For traditional Catholics, for pro-lifers, the visit by Pope Francis has been a series of missed opportunities. In his address to Congress not only did he make fleeting reference to abortion by stating the need for Americans to respect life at every stage of development, he then followed that with immediate specific reference to capital punishment. If he didn’t mention the unborn specifically, at least they are in good company. He didn’t mention Jesus, either. (Though he did mention “God,” which invites non-Christians to the table.)
The list of complaints on social media is endless. In sum, they paint a picture of a pope who has ignored the red meat issues of American Catholicism’s troubles in favor of a left-wing socio-political agenda. How do you solve a problem like Francis? How do you catch a cloud and pin it down? (Cue the Sound of Music)
But as this papacy has unfolded, something about traditionalists’ complaints over Francis calls attention back on the traditionalists and their hero popes, John Paul II and Benedict XVI. In thirty-five years of these two giant popes, we have witnessed all of the heavy-lifting both philosophically and theologically on the sexual revolution and the decline of the status of human persons in the twentieth century. We’ll be unpacking their writing for decades to come. As western civilization has crumbled, we clamor for more writing, more words, more defense of the sacred. And we get to the point where this author needs to ask, “What more needs to be said?” How many more words? How many more documents? How many more encyclicals? How many more speeches, homilies, press conferences?
In the span of two years I lost my two great mentors in life, one personal and one scientific. It’s a cold and lonely feeling to have them gone, to have the book closed on more words, more thoughts, more wisdom, more direction. But at some point the mentors, the parents, the elders have said and done all that needs to be said and done. At some point it’s time to leave the nest, to become the mentor for the next generation, to employ all that has been imparted and to add one’s own wisdom and experience. At some point, more words become just that: more words.
Words, words, words…
We don’t need more John Pauls and Benedicts. And this pope is right. It isn’t necessary for popes to always talk of sex and abortion. Where he comes from, those are secondary in magnitude to the evil of avoidable poverty, and all of the secondary violence and evils spawned by abject, grinding poverty. And to be brutally honest and completely fair to Francis, in 35 years of John Paul and Benedict, I heard comparatively little in traditional circles about third world poverty and the social justice teaching of the Church.
I have put my doctorate on the line in the service of the Gospel of Life. I have been a warrior in the cause. I have blogged for six years and rebuked my own scientific community for ignoring the truth of science in the headlong pursuit of assuring the slaughter of 60 million human beings in the womb. But I also worked for seven years with runaway and homeless teens in the bad and wild days of Times Square, New York in the 80’s.
And I and others see clearly what Francis sees clearly.
Jesus isn’t just being butchered in the womb. He’s dying 760,000 times a year of diarrheal disease (children under age five). Jesus faces the great dilemma tens of thousands of times per week in India of having just enough money to either buy food or firewood. If food, there is no fire to cook it, or boil the water to make it safe.
Jesus lacks basic medical care, shelter, or even a dignified place to die from His poverty and neglect.
Gay marriage is an affront to God, as is abortion and euthanasia, as is Planned Parenthood’s trafficking in fetal human remains-remains often harvested from babies still alive. But the issues Francis will not allow to remain in the shadows are just as pernicious, and even more perilous for the souls of traditionalists.
I didn’t marry a man. I married Regina 23 years ago. We didn’t abort our babies, we welcomed them with open hearts. We did it right. But I would be a liar if I said that patches in our marriage weren’t characterized by a lack of charity. I’d be a liar if I said that we did it perfectly, or even well at times. But for all that we have done right on the life issues, for Regina’s 25 years as a pediatric nurse and my work in the pro-life movement, we are called to place equal emphasis on the poor and the least.
I’ll be the first to admit that I have not done so on this pro-life blog, that the focus has been pretty tight on abortion, euthanasia, assisted reproduction, and marriage. No one person can do it all.
But no one Catholic has grounds to excoriate a pope for bringing matters of at least as great an importance out from their second-class status and into the heart of his papacy. How else do we combat the assertion of the proaborts when they charge us with only caring for babies until they are born?
