Discuss Religious, Moral and Ethical topics that are offtopic to other forums and that are within the boundaries of Christian morality and good taste, i.e., no pictures or videos of killings. Any politically charged material must be posted in the private Political and Social Issues forum; please PM admin for access. All rules apply. No promotion of Non-Orthodox-Christian beliefs. No baiting, flaming, or ad hominems. No polemics.
In kicking off this thread I recognise my reservations about the election of Pope Francis I were expressed in an extreme form and with a bile that serves only to detract from those same reservations.
My understanding is that the new Pope has a history of living and working in the simplest manner, certainly he was previously associated with 'liberation theology' (something I came up against originally in the form of a Chilean colleague) and is not a supporter of the Argentine President.
While his simple life style strikes a cord, the association with 'liberation theology' is cause for concern I feel.
And then there is President Obama's congratulatory remarks addressed to Pope Francis I.
"As a champion of the poor and the most vulnerable among us, he carries forth the message of love and compassion that has inspired the world for more than two thousand years — that in each other we see the face of God,” Obama said in a statement. “As the first pope from the Americas, his selection also speaks to the strength and vitality of a region that is increasingly shaping our world, and alongside millions of Hispanic Americans, those of us in the United States share the joy of this historic day.”
I was looking around for information about this [to me] lackluster Pope.
He seems to not exude anything at all. I felt a very blah feeling when I saw his picture this morning.
I thought I would wait til some commentaries came in to check here.
It looks like he is a liberal, which is what I completely was waiting for.
And a liberation theology adherent ? Bad, bad, bad.
I do think that my theory was right about Benedict. I am sure that he was forced out behind the scenes -
just so that a Third World liberal cardinal would be acclaimed Pope.
I was disappointed in that name. There are SO MANY Catholic Saints who espoused poverty. Why Francis, such
a divisive name and actually not one that sounds even Papal. To my ears.
I wonder what MP hierarchs are saying to themselves. They probably have long faces at the news. They were happy about Benedict's election,
but this will freeze over relations between the MP and Rome to at most a cordial formality without any warmth.
Look at the Newsmax story below:
"In addition, Allen added that Pope Francis is the first to be named from Latin America in more than 1,000 years"
Actually America had not even been discovered 1000 years ago. Only 600 years ago when, "In Fourteen Hundred and Ninety-two, Columbus sailed the ocean blue".
So, you see how inaccurate the Internet and even so-called "official and mainstream" news sources are!
By the way, StephenS, there was one small mistake you made, it is in calling him Pope Francis the FIRST. We never call him by a number unless there eventually follows another Francis. That is why when Pope John Paul was elected in the 70s nobody was calling him Pope John Paul the First when he was elected. Only when his immediate successor, Karol Wojtyla, took the name Pope JP2 did they call his predecessor "First". Right now there is no need for any such distinction since he is the first one to take the name Pope Francis in history.
