Some liberal gushing over the upcoming meeting of the President and the Pope.
Obama-Benedict meeting ‘no mere photo-op‘
By Dennis Coday
Created Jul 09, 2009Just off the phone with a teleconference called by the [squishy Kmiec] Catholic Democrats. They had [Catholic pro-abortion] Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro of Connecticut [a member of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus] and [Catholic pro-abortion] Congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts [solidly pro-abortion, backed by NOW] speaking about Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate and about tomorrow’s meeting between the pope and President Obama.
The big question (asked by Michael Paulson of The Boston Globe) was about tomorrow’s meeting. Is it symbolism or is it significant? [Symbolic is significant.]
The representatives were both adamant that this was no mere photo-op. [Based on….?]
McGovern said, "In the past there have been symbolic meetings that amounted to no more than photo-ops and nice press releases. [For example?] But my sense of President Obama is [Get ready for the gushy part…] that he doesn’t do symbolism. [ROFL! Doesn’t he?] He is not going through the motions. This is man who ran for president with a deep desire to change the world for the better. He is a man with a mission." [And no symbolism was involved.]
"I believe that [Obama] really wants to change things," [So do I.] McGovern said. "And I think this pope, with the encyclical that he has issued has put forward a framework not just for the Untied States to follow but for the rest of the world to follow. … [I he suggesting that the Pope Benedict’s teaching in Caritas in veritate and
Pope, er um, President Obama’s agenda are in harmony?]"I have high expectations for this meeting. … I believe this meeting has the potential to have a lasting impact, to help not only inspire but to provide — quite frankly — [get this…] the political cover in some cases to move forward in some of these areas that up to this point have been difficult for politicians to deal with." The difficult issues he cited were peace in the Middle East, extreme poverty and hunger. [I would add African issues, too. But, I suspect that these pro-abortion Dems mean something else as well.]
"My expectation and my hope for this meeting tomorrow is that it will be about real things and about results," he said. [Do these well-informed pro-abortion politicans understand that the meeting will be about 15 minutes long, minus the photos?]
DeLauro agreed with this sentiment and with the idea that Benedict has given the world a road map for the global economy. [Pope Benedict also stressed the importance of defense of human life.] Benedict, she said, "is very clear about what are the moral consequences and the economic consequences of what we do and how that affects people. He is trying, in a very thoughtful way, to address very serious issues. … President Obama has demonstrated this equal kind of deep thinking on these very, very serious issues, and he isn’t afraid to take on these very serious deep issues which cause tension in our society." [NB: The pro-abortion politician is drawing a close equivalence between the Holy Father’s Magisterium and Pres. Obama’s "magisterium". As I have been saying, some Notre Dame, Pres. Obama is the new Pope of America.]
"He has taken on issues that not too many political figures want to take on," she said. He did this during his campaign on the issue of race, [wait for it…] at Notre Dame on abortion and in Cairo on Islam."This is not a photo op. This is not, excuse me, posing for holy pictures. [PUHLEEZE. Does this person understand what is going on at all? But try to plumb the depths of the next phrase or two…] There is a reality and a difficulty about the serious issues that face all of our societies." [wowwww] The issues are complex with no easy answers, DeLauro’ [gosh!] said, but Obama and Benedict are saying, "let’s find the common ground [ooooo] and let’s see what we can pull out of this to try and move the dialogue forward." [Yah.. ’cause its dialogue that’s going to get it done.]
"That is the kind of leadership that we need in the world," she said. [Ummm… whose, exactly?]
I’ll blog a bit later on DeLauro’ and McGovern said about Caritas in Veritate.
Loading ...
I was always warned to be suspicious of people who use the modifer ‘very’, as in ‘very, very serious issues’. ‘Very’ is what one says when one does not know what to say or is attempting to avoid clarity of thought or speech, perhaps for dubious purposes.
I am also wary about ‘try and move the dialogue forward’. Does this mean we are putting the dialogue on trial before moving it, or did the author mean ‘try to’ move the dialogue?
Of course, these are the same liberals who abolished grammar and Latin.
I am also glad that they have finally openly admitted that they see the Holy Father as ‘political cover’. Liberals always bring politics into everything, even when they are trying not to do so.
I note this is not from a credible newsource, but an anti-Catholic propoganda machine, masquerading as a Catholic newsjournal. Tom
Where. Are. Their. Bishops.
This is giving me a stomach ache.
The more they gush, the more I worry.
bruno
When Obama supporters start gushing about their hero, it’s hard not to think of a 15 year old girl talking about the QB: He’s so wuuuuuuuuuunderful!!!!
I know that the vast majority of British Bishops are members of Incompetents R Us but I got to agree with LCB that even the USCCB ought to have weighed in by now.
Question FR. did the distorter ever toe the doctrinal line and if so when did it go looopy?
