Pope Drops By My 'Hood
by Scott Swenson, RH Reality Check
April 17, 2008 - 11:02am (Print)

No ticket? This is as close as you can get on public streets to the Papal Mass.

Get your programs, you can't tell the Pope's without a program.
Don't take it too hard, Mr. Swenson. I suspect people just didn't want to waste their time. I personally cannot imagine more of a fool's errand than protesting the pope. Telling the pope and his followers that people have rights seems to me very like trying to convince a shark to become a vegetarian.
Go to E. J. Dionne's pope's-visit discussion group on the Washington Post web site and check out a comment by roedel74 for an interesting idea. (No, I am not roedel74.)
Scott,
Maybe not as many people care about the left-wing ideologies and lifestyles as you wish. If they did, they'd have been there, especially in SW DC. It's obvious the Holy Father takes the sex-abuse scandal seriously, but what more do you expect him to do other than to keep future ones out?
I agree, the Church needs a better mechanism for throwing out bad apples.
he could talk with some of the victims? As of today, he has never met with or talked with any of the survivors of sex-abuse in the Church - that is immoral as far as I'm concerned and in no way helps to keep future criminals out of the Church. Also, there are many, many practicing Catholics who oppose the Pope's mandates on family planning and contraception (or lack thereof), his homophobia and his anti-condom stance which is absolutely unethical and irresponsible. I don't think the lack of protestors is a sign that many stand in opposition to his positions - or that many do not support the "left-wing...lifestyle" (what does that mean??). He's a symbol of faith for a certain segment of the Catholic population in the U.S. but as some sort of "political figure" he doesn't hold the same weight. For the most part, respectfully, I give the Pope not a second thought except when he furthers irresponsible and anti-religious ideology through his proclamations and actions.
Amie Newman
Managing Editor, RH Reality Check
Another thing the Pope could do would be to prevent the U.S. Cardinals from continuing to paper over the problem and hide the abusers, which according to Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, they continue to do. He could also recognize the intrinsic value of women leaders in the church, their bodily autonomy and that God creates each and everyone of us just a we are, whole and beautiful, but one step at a time. Everyone knows you have to deal with the internal problems before the external. As for people caring about "left-wing" issues, I'll just suggest you look at the polls of lay Catholics to realize just how out of touch the hierarchy of the church really is.
Be the change you seek,
Scott Swenson, Editor
I don't think you understand who the Pope is or what he means to Catholics. He is a symbol of the teaching authority of Christ Himself, handed down 2,000 years since Christ walked the earth. Certain truths, about God and the human person, have remained UNCHANGED and the Pope seeks to defend those truths. So even if many Catholics and other Americans feel that those truths are "outdated," the Pope isn't suddenly going to betray teachings he has sworn to defend. Read an early history of the Christian church, and you will find those who disagreed with the Apostles on who Christ was. They didn't say, "Gosh, you are right. Jesus wasn't really God. I guess we can all go home." Some things just don't change.
Benedict deeply loves those in his care, and he did meet with some of the victims of the sex abuse scandal yesterday. He wants to keep the bad priests out, and that is something I think we can all agree with. As for the rest, I hope that people live for the good (an Aristotelian principle), not for the ultimately fleeting political conveniences of our time.
74% of US Catholics say that they admire this pope, but surveys also show they still overwhelmingly disagree with Rome on mandatory priestly celibacy, birth control, same-gender marriage/ unions, and the handling of sex abuse. Most Catholics ignore the pope when he offends our consciences.
.
When the Pope visits Ground Zero, he will be greeted by a vigil honoring the late FDNY chaplain, Father Mychal Judge, the first official casualty of the 9/11 attacks.
.
Mychal was considered a living saint by many even prior to his heroic death. His extraordinary works of compassion have been compared to Mother Teresa (see http://SaintMychalJudge.blogspot.com )
.
But ironically, Fr. Mychal Judge would be barred from the priesthood today because he was openly gay, though celibate. He often asked, “Is there so much love in the world that we can afford to discriminate against any kind of love ?!”
