A Vatican Shot Across the Bow for Hard-Line U.S. Catholics
Source: NYT
Two close associates of Pope Francis have accused American Catholic ultraconservatives of making an alliance of hate with evangelical Christians to back President Trump, further alienating a group already out of the Vaticans good graces.
The authors, writing in a Vatican-vetted journal, singled out Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trumps chief strategist, as a supporter of an apocalyptic geopolitics that has stymied action against climate change and exploited fears of migrants and Muslims with calls for walls and purifying deportations.
The article warns that conservative American Catholics have strayed dangerously into the deepening political polarization in the United States. The writers even declare that the worldview of American evangelical and hard-line Catholics, which is based on a literal interpretation of the Bible, is not too far apart from jihadists.
It is not clear if the article, appearing in La Civiltà Cattolica, received the popes direct blessing, but it was extraordinary coming from a journal that carries the Holy Sees seal of approval. There has apparently been no reprimand from the pope, who is not shy about disciplining dissenters, and La Civiltà Cattolicas editor has promoted the article nearly every day since it was published in July.
Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/world/europe/vatican-us-catholic-conservatives.html
Lithos
(26,404 posts)I'm not Catholic - preface.
The Pope seems to be chastising people for not being extreme - yet in his own stance, he seems very rigid.
Is this a dialogue? If so, is the Pope open to changing his own hard-lined beliefs in other areas?
L-
diva77
(7,656 posts)not sure what you are referring to?
we have a pope trying to walk the line between modernizing his Church while remaining faithful to reason & tradition. He is not hardline like previous popes.
Nope. This atheist thinks he's doing the opposite.
aeromanKC
(3,327 posts)and of course Trump and his Trumptards.
Take that back to your thrice married and purveyor of Hate, Ms. Ambassador to the Vatican.
BigmanPigman
(51,627 posts)Crash2Parties
(6,017 posts)...yet, nor has he reprimanded any of the American Bishops or Archbishops.
burrowowl
(17,648 posts)the Fascist Pope John Paul II brought them back and even canonized their founder.
Pope Francis watch your back.
whathehell
(29,091 posts)You may have disliked John Paul, but he was not a fascist.
Hangingon
(3,071 posts)That comment irritated me too.
whathehell
(29,091 posts)"Fascist" my ass.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Benign literary license of no real consequence, can be a difficult concept for the "huffy and defensive..."
diva77
(7,656 posts)Hekate
(90,797 posts)orangecrush
(19,617 posts)And is courageous to stand up to the fascists, imo.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Wander over to FR if you have not just eaten. They wrote him off as the anti-pope long ago.
All this will do is strengthen their faith that he is a servant of Satan.
The hate is strong in that crowd.
rurallib
(62,448 posts)wonder if Putin had this in his plans or if it is just an unadvertised bonus?
Odoreida
(1,549 posts)Do you think there's a serious possibility of a schism over this?
LeftInTX
(25,555 posts)There is too much of an alliance between Evangelicals and Catholics in the USA. This alliance is fueling hard right positions here. The Catholic church has never been about "far right" American politics. The church is socially conservative, but that is in the only part of it that is conservative. It has always been opposed to Prosperity Theology.
Prior to Vatican 2, there was little dialog between Protestants and Catholics. Vatican 2 opened it up dialog, but it didn't say to embrace Evangelical viewpoints such as Prosperity Theology, Neoconservative principals and the Rapture.
In the article, some conservative Catholics are painting Steve Bannon as a "victim"...yeah right. He has no moral compass. I don't think John Paul II or Benedict would want anything to do with him either.
ProfessorPlum
(11,277 posts)"the worldview ... which is based on a literal interpretation of the Bible"
I call massive bullshit on that. That's what those groups _say_, and the NYT repeats it like a parrot here.
but it is complete and total bullshit, based on selective reading of the bible, picking and choosing, and creative interpretation.
I'm an atheist, but a kind and nurturing philosophy could be derived from a literal interpretation of the bible, if you wanted to have it. Just throw out the mean parts.
The fact that these fuckers have decided to keep just the mean parts reflects on them, not the bible. Which is yes full of hate and death and killing and discrimination - but it doesn't deserve to be tarred with ultraconservative values. That's too far.