“Dialogue” is a code word for compromising your strongly-held moral principles.
“Strongly held moral principles” are just too devisive for enlightend, nuanced, civilized people to entertain.
They’re only held by the nuckle-draggers who cling to their guns and religion.
I cannot understand why the Holy Father is having this meeting.
I’m afraid you’re in for a big surprise, Fr. Z. The landscape has, indeed, shifted. Pope Benedict, surprise, surprise, is steering left. Did you see E.J. Dionne’s article in today’s Washington Post? President Obama is to the right of the Pope!!! [ROFL! Imaginative!]
God is just full of mystery and joy … I love being Catholic!
Oh no, not more serious, very serious, deep, and complex issues with no easy answers. I haven’t heard any one talk like that for about 22 years and only at 0400 in the Frat house. After a couple of hours of defining terms, semantics and a couple of cases of beer they should have a new found respect for their diversity if my experience is any indication. What a load of idealistic, create your own reality b as in b. s as in s. I don’t even know if they expressed a coherent thought.
Sorry if I’m over the top, but I just had a horrible flashback.
FXR2
I know I’ve been posting this sentiment until I’m blue in the face, but this bears repeating right now:
1. IT IS ABSOLUTELY VITAL TO PREVENT A PHOTO OF PHOTO OF BENEDICT AND OBAMA TOGETHER. Because the photo-op itself, as an image, will be trumpeted by these goons as the Pope APPROVING Obama’s Culture of Death policies. That’s what they’re anticipating in the article above.
Now, whether the communications geniuses at the Apostolic Palace have gotten the message is a fifty/fifty chance. On the one hand, they brilliantly prevented Pelosi from being photographed with the Pope. On the other hand, with their parallel track record of P.R. failings this year (e.g., l’affaire Williamson), I have a big knot in my stomach about this.
So, if that photo-op DOES happen, the following is absolutely vital:
2. A no-holds-barred, in-your-face, Prophet Jeremiah, Prophet Elijah=vs-the-priests-of-Baal denunciation of the Culture of Death, addressed directly to Obama’s face. With no nuances — Caritatis in Veritate was full of measured language. Measured language, nuances, will be spun as SUPPORTING Obama’s position. And that means that Obama’s splitting of the Catholic Church in America will have scored a second spectacular victory in 90 days.
But if there is a strong statement, wavering Catholics in this country will face a decision — am I Catholic first or American first? Without a strong statement, wavering Catholics will be given permission by Rome to continue to wobble.
You should be ashamed of yourself, Father! You may be a priest, you may be a Catholic (notice I did not use the word good), but you are NO Christian! [yah yah… blah blah blah…]
The devil quoted Scripture to Jesus as his justification for sin (via temptation) so the lefties will quote Encyclicals and Papal meetings to justify their promotion of sin. Nothing new under the sun. And the so-called reporting will all be propaganda in support of whichever agenda points are being pushed.
Tomorrow morning, Obama will try very hard to tempt the Pope. Obama is used to getting what he asks for. His meteoric rise has been described as “preternatural”.
Pray for the Holy Father.
What’s with Fred? Is he another Obama worshipper who tolerants nothing negative said about his messiah?
Frankly, I can see nothing good coming from this meeting. On one hand, the Pope is almost forced to meet with Obama. On the other, Obama and his propoganda ministers will find some way to use the meeting to continue to push his extremist pro-abortion policies.
Obama’s idea of dialogue is the Muslim idea of dialogue – “Listen to what I am saying and obey!”
Just further proof that nothing of any good (and a good amount of bad) will come out of CIV. What a disaster.
I’m afraid you’re in for a big surprise, Fr. Z. The landscape has, indeed, shifted. Pope Benedict, surprise, surprise, is steering left. Did you see E.J. Dionne’s article in today’s Washington Post? President Obama is to the right of the Pope.
Is this the same EJ Dionne who claims to be a Catholic but supports pro abortion candidates?
Why would a Catholic consider Dionne a source?
God is just full of mystery and joy
I suggest you check out the Sorrowful Mysteries?
I love pretending to be Catholic!
Comment by shoofoolatte
FYP
You should be ashamed of yourself, Father! You may be a priest, you may be a Catholic (notice I did not use the word good), but you are NO Christian!
Comment by Fred
Why? Because he doesn’t consider Obama a saint?
President Obama is not a saint nor is he the messiah. I don’t worship him either — like you folks seem to worship Crazy Z! I know what it means to be a Catholic and I am proud to be a Catholic. I also take my Church’s social teaching seriously. This is why I am proud to be a Democrat and proud that we finally have a true leader in the White House.
Fred, you’re disrespectful. Fr. Z is a Catholic Priest and deserves your respect in that capacity, on account of that whole ordination thing. You don’t have to like him. You don’t have to agree with him.
