Is this our Faith?

Believer?

The mainstream media is really pushing these life-size cardboard Pope Francises.  Why?  Is it just because it’s fun, or funny.  Is it just for the money?

In keeping with previous papal visits, Pope Francis’ U.S. visit in September has spurred a mad dash among souvenir sellers. For $160, you can order an official, life-size “cutout” of the pontiff from the group organizing one of the events in Philadelphia.

Why is it so expensive?  Is it a collector’s item already?

Those 69-inch “standup” versions of Pope Francis, whose global popularity is perhaps the only thing larger than the replicas themselves, are being placed around Philadelphia so people can take selfies and share them on social media, the Associated Press reported.

So the point is not just to have a big Pope Francis around to bother you.  It’s to take a selfie with it and ‘share on social media.’

“Pope Francis is described as the people’s pope. So we have him in places where many people can see him,” World Meeting of Families digital content manager Nancy Caramanico told the news agency. “People are just really excited to be around him and are anticipating his visit to Philadelphia.”

Nineteen-year-old college student Jennifer D’Angelo will be in school when Pope Francis visits her hometown, the AP reported, so she took the opportunity to pose with a two-dimensional cutout of the pope on display at a food court.

“It seems like he’s trying to bring the Catholic Church together,” D’Angelo, 19, said. “I think he’s doing a great job. I’m just kind of sad that I’m not going to be in the city when he comes.”

Aren’t all the popes ‘people’s popes?’  Why just Francis?  Was Benedict only for rich fancy people?

Is Pope Francis bringing the Catholic Church together?  I think he’s just rallying non-Catholics, dissidents, media people, and dictators.  How many actual Catholics are excited to be around Pope Francis?  Are we thinking with our televisions?

For those seeking a less-grand papal presence, you can also order a variety of posters, a coffee mug emblazoned with some of the pope’s more notable quotations, and a 10-inch tall Pope Francis “plush doll” that is “surface wash only.”

Merchandising papal visits has a long tradition in the United States and elsewhere. In 1987, the U.S. tour undertaken by Saint John Paul II, then in the ninth year of his pontificate, inspired such items as a “Pope-Scope,” a cardboard tube with small mirrors at an angle, so people could see his motorcade over the heads of others. Other souvenirs included buttons, a T-shirt inscribed “Your Holiness, Welcome to Texas” and additional booklets, a selection of which was for sale via the online auction site eBay for $49.99.

Everything that happens in FrancisChurch is always framed as part of a long tradition but it’s not.  It just manipulates and morphs traditions.  It abuses them.

Six years later, mindful of such kitsch as “Pope-on-a-Rope” soap bars, Catholic leaders in 1993 prepared for another Pope John Paul II visit to America by hiring the Famous Artists Merchandising Exchange of Dayton, Ohio, to handle licensing of the pope’s image, according to The New York Times (paywall).

“More than 100 items were deemed acceptable, including those … approved to bear the Pope’s countenance: medallions, T-shirts, posters, postcards, lithographs, fanny packs and the Pope-Scope,” the newspaper reported.

Perhaps one of the most notable pope-related products emerged during a 1965 visit to New York by Pope Paul VI. It came during a newspaper strike, leaving journalists for The New York Times and other print outlets to cover a story they couldn’t distribute in those pre-Internet days. The answer? An “instant book” created by Times staffers and Bantam Books, a paperback publisher that released 500,000 copies of the story within four days of the visit. As the Times reported, Pope Paul VI “got his copy for free.”

Don’t be fooled.  A few vendors promoting and capitalizing off previous papal visits is nothing like the worldwide media/marketing efforts behind Francis today.

At the top of the article there is an enormous photo  of a man kneeling in prayer before his Pope Francis cutout and grasping its cardboard hand. Francis swag is not about fun or money.  It’s McKinsey & Company’s idea of worship, worship of their new catholicism.

If St. Peter lived in our time and had access to cardboard images and selfies, would he make sure the countries he evangelized were filled with life-size statues of himself first?  Is there going to be a single image of Christ anywhere near Francis next month?  I suppose one or two are unavoidable.

The Francis cutout is symbolic because his papacy really a contrived event.  It’s something orchestrated and Francis is just filling the life-size pope spot within it.

Real Francis is not flat.  He’s very round and so is the Church.  It has depth and it lives.  But FrancisChurch doesn’t.  It’s just a pasted veneer, a stage set.

 

 

Not racist

Not racist

Christopher Manion has had quite enough of Catholic leaders using Holy Mother Church and her faithful for their nefarious political schemes.  Not only do they pretend their agenda is noble rather than lawless and evil.  They smear the true and obedient members of the Church as murderous bigots!  Why on Earth must we pretend that these robed men are our Apostles?  They’re nothing like Christians.

Millions of Americans, including many Catholics, were stunned when Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Catholic Archbishop of New York, attacked opponents of illegal immigration as “nativists” in a recent and widely-circulated column in a liberal New York tabloid.

Unfortunately, Cardinal Dolan’s outburst represents a long line of liberalism on the part of America’s bishops — a position based not only on their “Social Justice” leftism, but because the welfare state which they celebrate doles out over a billion dollars a year to their Non-Government Organizations (Catholic Charities, Catholic Relief Services, Catholic Migration and Refugee Services, and so on).

