Pope Francis has arrived in the United States, and will be here for six days, traveling to Washington, DC, New York City, and Philadelphia.
It is clear that Pope Francis is a gift to the world and a supporter of progressive causes that he often shares with President Barack Obama!
This Pope is, clearly, the best Pope in the sense of promoting reform, since the time of Pope John XXIII (1958-1963) and the Second Vatican Council.
Pope Francis has made enemies among conservative Catholics and evangelical right wing Christians, who do not pursue the true message of Jesus Christ, the promotion of the poor and the disabled and the sick.
Pope Francis has condemned predatory capitalism which has no concern as to its effect on the poor.
Pope Francis has spoken up on climate change and global warming, infuriating those in the conservative movement and the Republican Party who only think about profits, and reject science.
Pope Francis has attacked the growing income inequality in the world, a dangerous disease that threatens global stability.
Pope Francis has worked to resolve problems in the Catholic Church, and to have a more open mind on divorce, abortion, gay rights, and other controversial social issues, while not wholly backing all of these cultural changes. But he has demonstrated greater tolerance of differences and opened up a sense of change, which is desperately needed in the Catholic Church, if it is to grow and prosper in the long term.
Pope Francis has engaged in bringing about the restoration of a relationship between the United States and Cuba, something long overdue.
Pope Francis has worked to help Syrian refugees, and generally to encourage immigration reform around the world, as to reject immigrants is against the American historical tradition, and worldwide would be the growth of another Holocaust, as Jews and other refugees suffered in the Second World War.
Pope Francis is a transformational Pope who, hopefully, will have a long range effect on the Catholic Church and the world.
Pope Francis has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is hoped that he will win it, as he richly deserves it!
Before he speaks to Congress, someone needs to put some duct tape on Joe “You Lie” Wilson’s mouth. 😉
You are correct, Princess Leia, such disrespect is so common among conservatives and Republicans in Congress!
I know Bergoglio aka Pope Francis, well, he is good man. And I was happy that a man from my fathers country was elected Pope. Although my wife is Jewish, she is also Argentine and she was very happy as well. As for Bergoglio’s vision of capitalism, he only has the statist example of Argentina’s economy. Ruined because of more that 8 decades of statist big government policies that were implemented all in the name of social justice. He believes that state capitalism, crony capitalism = capitalism. And that is very unfortunate but understandable for a Catholic priest who never lived outside of Argentina. Now that said, when it comes to matters of the soul, he is wonderful. Bergoglio praised America’s Roman Catholic church for its “unfailing commitment†to the pro-life cause on Wednesday, saying it was “the primary reason†for his visit to the country. The statement came during an address to the assembled bishops of the United States. “I appreciate the unfailing commitment of the Church in America to the cause of life and that of the family, which is the primary reason for my present visit,†he said at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle.The statement runs counter to the expectations set for the pope’s trip, which has been billed as a tour to denounce “the excesses of capitalism,†speak about environmental issues, and advocate on behalf of immigrants.
Francis called on the bishops to address a series of societal problems in the course of their work:
“I encourage you, then, to confront the challenging issues of our time. Ever present within each of them is life as gift and responsibility. The future freedom and dignity of our societies depends on how we will face these challenges. The innocent victim of abortion, the children who die of hunger or from bombings…”
Pope Francis subtly rebuked President Obama’s record on religious-liberty issues in his opening statement at the White House this morning. Roman Catholics want “a society which is truly tolerant and inclusive,†the pope said to Obama, before offering a warning. “With countless other people of good will, they are likewise concerned that efforts to build a just and wisely ordered society respect their deepest concerns and their right to religious liberty,†Pope Francis said. “That freedom remains one of America’s most precious possessions. And, as my brothers, the United States bishops, have reminded us, all are called to be vigilant, precisely as good citizens, to preserve and defend that freedom from everything that would threaten or compromise it.â€
The U.S. bishops’ list of “current threats to religious freedom†features two Obama policies, both promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS): Obamacare’s contraception mandate, and the 2011 decision by DHHS to deny Catholic groups that fight human trafficking a federal grant because they do not refer women to abortion providers. “I think it’s a sad manipulation of a process to promote a pro-abortion agenda,†Sister Mary Ann Walsh, a spokeswoman for the conference, said of the latter policy at the time.​
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/current-threats-to-religious-liberty.cfm
Pope Francis is not the Messiah, but merely the chief bureaucrat in His service. He is very much in the world and of the world, and he must perforce deal with the world and its realities. But the kingdom he serves is not of this world.