If society crumbles, if the life issues move from bad to worse, we cannot lay that at the feet of the popes, or even most bishops. We are the ones responsible for evangelizing, for presenting the truth in a compelling manner. And to be fair to us, we have.
In six years of blogging on the scientific front, it is safe to say that we have won the debate on the human identity and status of the embryo and fetus. We have won the debate on chemical contraceptives and their harmful effects. We have won on every major scientific issue by revealing the scientific literature in every field. But for all that we have won, the truth has emerged that the other side never cared about the facts. Now, under Obama and company, it is the exercise of raw political power and will. Now it is simply about Choice as a virtue, rather than choice being the mechanism that takes us to either virtue or vice. All decisions are moral because all are the product of choice.
Perhaps Francis knows something that we do not. Perhaps Francis sees that we are still fighting the last war. We are trying to correct the vision of the blind. What is needed now is not so much a pro-life apologetic. That was John Paul’s papacy. The ground has shifted seismically since then. What is needed now is a new evangelization altogether.
We are arguing for the dignity of the unborn to those who do not see, and even disavow their own fundamental dignity, who sneer at even the Natural Law of the secular Enlightenment philosophers. We are faced with the malevolence that John Paul foresaw and trembled at the thought of.
So, perhaps Francis is on to something. Perhaps it is easier to awaken the world to its collective humanity, its fundamental dignity by addressing all of those criteria Jesus said He would judge us by in Matthew 25. One thing, though, is for certain.
The life issues didn’t improve (though our understanding of them did) in 35 years of John Paul, Benedict, and the ascendency of traditionalism. In fact, it has become much worse. That is through no fault of those popes, or of us in the traditionalist and pro-life camps. But there is one thing else that is for certain…
It isn’t Francis’ fault, either.
YOU INENSITIVE IGNORAMUS. HE CALLED FOR DIALOGUE ON ALL TOPICS.HE DOESNOT ADVPCATE OPPOSITION TO GLOBAL WARMING BUT CARE FOR THE PLANET OUR COMMON HOME. USING LEFT AND RIGHT TO THE VICAR OF CHRIST IS MORE OPPOSITKION TO JESUS’BODY. GETA REAL LIFE AND GROW SOME FAITH AND GET OFF YOUR HOBBY HORSE. YOUR BROTHER IN THE REAL CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH THAT HAS NO WINGS EXCEPT PSYCHIATRIC. A.P. OBBY HORSE Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:19:22 +0000 To: hfbhermitage@hotmail.com
The answer to poverty is through the church’s teaching on Sexual morality. Children need a mother and a father committed for life. If they have that, they have a much better shot at material prosperity (and not winding up a government drone ).
The Gospel of Life needs ongoing preaching…even Humanae Vitae said that. JPII may have written it, but his priests didn’t for the most part preach it. And his bishops for the most part have not shepherded it.
The issues you mention do bear talking about, but we get that message from our shepherds at Mass, each time the gospel relates to taking care of one’s neighbor. But, the issue of the war on the unborn is at least equally as vital to hear from the mouth of our pope. Those on the opposite side of this issue did not hear him say “all stages of life” in reference to the unborn because they do not consider the unborn to be alive. It was as though there was a line drawn, he came right up to it, and stepped away. Catholics in this country are just as pro-choice as the rest of the population, in secret if not openly. The intellectual dishonesty has to stop.
42,000,000
That’s how many children are intentionally killed every year through abortion. That’s how many people are committing the same mortal sin every year (not counting fathers, doctors, and family who pressure the mothers into it).
760,000 people dying from a morally neutral disease doesn’t come close to being as much of a priority.
Pope Francis just met with Hitler x 1,000 and praised his climate and social policies
Andrew,
I used only one very small metric regarding annual deaths in the Third World. The world never listened to JPII or B16 on abortion. The teaching is there, and it is up to US to spread the word. I’ve done that on this blog with some 900 articles. Others have too. The evil rolls on and on. The evil of poverty is no less compelling and no less worthy of a pope’s heart.
