Like Obama, liberal fans of Francis cannot comprehend criticism January 19, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, different religion, disconcerting, foolishness, General Catholic, huh?, Papa, pr stunts, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, the struggle for the Church.
Even though his administration has been mired in scandal after scandal and failure after failure, and even though more and more Americans now think his presidency has been a highly negative event in the life of the nation, he retains a hardcore of progressive supporters for whom Obama can do no wrong. Similarly, even as more and more mainstream voices find it harder and harder to defend and/or explain away the steadily deteriorating actions of the Franciscan pontificate, he retains a broad base of support among liberals who claim membership in the Church, and especially among court hanger’s on like Andrea Tornielli.
Just recently Tornielli, who has been granted very generous privileges from Pope Francis, gave an interview in which he expressed his amazement at “conservative” criticism of the pope. He insinuates that the opposition is not based on anything Pope Francis has done, per se‘, but simply stems from ideology and/or an unbalanced, unhappy psychology. He seems to imply that blogs are the root of Francis’ trouble. But he provides no evidence or example to support his claims.
Via Eponymous Flower, some interesting excerpt from the interview Tornielli gave with another media fellow-traveler from Argentina, Elisabetta Pique:
Piqué: But in the past few months things have happened that one has never seen before, such as the letter of the 13 cardinals who wrote the Pope during the last Synod, who defied his authority and practically accused him of manipulation. [Where there is smoke…….]
Tornielli: Like Paul VI. [NO. Not like Paul VI. Deliberately premeditated, organized resistance to the restatement of constant Church belief regarding contraception was brewing years before HV was published. And, that was a reaction planned and led by a narrow cabal of self-interested theologians and clergy. Opposition to Francis, on the contrary, is an organic phenomenon largely flowing from the bottom (us) up. Also, where the Truth lies in each case is rather important, isn’t it?] who published the encyclical Humanae Vitae, there were articles with very severe criticism. But it is true, at the Synod, there was a moment of tension. [Because radical ideas were proposed, and still are being proposed. So the Church is never to have division? You haven’t read much Church history] And it seems to me that there is an organized movement, which uses all media, including the Internet, to spread discord and criticism of the Pope. [Really? Because I don’t see much hostility to Pope Francis from the mainstream media, whose voice is dominant compared to little independent blogs.] What amazes me is that they find something to criticize every day. In this movement, it does not really matter what the Pope says or does. [Yes it does. It’s just that he does an obscene amount of bad] That surprised me a lot and this perseverance clearly points to a prejudice, because it has not taken into account what he actually says and does, when it does not fit into clichés. [That’s totally false. The reason there has been so much criticism is because there has been so very much to criticize. And blogs like this one and other much more notable traditional blogs have often been remarkably restrained in their coverage, glossing over many problematic items. The idea that this “movement” is organized is idiotic. But let’s take just a few examples from this pontificate: claiming arms manufacturers are evil, purt’ near excommunicate, the hammer and sickle crucifix, the radical speeches in South America, constantly pushing a radical agenda a la Kasper, gravely wounding the Sacrament of Marriage, “who am I to judge,” “make a mess,” “neo-Pelagian idolaters,” “the God of surprises,” Holy Thursday Mass outside church, washing trannie feet, atrocious Masses, resurrecting the careers of hundreds of modernists, the horrible interviews, Laudato Si, Evangelii Gaudium……and that’s just a small sampling.]
Piqué: Can this daily critique of Francis, especially by blogs, who accuse him of being a populist, of being ambiguous, desacralizing in matters of doctrine and the papacy, hurt him?
Tornielli: If the criticism is not right, but on the basis of prejudice when it is systematic, even ridiculous, because of their insistence and their instability, it turns in the end against those who express them. [Uh huh. Sounds like wishful thinking to me. Once again, I think most people tried to bend over backwards to give Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt (not all, but most). And a lot of stuff just slides on by without much comment, as much from exhaustion from the sheer volume of troubling stuff as from a desire to respect the office.]
My takeaway – this stuff is getting through. Later in the post at EF it is related that Pope Francis is well aware that he has a growing chorus of critics, mostly on the internet. Not enough is said to know whether he really cares or not. I doubt he’s worried.
But maybe some of the hangers-on are. Again, Tornielli provided no example, and he also glossed over the nearly 1 million signatures of grave concern that were sent to Pope Francis prior to the Ordinary Synod last fall. That indicates this is not quite a lunatic fringe phenomenon.
Well…….I’ve never cared much for Tornielli,anyway. He’s far too much a press release, party line journalist for my taste.