Bors on 'The Secret Marxist Pope'

Don't think I've actually featured the work of Matt Bors here hitherto...'Bout time.

No, Really, You Shouldn't Have...

My first reaction to this: Just WTF were you thinking ?  But, then, hey, what's that around Francis' neck ?  It would seem to be the very same symbol on the necklace, apparently also presented by Morales.  So, maybe Francis doesn't look that closely at symbols before he puts them around his neck ?*  Maybe he's short-sighted ?  The whole thing is fuckin' weird.

Bolivian president Evo Morales presents a hammer and sickle-shaped crucifix to Pope Francis during the exchange of presents in La Paz.

Photograph: Agencia Boliviana de Informacio/EPA

Vatican officials appear to have been flummoxed after Pope Francis was presented with a communist crucifix depicting Jesus nailed to a hammer and sickle by Bolivia’s president Evo Morales.

The gift from the leftwing leader caused an immediate stir among conservative Catholics who said the pontiff was being manipulated for ideological reasons.

The response of the pope was less clear. After being handed the wooden crucifix during a formal ceremony, he examined it for a few seconds before returning it to a Bolivian presidential aide.

His comments were largely drowned out by a flurry of camera clicks, prompting a flood of speculation. While some have claimed he expressed irritation, muttering the words “eso no está bien” (“this is not right”), Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi said the pope was more likely to have uttered “eso no sabía bien” (“I didn’t know that”) in bemusement at the origins of the present.

The Bolivian government insisted there was no political motive behind the gift. Communications minister Marianela Paco said Morales had thought the “pope of the poor” would appreciate the gesture.

* But, but, Luís Espinal.  Yeah, I read the same article.  Whether said crucifix of said Jesuit priest would have necessarily been recognised by or appreciated by Francis, who knows ?

Accepting, Learning, Adjusting...

With the Pope's recent encyclical, the right-wing in American (professional) politics have predictably gone bezerk, including supposedly Catholic politicians in the GOP, but I get the sense from Catholic and mainstream media that the laity are more or less taking it in their stride.  Seems like the overall attitude is okay, this isn't something we've traditionally focused on that much, but now that Il Papa's had his say, maybe it's time to learn a little more and find out how we can apply what he said to our lives...  Catholicism is inherently conservative of course, and quite slow to change as a result, but there's a difference between conservative and radical (which would be a more appropriate label for many political & religious groups in the West that misuse the former term).

The Catholic Church isn't the one desperately trying to prove that the Earth is six-thousand years old, or insisting that every word of the Bible must be interpreted literally.  For that we have various evangelical organisations, some of them every bit as extreme in their interpretations of the Book and how it must determine every aspect of human society as their Muslim equivalents in the Middle East.  But sometimes we, certainly I, forget that difference.  And then it comes as a surprise, though it probably shouldn't, when the message from the Church is a fairly moderate, even sensible one. *

* Wanted, really really wanted, to embed the full video, which said somewhat more, but guess FN's scripts & Blogger don't play nicely together...Grumble...  Full video here:http://video.foxnews.com/v/4311350106001/cardinal-donald-wuerl-on-popes-climate-change-message/?#sp=show-clips

Cue Heads Exploding from DC to LA

Guess the ole' Encylical is out now from the Pope that some Americans insist on calling 'Pope Frank.'*  And given that the Republicans were already freaking out calling him a Marxist and hinting at him being the antichrist** (thinking of Gutfeld and Michael Savage specifically, but no doubt, there's countless examples), who knows what new rhetoric they'll come up with now.  How dare he bring religion into politics in my country !  Well, for most of you...you already did that. Again and again and again...But anyways...


*Which is far less insulting than what they called his predecessor.

** Not than many haven't been doing exactly that for generations.

Probably Wouldn't Even Embrace the Money-changers, this Guy

Pope Francis will call for an ethical and economic revolution to prevent catastrophic climate change and growing inequality in a letter to the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics on Thursday.

In an unprecedented encyclical on the subject of the environment, the pontiff is expected to argue that humanity’s exploitation of the planet’s resources has crossed the Earth’s natural boundaries, and that the world faces ruin without a revolution in hearts and minds. The much-anticipated message, which will be sent to the world’s 5,000 Catholic bishops, will be published online in five languages on Thursday and is expected to be the most radical statement yet from the outspoken pontiff.

