Tips for a happier life (from da pope!)
- Thread starter wil
- Start date
Alright you tell me...
When the media lambasts the pope or the Vatican, or the Catholic church for some perceived infraction, for whatever...
Does it have any effect on my thoughts or life or what the water cooler buzz is Monday morning? Nah....and the same with most noncatholics
When the media lambasts the pope or the Vatican, or the Catholic church for some perceived infraction, for whatever...
Does it have any effect on my thoughts or life or what the water cooler buzz is Monday morning? Nah....and the same with most noncatholics
A Cup Of Tea
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,313
- Reaction score
- 580
- Points
- 108
Quite. So do most Catholics, I would have thought.
A Cup Of Tea
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,313
- Reaction score
- 580
- Points
- 108
I tried not to assume, you might have that 'the Shining' thing or something.
LOL.
My general assumption would be:
The non-Catholic world has no real grasp of Francis beyond the media message, and certainly no grasp of his theology (some aspects of which respondents here would find positively medieval!) Hence so many false rumours of him over-turning doctrine.
The media would have everyone believe that Francis is staging some kind of revolution within the Church, which he’s not. That is, he’s not doing that on topics they’d like him to do it over, doctrine, etc., but he is, like BXVI before him, causing seismic waves in areas that are significant institutionally but don't really get much media exposure. That kind of stuff has no immediate media currency, so tends to go unreported. The work was begun by BXVI, who got next to no comment at all.
What the media goes for is style rather than substance, understandable is a soundbite culture. The consensus is largely sentimental, and generally the media loves the touchy-feely stuff. Same with JPII. Benedict XVI didn’t have ‘the common touch’, and worse, he was far too intellectual for the media. But if you look below the surface, a different picture. But again, if BXVI lacked political savvy in dealing with the media, he did in dealing with the curia as well, as the scandals around his pontificate evidence.
A clear example of this was the media dislike for BXVI, 'the Vatican rotweiller'. The media never made any comment about the fact he was a JPII appointment, nor that he was appointed to the role on a JPII brief. The media tried to promote discord between the pope and Buddhists and Jews, ignoring the fact that he, more than any other, called for the leaders of the great traditions to stand shoulder to shoulder in the one thing we had in common, the preservation of human values, in the face of dehumanising modernism.
And I am always struck by the fact that in Spe Salvi, Benedict's encyclical, there is a 'groundbreaking' theological discussion of purgatory, the judgement, the afterlife ... any mention of that in the popular press? Not a sausage ... and I doubt most Catholics know it either ...
The Catholic world’s grasp of Francis is probably much along the same lines. What percentage of Catholics read a Catholic paper, for instance, to counter the impressions of the general media?
Again generally, where Catholics follow the media they ‘care’ about reporting Catholicism in general, be it the pope or the latest scandal. Again, in an increasingly secular world, the media shapes the world in which Catholics live. Not only news media, but general representation on tv, etc. Mention ‘child abuse’ and ‘everyone’ knows that Catholic priests abuse children. My course director was mugged in the street because he’s a child abuser … I mean he’s a Catholic priest, therefore obviously he must be …
When I was a kid, it was boy-scout masters.
A Cup Of Tea
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,313
- Reaction score
- 580
- Points
- 108
What sort of papers discusses Catholic news evenhandedly? My first thought was the Vatican website but I'm guessing they have a rather positive spin on things?
..
Lol...yes the media provides the vids and transcripts.... I read them... Not the commentary pro or con on the words...
I could care less what the media says... I am looking to what he says....and even more to what he does and the changes he makes/instigates within the church and world.
Lol...yes the media provides the vids and transcripts.... I read them... Not the commentary pro or con on the words...
I could care less what the media says... I am looking to what he says....and even more to what he does and the changes he makes/instigates within the church and world.
A Cup Of Tea
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,313
- Reaction score
- 580
- Points
- 108
But they don't show you everything he says and does, you only get what get's filtered through news corporations. If I give you Moby Dick with 98% of the text censored, should you trust me that the 2% you can read is a relevant representation of the book?
I love some of the things the Pope has done, but I don't think I know anything about him.
Yes, it would!
But then, what sort of media discusses anything evenhandedly?
I don’t subscribe to any newspapers, Catholic or otherwise. I’ve just skimmed Google for comments on the Catholic press in the UK, and it would appear that all the mainstream Catholic media here is, in the opinion of respondents, not-at-all-Catholic! Too liberal by far. I don’t know enough to comment. The Tablet is a Catholic journal which subscribes to 'modern Catholicism’ and has been involved in various storms over issues of doctrine.
The only subscriptions I had were to Communio, a journal that championed a Patristic approach to theology, and New Blackfriars, the journal of the Order of St Dominic.
To get ‘balance' involves reading many sources, not just the mainstream ones. Blogs of course are a good means of getting the temperature of things.
The one regular ‘news’ spot I refer to is http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/
I tend to skim this to see what’s happening.
The point I would make though is, looking at who the author is, the site credits Sandro Magister. He studied theology, philosophy, and history. He’s a journalist. So far, so good, but … so what? Then he lists his early reading initiatives – Guardini, Bouyer, Daniélou, etc.
To most people, including most Catholics, that’s just a reading list, probably of people they’ve never heard of. To me, it’s a clear signpost of what to expect. A couple of my heroes are there: Danielou, De Lubac … From that I can ballpark his theology, his stance, where he sits on the spectrum of Catholic thought, how he'll view certain things …
You say your view is not shaped by the media, and yet to me, your view of the popes is the common media-managed viewpoint. Nigh on everybody thinks the same as you.
So JPII good, BXVI bad. Francis good. Why is that? Basically it depends on whether the pontiff has ‘the common touch’, the sentimentality which the media loves. JPII had it, BXVI doesn't, Francis has it in spades … but behind that, JPII was hardline conservative, and whilst BXVI was a traditionalist, he was neither as hardline nor as conservative as JPII. And as for Francis, as my mum says, with a laugh, ‘Do they know he’s a Jesuit? Do they know what that means?’
Answer: No, not really.
JPII, God bless him, was old and ill towards the end of his pontificate and easily managed by the curia. BXVI was a different kettle. He introduced many unpopular initiatives – cleaning up the clergy, cleaning up the finances – he reached out to the other spiritual traditions, he founded 'the Court of the Gentiles' to promote interfaith dialogue and dialogue with the non-believer, he spoke of the right use of condoms in specific circumstances – he did way more in real terms than JPII, but he was not a political animal and fell foul of both a hostile media and a hostile curia, hence the various ‘leaks’ and ’scandals’ emanating from the corridors of the Vatican.
Personally, I have likes and dislikes. JPII was great PR for the Church, but the impact of his ‘Theology of the Body’ whilst in many ways luminous, has underpinned a hardline position against a wider dialogue on gender issues, sexuality, the family unit... I find it challenging and somewhat close-focussed and too conservative.
BXVI’s theology was, of course, right up my street! Speculative and insightful, daring in its suggestion. Meditations on the Tarot, the handbook of Christian Esoterism/Hermeticism – has a positive foreword by him. I’m pretty sure the rest of the curia would burn it. He opened dialogue with dissenters, especially those heavyweight theologians who had fallen foul of the institution and were near enough in exile, making it possible to discuss their views without censorious looks … but whereas JPII was famous for his red Doc Marten boots, BXVI referred back to handmade shoes with gold buckles … a bit too much pomp for me …
Francis … I’m making no judgements yet... I like him ...