You say you take your Church’s social teaching seriously. Are you a Catholic in Communion with Rome? If so, what about its faithful teaching? Do you take that seriously? Because it’s about faith and works, not just works. You can do all the “social justice” work imaginable, but if you don’t adhere to ALL the church’s teaching in matters of actual faith, it matters not how seriously you take the social teaching. It’s one of those “both/and” things.
If you were true to the Magisterium, you wouldn’t be so impressed with the wun.
Z IS NOT WORTHY OF MY RESPECT. HE IS JUST A SIMPLE MAN — NOT A SAINT OR THE MESSIAH.
@C: ‘Obama is used to getting what he asks for. His meteoric rise has been described as “preternatural”…Pray for the Holy Father’
It’s always good to pray for the Pope, but let’s be realistic. President Obama is a relative lightweight. He had a very savvy marketing team who ran the longest presidential campaign ever, really well. The coincidental emergence of Twitter and social media in general, which tend to be dominated by leftists, didn’t hurt either.
Meanwhile Pope Benedict is one of the great men of the modern era. There’s just no competition there.
The Papacy is the oldest institution on Earth. We have it on Very High Authority that the Church shall endure until the end of time.
The bloodthirsty Roman Emperors, the Huns, Napoleon, Hitler — all of them tried to destroy the Church or turn Her to their ends.
They are gone. She remains.
I think the Holy See can handle a 15-minute meet-n-greet with the president. It is tiresome to think of how the usual partisans will
attempt to massage this diplomatic set-piece into some sort of Papal endorsement for this administration. It is saddening to think of
the simple souls that could buy that. But at least we’ll have a clearer idea of who these partisans and hacks for the current administration
may be. Their more egregious attempts to manipulate the words and actions of the Holy Father may serve to awaken some people
to the extent to which our media pays lip service to the ideals of objectivity and intellectual honesty. “Political cover”, indeed.
I see a parallel developing:
Satan vs Jesus during His 40 days in the desert
Obama vs Benedict during his pontificate
Both Satan & Obama desired change…according to their terms.
I was just reading Joan’s Rome http://www.ewtn.com/news/blog.asp?blog_ID=1 and she was one of the journalists in the pool that were covering the visit of the Australian Prime Minister to the Pope.
She will also be there today for Obama’s visit and said: “I will also be covering President Obama’s visit to the Holy Father tomorrow afternoon but not in the papal library. I’ll be in the San Damaso courtyard which is where the presidential party arrives by car, and from which they leave at the end of a papal audience. I hope to have photos of tomorrow’s visit: we were not allowed to take photos today.”
Perhaps they will not be allowed to take photos today, either. That would be good!
The representatives were both adamant that this was no mere photo op.
It’s a 15 minute meeting.
It’s not much more than a photo op. What can they really discuss in 15 minutes?
P.S. Will there in fact be public photos taken? That’s not always the case with papal meetings.
Fred sounds like he’s off his meds. Look Fred, if you support Obama, you’re just another faux Catholic. You sound like a White House plant to me. Tom
Pope JPII survived a visit with Bill Clinton [JPIIs words to the effect of “the hardest to counsel ever of any person ever met, as Clinton laughed and looked around”]. This is the difficulty of any Papal meeting with those lacking understanding or Faith.
I always wonder about those who think that these kinds of meetings will effect a change in Church teaching, after the Pope FINALLY hears an alternate viewpoint. [Riiiiiiiight…]
Hey P. McGrath-I like your comparison of the Prophets Jeremiah and Elijah!
I want to see the gloves come off and the Holy Father give Obama a good talkin’ to!
Hey Fred-those of us who come on this blog like Fr. Z, and we’ll stand up for him!
So there!
Fred,
You really ought show more respect for Father Z and all priests. This is a Holy Year of the Priest. Just beg God’s forgiveness in Confession, apologize to Father Z and move on. You were meant for much better things than name calling.
These folks in Congress are both tiresome and dangerous. They need to be resisted in every way and every day!
Liam, Thank You.
At least the protocol office finally got things right. I was worried that Barack would show up wearing a Notre Dame tie or something, because the protocol office would think “It’s a Catholic tie!”
This is by far the least Christian blog I have ever seen any fellow priest moderate. […. huh?] One can be a good Catholic and Christian and still be a democrat and support our president. I seems to be that you all need a lesson on what it means to be Catholic. I am a Democrat, an Obama supporter, and a priest. [Riiiiight….]
Fr. John
NYC
John,
Perhaps I should be questioning if you are a priest? Your words of hate make you sound more like a right-wing political hack.
Fr. John
NYC
How wonderful that the Holy Father greeted President Obama so warmly, and that they treated each other with respect and kindness. I think that there is a lesson her for the 80 or so right wing bishops who objected so strongly to the President’s reception of a Notre Dame honorary degree. Shame on those bishops. Kudos to Benedict and Barack.