And Cardinal Dolan is not alone. In fact, he is merely echoing his colleague in Los Angeles, Archbishop José Gomez. Gomez routinely attacks opponents of amnesty for illegal immigrants, accusing them with a string of strong epithets. In turn, he is merely echoing his fellow bishops in his native Mexico, who frequently rise to condemn “the arrogant, xenophobic, and racist attitude of the United States” (to which Abp. Gomez adds “bigotry”).

Is it ‘racist’ for Ireland to prefer mainly to be comprised of Irishmen, for Italy to prefer Italians, Germany Germans and Japan Japanese?  How about some deference toward Christian backgrounds?  Is that immoral?  What about Muslims?  How about criminals?

Must we choose between being fools and the enemies of our Bishops?

Nonetheless, the notion that all Caucasian Americans are guilty until proven innocent goes far to explain Cardinal Dolan’s unctuous condescension as he recalls his days as a teacher.

Any college student, he implies, knows that to oppose amnesty for illegal aliens (a term he refuses to acknowledge, by the way), or to demand that they follow the law (including the Ten Commandments) is nativist, backward — and anti-Catholic.

This unwarranted assertion cannot go unchallenged, since it is both unjust and counter-factual. Counter-factual because many Catholics are among the millions of Americans who oppose Obama’s program to import as many Third-World immigrants, legal and illegal, into the United States as possible.

Moreover, many of those same immigrants are not Catholic.

It is unjust because the Cardinal implies that anyone who disagrees with him is nativist — as though support of amnesty for illegal aliens were a requirement of Catholic Faith and Morals. This grievously overstates the matter.

What is required by Catholic Faith and Morals goes unmentioned: the doctrine on contraception and other sexual sins contained in Humanae Vitae.

Yet, in 2013 Cardinal Dolan bragged on national television that he has “only rarely, in my 37 years as a priest” taught the truths of that genuinely Magisterial document.

What is it that induces our bishops to ignore the Church’s timeless teachings, and instead browbeat us with their political preferences disguised as moral imperatives?

Well, as my father used to tell his Notre Dame Law students for thirty years, “if you take the first bribe, you may as well take the rest.”

So permit me ask a parallel classroom question to those that Professor Dolan shared with his college students years ago.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB for short) and its subsidiaries, as well as individual Catholic dioceses, receive over a billion dollars a year from the U.S. taxpayer.

Now, consider: Cardinal Dolan has exuberantly announced, on national television, that America’s bishops want to be Obama’s “cheerleaders.”

Can it be that our beloved bishops have — unconsciously, of course, just like the Cardinal’s target audience of “nativist” lay Catholics — could it be that our bishops have been bribed into silence by that billion dollars a year?

And could it be that our beloved bishops – who have watched more than thirty million of the faithful become “former Catholics” — could these prelates actually support amnesty because they want to keep the pews filled while they please their government paymasters?

These are merely questions, of course, not unjust accusations.

It seems today that the Catholic Church has no bishops, no shepherds.  That is the only reason that the flock is scattered and lost.  A bishop is not a bishop if he shows contempt for his faithful flock, as Cardinal Dolan certainly has, and teaches an anti-doctrine in place of the truth.

We are not Aaron’s Israelites dancing around the golden calf and the Cardinal isn’t Moses with the tablets.  We are humbly following God into the desert while this jolly prelate fires arrows with Pharaoh’s army.  Sorry to be noninclusive but he’s just not one of us.

 

 

 

Billionaire

Billionaire

At Creative Minority Report Matt Archbold draws attention to an unfortunate and revealing interview with Donald Trump where he was asked about all those good things Planned Parenthood does other than abortion:

Here’s what I would do if the time came: I would look at the individual things that they do and maybe some of the things are good and I know a lot of things are bad. The abortion aspect of it should not be funded by government. Absolutely…I would look at the good aspects of it and I would also look as I’m sure they do some things properly and good and good for women and I would look at that. I would look at other aspects, also. But we have to take care of women. We have to absolutely take care of women. The abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood should not absolutely – should not be funded.

This reminds me of when Ross Perot said he’d erase the deficit by “getting under the hood” and fixing it, or that he’d “get a shovel and clean out the barn.”

Archbold writes:

Well that changes things quite a bit, doesn’t it? Trump says that the abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood shouldn’t be funded but as he knows, money is fungible and Planned Parenthood already says that no taxpayer money goes to abortion. The Hyde Amendment states that no government funding can go towards abortion. So he’s saying he would consider funding Planned Parenthood as long as it didn’t fund abortion. So Trump wouldn’t change anything when it comes to funding Planned Parenthood.

Next ‘The Donald’ told the world that he’ll permit three whole exceptions for abortions too!

I am for the exceptions. You have the three exceptions. I’m for the exceptions. The health of the mother and life of the mother. I absolutely am for the exceptions and so was Ronald Reagan, by the way. There’s nothing wrong with that. You have to do it, in my opinion. Now, Marco took a strong stand. I respect him. He believes that. I have – you now it’s just a different thing. I am for the exceptions, yes.

Trump failed to cite what the third exception was.  I assume he meant in cases of rape.  Either way, we all know that one exception is every exception because this is murder, and any lying excuse will do.

I think it’s probably hard for someone in Donald Trump’s business and position to actually be pro-life today.  Very hard.