamda:
I take issue with your statement ,”open a dialogue with Muslims.” In fact that was not the purpose of the lecture series at Regensburg (It was entitled “Faith, Reason and the University — Memories and Reflections” (German: Glaube, Vernunft und Universität — Erinnerungen und Reflexionen). The program was not about starting a dialogue with Muslims. Any discussion between us would require an agreement to start with facts as a foundation.
I don’t consider the press as a litmus test and neither are they experts in subject matter. John Allen has covered the Vatican for probably 20 years and he is widely respected for knowledge and accuracy of his reportage. There are also a few others.
Popes and priests are human; they sin and err in their ways. The Vatican is an ancient institution and because it is composed of sinners, will always be imperfect. Anyone who has studied a bit of Church history knows that the sex abuse scandal is not the first to hit the Church. Folks love to reference this scandal and my opinion is that, it happened, it was wrong, action was taken, more action needs to be taken and healing needs to take place. FYI, I have read the John Jay study and alot of other data concerning the priest sexual abuse. I am also aware of the rates of sex abuse in the schools, families and frankly other clergy. The Catholic Church is very centralized and so it compiles the data. If anyone thinks that sex abuse doesn’t exist in other churches (baptist, jewish faith etc). they are mistaken. Because the centralization that exists in the Catholic Church does not exist in other sects, you will never get the data from these other entities. Also, the papers are full of reports of teachers caught sexually abusing children. The information I’ve seen indicates a higher level of sex abuse in the schools. Given my research, I know that many institutions, hide this information and private settlements are made. But, everyone’s favorite target is the Catholic Church.
Amelie, my handle is Lambda, not Lamda. The scope of the lecture included interfaith dialogue, that’s why the pope brought up Islam, in the most insulting and blunderous way possible. I never implied that the press are doctrinal experts, they’re just doing their job.
As to the issue of child abuse, you’re not saying anything new, and that includes the party line on comparative numbers from other religions and professions. I only mentioned the scandal in relation to JP 2. I consider him responsible for the climate that failed to punish criminals, instead shuffled them around, coddled them, and even promoted them. Priests are human and they sin, yadda yadda, but they happen not to go to jail, and that does not happen across religions and professions.
Have you read the lecture? I have. I would urge you to do so because it is about the interplay of faith & reason; it is not about interfaith dialogue. “Pope Benedict’s lecture dealt mainly with the role of theology in modern knowledge, and with the relationship between faith and science, religion and culture, and Christianity and modernity.”
As I stated before ” Any discussion between us would require an agreement to start with facts as a foundation.” Unfortunately, I find that your comments are not based on facts and I decline to continue.
I apologize for the misspelling of your name; it was not deliberate. I am in need of new glasses!
OK, vade in pace!
Donald may finally have met his match! He better be careful….this guy has connections!!! Smite the Donald….was heard rumbling in the clouds above Mt. Olympus.
This pope is head of a church that condoned and helped perpetuate the abuse of young boys for how long? Trump may be an ass but I find this so hypocritical coming from a man heading back to his walled in home. Has the Vatican ever apologized for ruining so many lives? He shouldn’t be so quick to criticize anyone.
I don’t understand how Trump and Kanye have so many supporters. They both seem to get a pass no matter what they say or do. Why??? I can’t believe there are people out there that support such morons.
I would like to mention that the internet media sites are full of explanations re: Pope Francis’s comments:
“Pope’s comments on Trump not a personal attack says papal spokesman”
I wonder what Father Lombardi would do without Pope Francis’s frequent controversy- provoking statements…
#TeamNoOne
I dislike Trump and I’d like the Pope and the Vatican to stay out of the political process.
Thank you! Absolutely agree w you.
Pope is a politician, thats how he became top catholic, but he’s not American, so he needs to BUTT out!
The pope and Trump are vile in different ways.