Pope Francis has an irritating (and more than irritating) habit of saying ignorant and destructive things about economics and public policy. And of course no one should hesitate in criticizing him on these issues. Pope Francis has no special expertise, and no special grace, in these matters, and, like any leader of a large and significant organization, he needs to hear criticism and the forcible presentation of different points of view. But surely the political distance between us conservatives and Pope Francis is a good deal narrower than the chasm between Pope John Paul II, the great scourge of Communism, and Wojciech Jaruzelski, the scheming front man for Soviet brutality.
Pope Francis presents us with an interesting challenge: What do we do when we find ourselves in a political disagreement with a good man? We’ve had bad popes, no doubt, but it is difficult to make the case that Pope Francis is one of them, that he is motivated by malice. Errors? Surely. Ignorance? Without doubt. But wickedness? Please.
We conservatives want liberty, for ourselves and for the world. On that front, Pope Francis, unlike some of the great men who have walked before him in those fisherman’s shoes, does not appear to be a man who is going to be a great deal of help. But what do we want liberty for? For the things of this world alone, or for something more? That, despite his lamentable adventures in political economy, is more Pope Francis’s game. And he asks us for our prayers. Maybe the appropriate prayer is wisdom for the pontiff, and humility for his critics — for me and you and the rest of us.
Pope Francis has come to the United States, bringing with him more criticism of capitalism than a Bernie Sanders rally. He speaks with eloquence, fervor, and great moral standing. He is also wrong. The pope’s emphasis on the needs of the poor is important, especially in today’s politics, where poverty is often a public-policy sideline. But in calling attention to the problem, he fails to understand that free-market capitalism is not a cause of poverty, but a solution. To see an example, the pope need look no further than his native Argentina. In 1980, less than 1 percent of Argentinians lived in extreme poverty (that is, on less than $2 a day), while in neighboring Chile, the extreme-poverty rate exceeded 15 percent. Today, while the proportion of Argentinians living in extreme poverty has risen slightly, to nearly 3 percent, Chile has seen the most dramatic reduction in poverty in Latin America. Fewer than 2 percent of Chileans now live in extreme poverty. Overall economic growth tells a similar tale. After accounting for purchasing-power parity, per capita GDP was 12 percent higher in Argentina than in Chile in 1980. Today, Chile’s per capita GDP is 16 percent higher than Argentina’s.
What accounts for the difference? Following the fall of Salvador Allende, Chile embraced free-market capitalism. And while the initial economic gains were tainted by the country’s brutal dictatorship under General Pinochet, they have largely continued through the democratic governments that replaced the military regime. The transformation has included everything from free trade to lower taxes, from denationalization of state-owned businesses to the privatization of social security. According to the latest Economic Freedom of the World report, Chile’s economy is now the 13th-freest in the world — freer, in fact, than the United States’ economy. Meanwhile, Argentina’s economy has remained firmly mired in government control under a succession of presidents. The Economic Freedom report ranked Argentina a disappointing 151st. And Argentinians are suffering the consequences.
The reality is that free-market capitalism has done more to help the poor than any other force in history. Consider that in the last 20 years, as much of the world has embraced free markets, more than a billion people have been lifted out of poverty, while the number of people worldwide living on less than $2 per day has been cut in half. In China alone, even the partial adoption of a market-oriented economy has saved more than 650 million people from poverty. Almost 84 percent of Chinese lived in extreme poverty in 1987. Today, less than 20 percent do.