Without life there will be no issue of poverty and disease or any other evil on this earth.
Luke 23: 27A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. 28Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ 30Then
“ ‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!”
and to the hills, “Cover us!”
31For if people do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?”
He warned us of the day that women would rejoice in being childless! And he said to weep.
Well this “new” approach isn’t winning any converts, only adulation from a society who moulds Francis and his words into their own image. He is “so humble” and “so different” when in fact… he is just like his predecessors. Francis has been failing the Catholic Church as our leader. Theologically sound and deeply spiritual he is. He is not some evil anti-pope. But he is a bumbling fool who has lost the opportunity to really make an impact.
Very sad to read these negatives comments. The world has become so sinful that we need to use simplicity to win them back. Pope Francis is inspiring fallen away Catholics & others to give the church a 2nd look. It’s happening in my family, isn’t it happening in yours?? The Holy Spirit knows exactly what He’s doing!
It’s very sad to read these negative comments. Pope Francis is giving these people “baby food” as that is all they can handle. He is practicing the virtues of Prudence & Wisdom and we should do the same. I’ve never seen so many people finally starting to take a 2nd look at the Catholic church. It’s happening in my family because of Pope Francis. Isn’t it happening in yours?? Let’s trust the Holy Spirit as He knows what He’s doing! As St. Mother Teresa wisely said “What’s wrong with the world? You & me!” Let’s work on ourselves rather than point fingers at the Pope. Will we convert as many as him by the end of our lives?
I always appreciate your posts. They articulate, albeit at times with a surfeit of zeal, what most ardent pro-life Catholics intuitively sense. I do think Pope Francis is sincere, humble, and pious by nature. But his penchant to appease tyrannical leaders is a weakness. This was evident in his visit to Bolivia and Cuba as well as in his fawning remarks to our president at the White House. Given the opportunity in his address to the US Congress, he should have directly, not obliquely, challenged our leaders to defend the right to life of the unborn and the right of all people to practice their faith according to the dictates of their conscience. Instead, he chose to emphasize the dubious claims of global warming alarmists and a dysfunctional open boarders immigration policy both of which will ultimately damage the lives of the working poor that he admittedly wants to help. At the end of the day, he, like many Jesuits, leans towards that elitist perspective which favors institutions over individuals in remedying our social ills. And yes, it would have been great to hear the name of Jesus Christ unapologetically proclaimed from the Speaker’s Balcony in the Capitol, Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam.
JP2 a hero pope? You know zero traditionalists if you believe that. Traditionalists know JP2 was a weak leader who allowed all the degradation and trivialization of the liturgy, failed to hold the line on the Karl Rahner/Hans Kung/etc worship in he church, promoted leftists and did nothing about the homosexual predation of the clergy, the list goes on.
Benedict was a good pope, and freed the traditional liturgy, lifted unjust sspx excomunications, and properly critiqued the empty promises of Vatican 2 and its failure for a renewal (since quite the opposite happened).
JP and Benedict were more hard line than Paul vi, but that’s because the auto demolition of the Chechen (Paul’s words) was unleashed by him.
Church not Chechen
This author clearly has no earthly clue what it means to be a traditional Catholic. First of all, not a single traditional Catholic on planet earth would call JPII a “hero pope.” To suggest one would is simply laughable. Even more laughable is the author’s phrase “in 35 years of John Paul, Benedict, and the ascendancy of traditionalism.” Traditionalism, by its very definition, is the root of our faith. To suggest it is something new that arose in the last 35 years is either dishonest or ignorant. At best, it is historically inaccurate to a laughable degree. “Traditionalism” is nothing more than adherence to the liturgy and teachings of the Catholic Church for the first 1500 years of its existence before modernist progressives started desecrating them and attempting to erase Church history from the collective minds of the faithful 45 years ago.
Well, Bill, perhaps between my surfeit and Francis’ dearth the scales will balance. 🙂
SM and Juan: This author knows the difference between traditionalists and heretics. Get well soon.
“The evil of poverty is no less compelling and no less worthy of a pope’s heart.”
