Pope Francis: The Answer to Obama's Prayers

Superhuman Political Force for the Poverty Panel

NBC News reports:

It’s being dubbed “the Francis effect” and it’s hitting Washington, DC.

From 4500 miles away Pope Francis is exerting his influence on everything from foreign policy to summits on poverty. Pope Francis got a big shout out on Tuesday from the leader of the free world as a great example of someone who understands what’s important.”Nobody has shown that better than Pope Francis, who I think has been transformative just through the sincerity and insistence that he’s had that this is vital to who we are,” President Barack Obama said during a panel discussion at Georgetown University.

“And that emphasis I think is why he’s had such incredible appeal, including to young people, all around the world.”

Why does the Francis adulation from Obama go on and on and on? Is the Pope more sincere?  Is he ‘transformative,’ whatever that liberalspeak means?  What does it say when something is ‘vital to who we are?’  Does Pope Francis really have an ‘incredible appeal’ especially including young people, or is it just non-stop well-funded hype?

I know one thing: it’s not filling up Churches, but we don’t need those any more anyway.  You can ‘kneel before the poor’ anywhere, can’t you?

Well, not in Georgetown.

The three day Catholic-Evangelical leadership summit at Georgetown is a direct response to the pope’s call to help the poor.

It’s been answered by an influential lineup of people on vastly different ends of the political spectrum. Speakers include ideological opposites from progressive Senator Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat and former conservative presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty to members of Opus Dei, a Roman Catholic lay organization, to Nuns On The Bus, a Catholic groups focused on social justice.

Democrats, dissidents, and a Romney Republican.

“It’s been a long time since we’ve seen a pope have this kind of influence in the United States,” said E.J. Dionne, Washington Post columnist who moderated the poverty panel including President Obama.

…and the whole thing run by a left-wing Wapo pundit.  Does anybody ever help the poor by actually doing something for them?  I’ve never met a poor broke person who would be interested in moderators of ‘poverty panels.’

However, it’s too early to say whether Tuesday’s talk will lead to change.

“If they care about these problems, Americans can change the politics that would, over the next five to 10 years, make a huge difference. And I’m not talking about changing Republican-Democrat. I’m talking about making poverty and the opportunity to escape from poverty a higher issue on both parties’ agendas,” said Robert Putnam, the Peter and Isabel Malkin Professor of Public Policy at Harvard.

I guess if both parties adopted your big government redistribution platforms it wouldn’t matter if they were Republican or Democrat, you’re right.

The report presents some silly charts showing how beloved and respected Pope Francis is.  Then it talks about how important Catholics in Congress supposedly are.  It all boils down to a sort of superhuman papal political force.

The president said he can’t wait to host the pope and if he can spur the least effective congress in history to action, it might just be a certifiable miracle.

'Martyred for the Faith' just because he defended the poor and oppressed

‘Martyred for the Faith’ just because he defended the poor and oppressed

John Zmirak responds to the recent revelations by a powerful KGB defector that Liberation Theology, so emulated and resurrected by the Franciscan Pontificate yet suppressed until now, was formulated in Soviet Russia.  After recapping the story and some well-known responses, including John Allen’s accusation that the United States exported forms Protestantism south, he writes:

Whatever problems one might have with Pentecostalism, it is genuinely Christian, which Liberation Theology isn’t. It’s scarcely theology. And it doesn’t liberate. In Latin America, it served or serves as the pious fig-leaf for nasty dictatorships like the Sandinistas’ in Nicaragua, and the Chavistas’ in Venezuela. Its watered-down American version — popular among leftists who still claim to be Catholic — offers political cover for pro-abortion, anti-marriage lawmakers, who hope they can buy back their souls by dispensing some extra food stamps and reducing their carbon footprints.

Much worse than Liberation Theology’s worldly effects are the spiritual poisons it trades in: toxic envy, gut-gnawing resentment, a craving for the chance to mete out violence, a scorn for thrift and honest work and an acid cynicism that reduces every human relationship to a swap of money or power. All this in the name of Jesus.

These old lessons should be well-remembered in our time.

It doesn’t seem that Communism or Liberation Theology have waned today.  Instead they have quickly become so pervasive in the world and in the Church that a free faithful alternative no longer exists with which to compare them.  The Faith is so rare and the propaganda machine is so vast, we are now almost entirely immersed in calculated lies.

Put briefly and starkly, Liberation Theology treats Jesus as a proto-revolutionary who came to save the poor from social injustice. The Kingdom of God is the earthly paradise which we will construct from the ruins of Satanic capitalism. The church serves the role of the Party, as the vanguard of the sacred class chosen by History (oops, I meant to say “Jesus”) to overturn the wicked “structures of sin,” and put the Sermon on the Mount into action at the point of a bayonet. The meek shall inherit the earth, once we’ve rounded up all the non-meek into gulags and confiscated their land. You know, the way the Soviets saved Ukraine from greedy farmers in the 1930s.