In sub-Saharan Africa, GDP per capita has more than tripled since 2000. In India, a 90 percent decline in hunger began when the government scrapped much of its socialist regulatory regime and introduced free-market reforms, starting in 1991.
Throughout most of human history, most of mankind lived in truly abject poverty. Indeed, even the richest and most powerful lacked the goods and services that are within reach of all but the poorest today. But, as Bono, hardly a right-wing icon, explains, “Capitalism takes more people out of poverty than aid.†Everywhere that free market capitalism took hold, national wealth began to increase and poverty began to fall. Everywhere that free market capitalism didn’t take hold, people remained impoverished. Everywhere that free market capitalism has been rejected since then, poverty has increased.†Once more, witness Venezuela.
Pope Francis is right to remind us of our obligation to help the poor and less fortunate. But the pope, who admits that he is not an economist, misunderstands the transformative power of free markets. And given the remarkable compassion that this pope has shown on so many subjects, it would be a bitter irony indeed if his ill-informed critique of capitalism condemned more people to a life of poverty.
Well said about the Pope, Professor! 🙂
Thanks, Southern Liberal!
Good to see that the Pope’s visit backfires on the GOTea! http://www.politicususa.com/2015/09/23/pope-visit-backfires-republicans-obama-francis-team-climate-change.html
Excellent piece from Wisdom Voices about the Pope’s visit.
http://wisdomvoices.com/100-years-ago-we-thought-very-differently-about-the-pope/
Breakdown of the Pope’s speech to Congress this morning.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/09/24/3705086/pope-francis-address-to-congress/
I’m not too highly religious and many of my views are more in line with the Pope than the bible-thumpers.
I’m not too highly religious either. I go to church on special occasions.
“. . . the true message of Jesus Christ, the promotion of the poor and the disabled and the sick.”
Professor, anyone who has read enough of the New Testament certainly is made aware of the fact that Jesus showed great concern for the poor and the sick. There is no denying that, and to do so would be a great mistake. You are correct to call out some conservatives and some on the “religious right” for much hypocrisy in wanting to uphold and proclaim certain aspects of Jesus’ teaching and The Bible as a whole but ignore and belittle other aspects. For example, wanting to apply what Leviticus says about the sin of homosexuality to the modern issue of same-sex marriage but not wanting to apply other passages in Scripture, particularly from Jesus himself that speak about helping those less fortunate like the Proverbs or Matthew chapter 25 to the issue of illegal imigration or to certain fiscal policies that might hurt those who are not so well-off more than help. This is maddening, and only shows that there are some, if not many, that are only interested in using Jesus as a puppet for their political agenda. It is difficult for me as a follower of Christ to see happening.
However, having said that, I must also say that with all due respect I am afraid that this hypocrisy is not only on the right but much so on the left as well. Many on the left (rightfully so) want to quote Jesus when he says, “Judge not lest you be judged”, (Matthew 7:1) but do not like when he says (if they are even aware that he says it at all), “No one comes to The Father [God] except through me.” -John 14:6. Or numerous other things he says about personal conduct, marriage & divorce, sex and most importantly, Himself.
It is inaccurate to say that the true message of Christ is to promote the sick, disabled and poor, in the sense that his message = that. They are certainly a part, but only a part, not the whole thing. In his own words he says he has come to, “Bear witness to the truth” – John 18:17, give his life as a ransom for many -Matthew 20:28, and ultimately be crucified as an atonement of sin for all who believe in him (John 3:16). So when anyone says his message IS to help those less fortunate, they may be guilty of the same thing that some on the right are; simply focusing on the aspects of Jesus’ teaching that expedites their political agenda and disregarding the other stuff. It seems both sides are capable of hypocrisy in this area.