I agree, but that sentiment – and the overall feeling I get from your article – come dangerously close to a false equivalence; of the type spread by Archbishop Cupich.
As Sue said, “the Gospel of Life needs ongoing preaching,” particularly when meeting with one of its greatest enemies.
Dying 760,000 times a year of diarrheal disease is not happening at the behest of a government or deliberate conscious choice to kill (also wounding the soul of the murderer).
Here’s another metric to show the out-of-proportion evil of abortion – consider the pain of being sliced, diced, (or burnt with acid). Would you rather go through that, or executed by the state (dying almost instantaneously). I’d rather even experience the Nazi gas chamber than experience an abortion. How about you? Talk about the Golden Rule.
“But no one Catholic has grounds to excoriate a pope for bringing matters of at least as great an importance out from their second-class status and into the heart of his papacy. How else do we combat the assertion of the proaborts when they charge us with only caring for babies until they are born?”
Good line. I’m sorry so many people seem upset by what you wrote. I think that just shows that you are getting close to the heart of the matter. People get defensive when they are convicted and we have a great temptation to think every other Christians needs to be just like me, instead of just like Jesus.
JPII and BXVI have given us plenty to work with, and I think Francis is giving us the context in which to work it. Now we need to get to work. As laity we are disciples in the world, not cheerleaders for the clergy.
The major issue I think at play, and what often ticks off those that are of a more traditional bent, is not that he’s necessarily his emphasis on the poor (we’re certainly all called to do that…), but rather being forced to take specific stances, when there are a variety of ways of working with and helping the poor among us. That is to say, is the government the best means to help the poor, or is the individual or something organized at a more local level? (The Church does have a principle called subsidiarity of course) How we help the poor is a matter of prudential judgement, and two people can legitimately disagree as to exactly what to do. Does helping the poor necessarily mean repeating UN or DNC talking points?
Rather unfortunately various points of LS are UN talking points (but to be fair of course population control was condemned in LS)….Sometimes as good as a lot of intentions of the various programs that are instituted to help the poor, they do the exact opposite of what they intend. Is it necessary that we support things that don’t work quite as intended.
The poor we will always have with us (this of course doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to help people carry their cross, or try to help them). The real sad thing to me actually, is that previous Popes DID talk about helping the poor, but no one ever listened. At least for sure with Benedict XVI was pope….The thing is those these things were done without fanfare or celebrity….(No one remembers the time when Pope Benedict went to the prison, met with sex abuse victims ab libitum from his schedule, or even rode the bus back)….
Thank you for this piece though, oremus pro invicem
” As laity we are disciples in the world, not cheerleaders for the clergy.”
Now THAT’S the exclamation point the article needed. Mind if I use that in the future?
Dr. Nadal, I don’t disagree with what you’ve said. My thought is, it’s not an either/or. No one was asking for his entire message to be about abortion, or for him not to speak about the death penalty, and certainly not that he not speak about poverty. The content of his message was wonderful and needed. I am simply breathless, though, that he did not even include one sentence about the butchering of our babies here in America. That very Congress he spoke to was preparing in mere hours to vote on whether to defund PP, so the issue could not possibly have been more timely, more NOW. Not even one direct sentence? Not even one specific mention, no call to seize this chance to correct this gruesome injustice and consider the moral gravity of what we’re doing? It was deflating.
YES! Exactly what catholicmoxie said.
I’m with you, Catholicmoxie. There are a great many things I wish this pope and his bishops would say, that he would have said to Congress. But I have no reason to believe that he is not a deeply prayerful man, nor do I have reason to believe that the Holy Spirit does not speak to him in a deeply convicting and motivating manner. He IS Peter.
It took quite a bit for me to write the deeply disturbing truth that for 25 years of JPII and B16, the life issues have deteriorated on every front. Francis sees this as well. Perhaps the Holy Spirit is leading him in a way that flanks the opposition. What has become very clear to me is that the constant tearing at Francis by the orthodox wing will succeed only in diminishing the Office, and leave them with nowhere to go when they champion a future pope, and others show slight regard for his diminished authority.