It sounds like thinly veiled Marxist theory, and that’s exactly what it is. As Norman Cohn and Eric Voegelin showed, Marx himself seized the Christian vision of a New Jerusalem after the Second Coming, dragged it into politics, and dressed it up in a white lab coat as a “scientific” prediction of a this-worldly utopia. Instead of the Second Coming, he inserted “the Revolution,” and in place of the Christian church he plugged in the proletariat and the Party. For decades, idealists around the world were willing to conspire, betray their country, go to prison, die — and wherever they came to power, to kill their fellow men by the tens of millions, and imprison millions more, to force Marx’s kingdom to come.

Leftism is always relentless, not because it works, but because it’s evil. They never learn or give up.  There is no reason to stop trying and hating when you have an eternity before you.

The sordid failure of materialist Marxism to fulfill any — even one — of its messianic promises posed a problem for people who were still, for their own reasons, drawn to revolutionary fantasies that entailed gaining power, confiscating other people’s property and silencing them by force. History, it is perfectly clear, is not inexorably driven to produce a dictatorship of the proletariat. It took Soviet tanks to remind the workers of Hungary and Poland of what was good for them. It demanded concrete walls and barbed wire to stop the common people from fleeing “people’s” regimes by the millions, to live instead in wicked capitalist lands where they would be exploited. What to do, if you still find reality intolerable, and crave a revolution?

You turn to magic. You create a “god from a machine.” You twist people’s faith in Christ into the self-confidence of a conquering social class. You drag down their hope for heaven, and rope it to wishes for cheaper gas and more cassavas. You teach them that real love, tough love, amounts to a cold-blooded calculation about maximizing utility: To make that liberating omelet, Jesus wants you to crack some heads. Perversely, as Marxism by natural means began to collapse all around the world, liberation theologians tried to revive it by calling it Christian.

Look for this in the Pope’s goals, in his allies, and in his rhetoric.  You won’t have to look hard.

 

 

 

rubio2

Sharing love and joy at important events

Catholic Vote has just republished the assertion that Florida Senator Marco Rubio has returned to his Cuban Catholic roots.  Just the other day he was reported to ‘crave the Blessed Sacrament.’

It’s not unusual for people to claim to be Catholics yet in reality be some form of Protestant, but Sen. Rubio seems really to be embracing a ‘big tent Christianity.’  His wife attends a Baptist megachurch, where he is a regular contributing member.

Can one be both Protestant and Catholic?

As an adult, from 2000 to 2004 Rubio took a detour from his Catholic roots to exclusively attend Miami’s Christ Fellowship, a Southern Baptist megachurch to which Rubio has given at least $50,000.

Now straddling both Christ Fellowship and the Catholic Church, Marco Rubio seems positioned to appeal both to conservative Catholics but also the anti-LGBT, demon-casting, creationist segment of the Protestant evangelical right.

Though he’s now primarily and “firmly” Catholic, Rubio has recently toldReligion News Service reporter Sarah Pulliam-Bailey that he has “maintained the relationship with Christ Fellowship” and often attends services at the church.

At CatholicVote they say Marco Rubio goes to Mass every Sunday and to the Baptist Megachurch too!

Why no reference to a Catholic parish?

Marco Rubio had perhaps the most fascinating journey of them all. He was born in Miami and his Catholic parents were both born in Communist Cuba. When he was about 8, his family moved to Las Vegas. And for awhile the Rubio family became Mormon. By the time Marco was in sixth grade, his family left the Mormon Church. He received Holy Communion on Christmas Day 1984. When the family returned to Miami a year later, he received the sacrament of Confirmation. His wife encouraged him to start attending an evangelical church in 2000 — and they exclusively for several years. “I felt called back to Catholicism around 2004,” he said. When Rubio ran for the Senate in 2010, there was confusion about whether he was evangelical or Catholic. I spoke with Rubio’s spokesman JR Sanchez in 2010. Sanchez told me that Rubio went to Mass every Sunday but that he also attended services at the evangelical church. As noted by religion writer Sarah Pulliam Bailey, Rubio himself later confirmed this in his memoir.

It’s not hard to see how many Catholics today can make no real distinction between the Mass and Protestant services.  If they have no other exposure to the Faith, they’re fair game for all kinds of silly trendy ideas.

Today from Politico:

Marco Rubio says he would attend the wedding of a same-sex couple, even though the Republican Florida senator and newly minted presidential candidate has said he believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

Fusion host Jorge Ramos pressed Rubio on Wednesday about whether he would go to the same-sex ceremony of someone in his family or someone on his staff who happens to be gay.

“Happens to be gay”  You sure hear that a lot, as if it were all some casual accidental occurrence.

“If there’s somebody that I love that’s in my life, I don’t necessarily have to agree with their decisions or the decisions they’ve made to continue to love them and participate in important events,” he told Ramos.

Terrific.  If it’s an ‘important event,’ then by all means participate.  It’s all about love the Bible says.