From First Things:
In a widely covered interview, Pope Francis asked Catholics to stop speaking out on abortion, contraception, and gay marriage. This signaled a wholesale change in the Church’s stance toward the world, an opening of windows to let in the air, a banishment from the religious sphere of any concern that became entangled with the political.
Or so said certain people eager to replace one political conception of the papacy with another, to change out a Tea Party pope for a Move On magisterium. “Pope Francis Is a Liberal,” declared Slate, “It’s not just homosexuality or birth control. He’s profoundly anti-conservative.”
Others have pointed out that the Church’s teaching hasn’t changed, that no change in that teaching has been proposed, and that, moreover, when read correctly the pope’s words are perfectly of a piece with every utterance of Benedict. Despite the truth of many of their discrete observations, it sometimes seems such interpreters would refuse the pope the right to say something new.
The pope certainly does mean to propose an adjustment, though the nature of that adjustment isn’t immediately clear. The hope of many (and too-eager suspicion of some) that he was muzzling the Church’s moral witness was immediately disappointed. A mere day after the publication of his interview, he denounced abortion in the strongest terms of his papacy, some of the strongest of any papacy:
In his strongest public words to date on the subject of abortion, Pope Francis affirmed the sacredness of unborn human life and linked its defense to the pursuit of social justice. “In all its phases and at every age, human life is always sacred and always of quality. And not as a matter of faith, but of reason and science!” the pope said Sept. 20 to a gathering of Catholic gynecologists. Pope Francis characterized abortion as a product of a “widespread mentality of profit, the ‘throwaway culture,’ which has today enslaved the hearts and minds of so many.”
That mentality, he said, “calls for the elimination of human beings, above all if they are physically or socially weaker. Our response to that mentality is a decisive and unhesitating ‘yes’ to life.” The pope grouped together unborn children, the aged and the poor as among the most vulnerable people whom Christians are called especially to love. “In the fragile human being each one of us is invited to recognize the face of the Lord, who in his human flesh experienced the indifference and solitude to which we often condemn the poorest, whether in developing countries or in wealthy societies,” he said. “Every unborn child, though unjustly condemned to be aborted, has the face of the Lord, who even before his birth, and then as soon as he was born, experienced the rejection of the world,” he said. “And every old person, even if infirm and at the end of his days, carries with him the face of Christ. They must not be thrown away!”
This is no surprise. In 2009, Francis offered these high-proof words regarding Argentina’s gay marriage bill:
More at the link. But the theme of the article is simple: our friends on the left who thought that Pope Francis was somehow changing Church teaching was based more on wishful thinking than actually reading what he said. The Pope wishes to change the tone of some of the teachings, without changing the teachings themselves; he wishes to include people insofar as they may be included without changing the teachings of the Church themselves.
From Kate Stokes of The Victory Girls:
by KATE STOKES on SEPTEMBER 21, 2013
FINALLY, former Army Captain Will Swenson will receive the Medal of Honor on October 15, 2013 for his courageous actions in one of the most hard-fought battles to-date of the Afghan war; the Ganjgal Valley in Kunar Province on Sept. 8, 2009. And yes, this was the same battle in which Marine Sgt. Dakota Meyer, in 2011, received the MOH for his own exemplary actions on that awful and bloody day when 5 Americans died.
Here’s what happened: It was a six-hour battle which has been written and talked about for years now. Apparently, 50 insurgents who were deeply entrenched in the mountainside village of Ganjgal, ambushed a group of about 60 Afghan soldiers, 20 Afghan border police and 13 military trainers shortly after dawn as the group was on its way to meet village elders. According to accounts, the enemy fighters appeared to know they were coming, and launched a fierce attack of small-arms and rocket fire.
More at the link, including actual news footage of Captain Swenson’s actions.
Sister Toldjah asks, “Remember when going to college was supposed to expose you to all kinds of differing viewpoints? It’s been so long …” It seems tha professors at the University of North Carolina don’t believe that an opposing views should be credited at all. But it’s hardly just UNC; William Jacobson of Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion pointed out how Oberlin College covered up a racism hoax by liberal students, and then blame conservative bloggers for exposing the truth. And Donald Douglas noted that Modesto Junior College stopped a student from handing out copies of the Constitution – presumably including the First Amendment — on Constitution Day.
Also from Professor Jacobson:
Posted by William A. Jacobson | Saturday, September 21, 2013 at 6:30 pm
Aleister, who writes for College Insurrection, has his own excellent blog, American Glob.
In a post yesterday, Aleister noted how quickly the media dropped any interest in the politics of the Navy Yard shooter … as soon as it became clear that the was a mentally-ill liberal black man, not a conservative/Tea Party/right-wing white guy, Why Has The Media Stopped Talking About The Navy Yard Shooter?:
The media typically loves stories about people who go on shooting sprees but just a few days after the Navy Yard shooting story broke, no one in the media is talking about it anymore. Why?
The answer is pretty simple. The story didn’t fit the media’s preferred gun control narrative.
Had the story been about a white Tea Party member as everyone in the liberal media was hoping, we’d still be bombarded with coverage of the story. Black guy? Liberal? Mentally ill? The story no longer served any purpose for the left’s agenda so it was dropped.
The same phenomenon took place as to the Family Research Council shooter, motivated by a Southern Poverty Law Center hate watch list. Almost complete media disinterest, including in the sentencing this week.
More at the link.
L D Jackson writes about the latest outrage:
By LD Jackson
I want to give every parent a hypothetical scenario to think about. Just imagine how you would feel if you discovered a peeping tom outside your children’s window. Now imagine how you would feel if you discovered the peeping tom was naked. Think about that for a moment. What would you be likely to do to the pervert who was ogling your children and wearing no clothes? You can answer that question in the comments, but suffice it to say, my reaction would not be pleasant to any individual I caught in such a compromising situation.
Such is the case of Emilio Chavez III of Albuquerque. He caught one Dylan Maho outside his daughter’s window and he was naked. That’s right, he was hiding in the bushes outside the girls’ window and he was as naked as the day he was born. Here’s what happened next.
What happened next? The girls’ father, brother and a friend chased the peeper down the street, caught him, and beat the crap out of him . . . and the city of Albuquerque is charging the father with a crime. At least they have more sense in neighboring Texas, where a father who caught a man raping his five-year-old daughter beat the rapist to death, and will not be charged with anything. He ought to get a medal!
Since we have been told so often that global warming climate change is real, proven, settled science, it seems that when the data contradict the projections — as in: when the real-world tests do not validate the hypotheses — the data must be hushed up:
By William Teach September 21, 2013 – 9:44 am
UN IPCC head Rajendra K Pachauri, who is not a climate scientist, recently admitted
“We are an intergovernmental body and we do what the governments of the world want us to do. If the governments decide we should do things differently and come up with a vastly different set of products we would be at their beck and call.”
The UK Daily Mail reports
Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed.
A leaked copy of a United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary and the United States raised concerns about the final draft.
More at the link, but, by now, nobody should be surprised.
Stacey Stacy McCain notes how North Carolina Democrats are tying to stifle conservative women bloggers. If there’s one thing that liberals hate even more than freedom of speech, it’s anyone other than a white male having an opinion different from the Official Liberal (or Democratic) Position.
Well, that’s all for this week.