Thank you Dr. Nadal. You always challenge me to think more critically. If that last comment had been in the original post, it would have helped quell my temptation to jump to conclusions.
Well put Dr. Nadal! The issues faced by the American Church are not the same as the ones faced by the rest of the world. And most of the complainants behave as if their concerns are the only ones that matter. They are typifying the American Bully that shouts ‘Murica!’ and acts like he is the only one that matters – which is, unfortunately, the way the rest of the world sees the USA. Like you, I don’t disagree that these issues are not important. But there are other issues that are just as important that the rich countries have to take on.
Andrew, it’s good that we have such passions! It means we care, we love, we think, we pray. You’re right. I should have had that last comment in the original post. When it comes to bishops in general, and popes in particular, I resist the urge to speak my mind, and 99% of the time I don’t. And for good reason.
They’re smarter than I am, and the Holy Spirit is with them in a powerful way. I err on the side of not tearing down the Office. Sorry for the confusion. God Bless.
Dr. Nadal, again, I agree with you. And I certainly have no desire to tear away at our dear Pope. I don’t doubt for a nanosecond that he is a holy and prayerful leader. He exudes mercy and gentleness. I believe his real charism is mercy. It’s what he cannot contain, what he must preach. And heaven knows we need it.
God is God and Christ can manage His Church just fine, I know that. My frustration today is with all those who will make no allowance at all for people (like me) who felt deflated, even crushed, that Papa made no mention of the woolly mammoth in the room as he addressed our Congress. I didn’t expect bludgeoning or finger-wagging, more like a call to repentance for the sake of mercy. More like a plea from the man they all know desires peace and justice, to open our eyes and see the humanity of the babies we are chopping into pieces. I think it would have been powerful coming from him, in that moment, in that chamber. So yes, I was crushed when he said nothing. But I love him, and I will take to heart every word he DID say, and thank God for his witness of mercy.
Now if only Catholics would stop the snark, scorn, and lashings on everyone who dares to express disappointment…
I meant to add… because if Peter can’t call people to repentance, no matter the setting, no matter the audience, then who can??
Gerard,
Excellent post, and excellent points. Millions of people die each year of avoidable diseases. Hundreds of millions go hungry and thirsty. We, as orthodox, believing Catholics, so often forget the truth rooted in the corporal works of mercy:
To feed the hungry;
To give drink to the thirsty;
To clothe the naked;
To harbour the harbourless;
To visit the sick;
To ransom the captive;
To bury the dead.
Yes, we are called to fight with ALL WE CAN against abortion. But I ask my brothers and sisters who are so fearful of the direction Francis is taking the church… when was the last time you went out after putting the kids to bed and walked the streets of the closest big city feeding the hungry? Do you stop and talk to homeless people on the street, because you see in them the face of Jesus? Do you buy them a meal? Or do you turn your head and walk by?
Complaining about John Paul II’s allowance of worship styles you don’t like, while walking by poor, homeless and hungry people is the very definition of complaining about the splinter in someone else’s eye while ignoring the plank in your own.
Here’s my input – I, too, was disappointed Papa Francesco did not speak more directly about abortion and same-sex marriage. And I, too, have to trust the Holy Spirit in leading the Holy Father. It is not for me to judge or criticize. Otherwise I would be getting into the same position that so-called “liberals” were in when they were so harsh with Popes JPII and Benedict XVI. I remember those days when I lived in Seattle. There was A LOT of “Pope Criticism” among many Catholics I met. Heck, before my own “re-conversion” in 2008 through the teachings of JP II’s Theology of the Body, I was one of these “critical Catholics”. And I regret that now. I hope the brothers and sisters who are so openly critical of Francis now will remember that none of us has the viewpoint from the helm of the ship like Francis does! Let us pray for him to have wisdom, not criticize him.