.
We have no illusions that this pope is going to change. Rather, we are bearing witness to two truths -- that God created and loves gay people, and that the pope does not speak for the whole Church, the Ecclesia, on these matters.
.
Indeed, two-thirds of U.S. Catholics-in-the-pews reject the pope’s views and support either civil unions or full marriage rights, according to numerous surveys.
.
As Fr. Mychal also said, "Don't let the (institutional) church get in the way of your relationship with God."
I really am trying to understand where you folks are coming from with the animosity towards the pope. You keep mentioning his views on gays, [artificial] contraception, etc., but it seems none of you have read a drop of what Ratzinger/B16 has written? He's written volumes on those issues and he does not simply pass them off as liberal nonsense but rather engages and dare I say dismantles those falicies. You would never say that he does not consider gays children of God if you had read anything. How could he? That would be a heresy. By saying that an act is immoral... does that make the person intrinsically evil and some how not a child of God? Of course not! What a silly viewpoint. I challenge everyone to actually read what the Church REALLY teaches and WHY. From your comments, your ignorance is shining through. And I mean that in love...seriously. I am a convert to the faith and would have agreed with you, but I was wrong. And so are you.
(I know that in our relative world we're not alowed to say someone is wrong. But we can't both simultaniously hold the truth if they're contradictory, so I must declare you wrong or me a fool...I'm sure you regard me as a fool)
You will probably not read anything and keep on pushing your relativistic and illogical viewpoints into the blogosphere, but I challenge you to read the other side.
JMC,
Thank you for your comment and I'm glad you find solace in what Benedict teaches. The point many of us make is not that you aren't entitled to believe as you do, it's simply that we'd like the same respect in return. That is something that the church fails to provide with it's imposition of one view of morality in a world that clearly has many. That is not moral relativism, it is a recognition of pluralism. There is a difference between what is right and wrong and the fact that there are many different ways to learn and experience right and wrong.
Be the change you seek,
Scott Swenson, Editor
It isn't an either or proposition. You can be both wrong and a fool, which the words you are using here seem to indicate.
I don't agree in part with the article. Look, the Catholic church is a private club in my opinion and so it has the right to not admit women to the priesthood or believe a human being (the Pope) is infallible when it comes to talking about the church teachings [which include things like how two consenting adults behave in the privacy of a bedroom and the bodily ascension of Mary into 'heaven']. Interestingly, this has only been in place since Vatican I. But I also don't support the tax exempt status of ANY church or the idea that secular government cannot and should not intervene by criminal prosecution in the instance of an actual crime taking place.
I give you the child rape scandal we all know about.
One of the arguments the Church used was that they were not obligated to cooperate with government investigations because the police had no authority due to the separation of church and state, or, here's a nice one, it wouldn't be fair to the victims of said molestation. It isn't fair to the children who have been raped to turn over the names of the people who raped them because then authorities would know who those said kids are which, come on, apparently adds insult to injury? That's sarcasm btw. Pope JPII presided over the church during this matter and didn't do anything to make the Cardinals who made these decisions think they were wrong. And I don't have the time to go into Ratzinger's role in any of this.
I was raised a Catholic and went to eight and a half years of Catholic school. I had two brother's in seminary and one who very nearly took the vows as a Jesuit. That brother is in Opus Dei. I have read plenty from and about the Catholic church. It isn't that some of us haven't read the other side, it's that we don't agree with it.
Why do we insist on hammering away at RELIGION? You are not going to sway the Pope from his beliefs or he from yours...Abortion is freakin' legal, get over it. What are you folks still bitching about? Until the day comes when it is not? THEN bitch about it. Why hammer people's religion and their leaders?
It is an endless circle of exhausting arguments. Go out and help prevent unwanted pregnancy and lay off people's religion for crying out loud. Let's stop the blame game and get something done together. We are ALL at fault on this one.
Thx
LT
Be the change you seek,
Scott Swenson, Editor