However, it is certain to anger sections of Republican opinion in America by endorsing the warnings of climate scientists and admonishing rich elites, say cardinals and scientists who have advised the Vatican.

And why should we continue to pander to the denialists in the United States (or other places -- thinking of the likes of Tony Abbott here) ?  Since when was the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church answerable to America ?

In a recent speech widely regarded as a curtain-raiser to the encyclical, Turkson said: “Much of the world remains in poverty, despite abundant resources, while a privileged global elite controls the bulk of the world’s wealth and consumes the bulk of its resources.”

The Argentinian pontiff is expected to repeat calls for a change in attitudes to poverty and nature. “An economic system centred on the god of money needs to plunder nature to sustain the frenetic rhythm of consumption that is inherent to it,” he told a meeting of social movements last year. “I think a question that we are not asking ourselves is: isn’t humanity committing suicide with this indiscriminate and tyrannical use of nature? Safeguard creation because, if we destroy it, it will destroy us. Never forget this.”

The encyclical will go much further than strictly environmental concerns, say Vatican insiders. “Pope Francis has repeatedly stated that the environment is not only an economic or political issue, but is an anthropological and ethical matter,” said another of the pope’s advisers, Archbishop Pedro Barreto Jimeno of Peru.

“It will address the issue of inequality in the distribution of resources and topics such as the wasting of food and the irresponsible exploitation of nature and the consequences for people’s life and health,” Barreto Jimeno told the Catholic News Service.

...

The rare encyclical, called “Laudato Sii”, or “Praised Be”, has been timed to have maximum public impact ahead of the pope’s meeting with Barack Obama and his address to the US Congress and the UN general assembly in September.

It is also intended to improve the prospect of a strong new UN global agreement to cut climate emissions. By adding a moral dimension to the well-rehearsed scientific arguments, Francis hopes to raise the ambition of countries above their own self-interest to secure a strong deal in a crucial climate summit in Paris in November.

...

Francis, the first Latin American pope, is increasingly seen as the voice of the global south and a catalyst for change in global bodies. In September, he will seek to add impetus and moral authority to UN negotiations in New York to adopt new development goals and lay out a 15-year global plan to tackle hunger, extreme poverty and health. He will address the UN general assembly on 23 September as countries finalise their commitments.

However, Francis’s radicalism is attracting resistance from Vatican conservatives and in rightwing church circles, particularly in the US – where Catholic climate sceptics also include John Boehner, Republican leader of the House of Representatives, and Rick Santorum, a Republican presidential candidate.

Earlier this year Stephen Moore, a Catholic economist, called the pope a “complete disaster”, saying he was part of “a radical green movement that is at its core anti-Christian, anti-people and anti-progress”.

Erm, words have meaning.  Destroying the only planet we have in the name of a extremist version of a particular economic ideology is radical.  Calling for cooperation in preserving said planet is conservative.  And calling for the rich of the world to be willing to sacrifice (at least some of) their (largely ill-gotten) riches for the sake of the poor is Christian.  As in the first and only of that name.

Pope Francis hints at 'brief' papacy

Hmm.  On the one hand, this could be the Catholic Church's loss, and that of the world.  On the other hand, the man is seventy-eight years old...  Prior to Benedict XVI, the last resignation the church saw of a sitting Pope was in the Middle Ages.  If this is to become established practice, I'm not at all sure it would be a bad thing, and do wonder how much this is/may be a reaction to the way John Paul II so publicly and painfully dragged out his papacy to the last moments of his life.  The Catholic Church has always spun this as a positive, as further evidence of JP's commitment to 'the sanctity of life', but I'm not so sure it helped the church or its image, or how effective a leader JP could have been towards the end.  Far better I think if JP had handed over power earlier to a more able leader, and been able to face his struggles in a more private and dignified manner.  But that just's my opinion of course. 

Pope Francis has suggested he may resign his papacy like his predecessor, rather than remain at the Vatican for life.

The pontiff made the comments during a interview with Mexican television, marking the second anniversary of his election.

"I have the feeling that my pontificate will be brief. Four or five years; I do not know, even two or three," he said.

He praised Pope Benedict's decision to step aside in 2013 as "courageous".

"Benedict should not be considered an exception, but an institution. Maybe he will be the only one for a long time, maybe he will not be the only one.