One more thing I would encourage any of you to do – befriend and get to know brothers and sisters from countries like Haiti, Zambia, El Salvador, etc. Their perspective is sorely lacking among most American Catholics. And their perspective is critically important for us Western Catholics. They are living in the midst of what Francis is talking about. I know by being in relationship with them as a friend and as a brother (especially with priests I have come to know), I have come to see the world in a different way. I am no less opposed to abortion or same sex relationships being called “marriage”, but I have had my mind and heart opened up to things I didn’t see or have full knowledge of. PLEASE get to know these brothers and sisters from countries which are very, very poor! Ask them to teach you. Ask them to widen and broaden your perspective. We in the West need them sorely! We have remained isolated from them for too long. We need to hear THEIR experience of the Faith in their countries.
One example of a way in which I have been “converted” by a Haitian priest who we have adopted into our family came just this week. Our dog of almost nine years, who we DEARLY loved, had five seizures in two days. The doctors wanted to do all kind of diagnostic tests and maybe even refer us to a neurologist. But our Haitian friend works with hundreds if not thousands of children who suffer from hunger and cannot even afford to go to school in their own country. My wife and I knew that it would be “un-pro-life” to spend money on our dog that could otherwise go to help brother and sister Catholics in Haiti be able to feed their families and educate their children. These children are “our” children just as much as unborn children are “our” children. Our priest friend is absolutely and undeniably opposed to abortion. It is horrific to him. But he confronted my wife and me with how inconsistent our pro-life position would be if we spent thousands on a dog when “his children” go without in Haiti. When I told him that many Americans – including Christians! – spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on their pets, he said it like it is! “That’s a sin!”
It is so easy for me to criticize JP II, Benedict or Francis rather than look at my own life and where I am so inconsistent in my pro-life beliefs and actions. Thank God that our Haitian priest friend was here this week when we decided to let our dear doggie move on to Jesus (wherever Jesus decides to take her!). His being here made it easier to do what was right and truly pro-life. And the $80 we saved by not bringing her ashes home with us will go toward sponsoring a child he works with so s/he can go to school and have a chance at a future. We even believe that’s what our doggie would have wanted us to do! We would love to have had her ashes in our home, but we know that she would want us to spend that money on a child in Haiti! She would say to us, “Now THAT is being truly and wholly pro-life!”
God bless ALL of you!
The culture war with abortion and gay marriage has left many pro-life Catholics married to the Republican Party. Unfortunately that marriage has convinced Catholics to be uncaring/un-Catholic/too-Republican when it comes to refugees and immigration and simple care for the poor and crazy when it comes to climate change and the care of creation.
Pope Francis was wise to disengage in the language of culture wars and instead called all of us to higher respect for the dignity of all life.
Great post and follow-up comments. This is the first time I read your blog.
Gerard, this is golden. This is exactly right. Thank you for offering something new — and substantive. Really, really well said.
Thanks, Leila. 🙂
As a fallen-away Catholic let me make this clear. I believe Francis has been focused on exactly the right things and will be remembered as one of the greatest Popes ever.
1. He fired Bishops and Cardinals and has been uncompromising on the sex-abuse scandal — something that, IMHO all Catholics should have been focused on years ago rather than passing judgment on others..
Matt 7:5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
2. He Fired all of the “Bling Bishops” and the corrupt Cardinals running the Vatican bank, taking on the establishment and making a difference for the poor and disenfranchised. Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many sorrows.
3. He has been a staunch advocate for love and understanding between peoples of different faiths. Corinthians 13:13 Three things will last forever–faith, hope, and love–and the greatest of these is love.
4. He has called for all peoples to care for one another, to focus on people and not on ideas or ideology. This is truly the golden rule is it not? If we would focus on taking care of one another, would we really have many of the troubles that plague the world? There are sooo many verses in the bible that make this clear, well.. if you don’t believe me just open it.
5. The focus of this blog is on the sanctity of life…well that extends to the womb but also outside of the womb. Without an acceptable environment to live in, what good does it do to save the lives of the unborn only to have a life of misery? The more we learn about the universe, the more we understand that our earthly home which every generation passes on to the next, is precious. If we do not take care of it, we will condemn future generations to doom. 1 Corinthians 10:24 Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth.
