08 January 2014

From the 'Stuff My Brother Says' File




"These Lucky Charms sure would taste better if Benedict were still Pope."

4 comments:

E.Q. said...

Preach!

Prekast said...

I betcha' he has a similarly named file which is MUCH thicker...

Karen said...

You are so blessed to have a family member "who gets it". I crave that!

Barto of the Oratory said...

The resignation of Pope Benedict remains an unsolved mystery, in my book. To me, there are clues in the fact that the Cardinals voted for a man who was NOT a European or an American, who was so far away from Rome that he practically could not have been a Vatican insider, & who was not a member of any conservative clique or faction among the Cardinals & bishops. Cardinal Bergoglio was known by the other Cardinals for just one thing: being one of the principal authors of the 2007 Aparecida document issued by the Latin American bishops. That document established Bergoglio as a liberal. So, why would all those Cardinals appointed by John Paul II & Benedict pick a liberal to be pope? I can think of only one reason: Some conservative clique of bishops in the Church was blackmailing Pope Benedict into doing something or not doing something. This clique had true information (or false information that would appear true to the public) & threatened to expose it. The clique never expected Pope Benedict to respond as he did--quitting the papacy. The Cardinals learned of what happened, & voted to make sure that someone UTTERLY OUTSIDE the power clique from the era of John Paul II & Benedict ended up in the Chair of Peter. The Cardinals, with the resignation of Benedict, saw that the corrupt power politics among the bishops (which has always been a factor) had gone too far. Why else would all these John Paul- & Benedict-appointed Cardinals elect a liberal? Benedict/Ratzinger was a good man, he did nothing wrong, but he was not adept at power politics. He was, by his own admission, by nature nothing but a professor & scholar. He had no taste or talent for dealing with self-serving (& in some cases wicked) power politics among many of the bishops, especially among the ruling clique of the bishops. Another clue is found in the fact that leading conservative Catholic commentator & author George Weigel, a Vatican insider during the reign of John Paul II, wrote a scathing denunciation of Benedict's second encyclical. (see: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/227839/i-caritas-veritate-i-gold-&-red/george-weigel ) The fact that he felt he could get away with publicly humiliating Benedict in that way shows that Benedict was weak, & was under attack by some conservative Catholic clique. Some people might thing that the conservative bishops are the good guys. But sin takes no vacation based on ideology. Cardinal Mahoney was a liberal & corrupt, but there's no spiritual law that exempts conservative Catholics from the temptation of Lust, Pride, Vainglory, Greed, Envy, & so on. Fr. John Corapi was an ultra-conservative priest who constantly appeared on EWTN denouncing liberalism. One of Fr. Corapi's last public appearances was at an anti-socialism rally in St. Louis! But Fr. Corapi was caught having a sexual affair with a prostitute & using drugs. Upon being called to account, he abrupty quit the priesthood. The priest founder of the Legionaries of Christ was an ultra-conservative, but was ultra corrupt & deceitful. Another clue: Pope Francis' whole papacy so far can be read as an attack on & humiliation of the conservative clique that threatened & abused the good man Benedict out of office. Pope Francis is a liberal. But I think the Cardinals knew one thing about him: Pope Francis is incorruptible. His heart is pure, & he's fearless--he doesn't even care if he is assassinated. His behavior just screams out, "Assassinate me if you want to, you bastards! I don't care! God is great & in Him I trust" In theology, I think conservatism & traditionalism are better than liberalism. But moral purity & moral courage combined with political craftiness (Scripture says, "Be as cunning as a snake but as harmless as a dove") are more important than where one sits on the ideological theological spectrum within the pale of orthodoxy.