Truly caring about all people, eliminating hypocrisy, and holding leaders and clergy accountable. The lack of these actions are precisely the reasons I left the Catholic Church years ago.
Maybe the people who are quick to judge him harshly need to focus on improving themselves and loving others….instead of loving themselves and their ideas while “improving” others.
“Where he comes from, those are secondary in magnitude to the evil of avoidable poverty, and all of the secondary violence and evils spawned by abject, grinding poverty.” We have to be very careful not to enter into the errors of the “Seamless Garment” putting all life issues at equal level or even elevating poverty over abortion. This is not church teaching. Abortion is an intrinsic evil and the church has been clear, that abortion and euthanasia re the PRE-EMINANT life issues. I have seen some disturbing comments on threads where this post has been made, and I see people slipping into this error. Please be careful to point out church teaching on this.
[Margie, Let me point out the ultimate Church teaching: The Last Judgement scene in Matthew 25, where Jesus tells us in his own words the criteria He will use. Read it and get back to me. ~ G.N.]
Margie is right. If more emphasis were put on saving oneself for the one marriage one would have in life, babies would be born into more stable nests, eliminating much poverty.
The Church is not against the death penalty! Google Sts. Thomas & Augustine on this subject
.
Thank you, this was good and refreshing.
Thanks for this article, Gerard. It’s very sad to see division rupturing our already fragile Church. He is our spiritual Father! Do people forget the respect owed to his office? The term ‘holier than the pope’ has taken on a whole new meaning these last few weeks! I think I may even have lost Facebook friends, not over gay-mirage, not over abortion, but by defending the Pope!
Thank you JohnPaul,well said. So many are short sighted & only see what is close to them. I lived in Mexico, with the poor for 7 years, & many things look different from the south.
We are not American Catholics. We are Catholic Americans.
YOU INENSITIVE IGNORAMUS. HE CALLED FOR DIALOGUE ON ALL TOPICS.HE DOESNOT ADVPCATE OPPOSITION TO GLOBAL WARMING BUT CARE FOR THE PLANET OUR COMMON HOME. USING LEFT AND RIGHT TO THE VICAR OF CHRIST IS MORE OPPOSITKION TO JESUS’BODY. GETA REAL LIFE AND GROW SOME FAITH AND GET OFF HOUR H OBBY HORSE Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:19:22 +0000 To: hfbhermitage@hotmail.com
[Dude, You already offered me this insult three days ago when the post first went up. Check the thread if you don’t believe me. I don’t mind the insults, but you already called me an insensitive ignoramus. It gets boring to read the same insult from the same person. If you feel the need to insult me again, may I ask for some fresh material? Thanks. ~G.N.]
No, he called you an “INENSITIVE” ignoramus (twice). Get it right. :-p
Gerard, I find it laughable that your defense of your irresponsible and fallacious claim that traditionalists consider JPII a “hero pope” was essentially “I’m right because I am.” Going on to close your arrogant defense with such condescension illustrates that you are not an intellectual who can (or should) be taken seriously.
Despite your erroneous and uncharitable claim, those who contend that JPII is not a “hero pope” are not heretics; they are faithful members of the Catholic Church who recognize a modern progressive when they see one.
Oh, and I am quite well, but I do appreciate your get well wishes.
God bless.
[As I said. There is a difference between a tradionalist and a heretic. Condescension best describes your callow take on a giant in the Chair of Peter. Get well soon. ~G.N.]
Yea, what SM said! (Though I am not well, apparently because I have a problem with pope-olatry
Gerard, noting that JPII is not a hero in the minds of trafitionalists is neither heretical nor callow, and neither is identifying him as the modern progressive he was. JPII was and still is praised the world over by liberals for his modernism, a fact that would certainly not ingratiate him to traditionalists. It is perfectly acceptable for you to have your biases, but if you are going to publish public articles and pretend to be a scholar, you have a responsibility to be honest about them.
[I was the Academic Dean of a very traditional and orthodox seminary. So don’t talk to me about scholarly pretensions. Further, it is your hubris that makes you speak in the name of all who regard themselves as traditionalists. You don’t, and not by a long shot. The fact is that the bulk of Catholics who self-identify as traditional loved John Paul. The next fact is that he spoke from the heart of the magisterium. That brings me to my third point. Anyone who has actually read what John Paul wrote can see how fully footnoted and rooted his writing was in both Scripture and Tradition. You played the wrong card with me when you accused me of sloppy scholarship. If you have any scholarly skills yourself, then you know how to read a document and follow the footnotes. If you have gotten that far and still run down John Paul, then you are a hubris-filled pedant. Either way, my original wish for you to get well soon still stands. ~G.N.]
Thank you so much for this thoughtful and thought provoking post. The papacy of Pope Francis has been very spiritually challenging to my soul. And I think that is a good thing. We “good” Catholics need conversion too and that is why I think he makes us uncomfortable. God bless you!
You’re welcome, Becky.
A note to those (Juan and SM) who believe John Paul to have been a progressive pope (i.e. loved by liberals), and not at all a hero to traditionalists. First, on the great continuum, if you believe that liberals loved John Paul, you are clearly under the age of 25 and have never read a newspaper. The alternative is that placing John Paul as a liberal-loved progressive pope you are somewhere to the right of Mussolini and Franco on the spectrum.
Those of us who grew up with John Paul, who saw him characterized in the major media as, “Medieval,” know that he was pilloried. He was protested by feminists everywhere he went. He squashed the Liberation Theology movement for the Marxism in clerical drag that it was. The New York Times spent the last 15 years of his life on a perpetual death watch. Homosexuals will never forgive or forget his firing of Catholic University’s professor, Fr. Charles Curran, for his dissenting theology.
I was there in the 80’s and 90’s at Campus Ministry conferences (and other gatherings of liturgical and ministerial types) where his name was reviled by the “progressives.” If by, “progressive,” you mean his liturgical approach which was consistent with Vatican II, then you need to grow up. John Paul was one of the Council’s bishops, and the Council is part of Sacred Tradition (Fathers, Doctors, Councils). If you have a problem with that, you’re either flirting with heresy, or you’ve crossed the line. Kicking a dead pope’s corpse gives me a fair idea of where you stand.
Now, I don’t mind the name-calling when it comes to me, even when you deliver the first shot. I give as good as I get (another flaw in me). But John Paul, and all popes, are off limits here. My house, my rules. You especially don’t bash dead popes here. It’s not only uncharitable, it’s poor form. So, use Google, look at JP’s treatment in the New York Times, his adulation by the feminists and other assorted, “progressives,” and then come back for an adult discussion.
Class dismissed.
[…] Gerard M. Nadal eloquently summarizes the challenge Pope Francis poses to those of us who wish he would devote as many words to life, […]
Reblogged this on St Henry II and commented:
Still dealing with moving chaos. Go read this!
Thank you for sharing your insight. Well done!
I like moribund threads; perhaps it’s the only way for a bonehead like me to have the last word. Speaking of which, one might hope that any final thoughts here would aptly summarize the arguments presented by commenters and then discerningly point any latecomers to this thread towards some delightfully unexpected conclusion. Alas, not in my case. The unfathomable depths of ignorance I have attained, through years of strenuous effort, will not allow my forging any stalwart words of consequence. Nonetheless, I predict that there will be no resolution between the two camps represented by arguments made here on this thread, because this little brannigan (a term I picked up in an Irish bar, having failed miserably to pick up anything else in an Irish bar) follows, by nature I believe, the inexorable attrition of members suffered by the Church and the consequent self-preserving evolution of biblical hermeneutics among it’s waning congregations. OK, never mind all that. What I really wanted to say is that I agree with Dr. Nadal.
[…] « Oh, Francis… […]
Please feel free to use that whenever you want. Thank you for the kind words.
[…] or expected that our hearts rebel. Have we been slapped and dismissed for our years of service? (Prolife activist Dr. Gerard Nadal powerfully suggests otherwise.) Or like the dutiful brother, are we excluding ourselves from the feast out of a sense of pride […]