Pope Francis's Address to Congress

Pope Francis's address to Congress yesterday was unprecedented for a couple of reasons. To start with, he is the first pope to do so. But perhaps more importantly, he spoke to the legislators on terms they seldom hear anymore, the plane of moral necessity. And while liberals had quite a bit more to cheer than conservatives in Francis's speech, there were several cases that struck a positive chord with both, and a couple of instances where conservatives liked what they were hearing more than liberals did. The upshot is that the Pope, though polite and pastoral rather than scolding, did not pull his punches. His approach is not liberal or conservative in U.S. political terms; it is humanitarian in Catholic terms.

The Pope paid his respects to politics as a profession that can accomplish much good, in the proper light. He encouraged a politics whose purpose is "to build the common good, a community that sacrifices particular interests for the common good."

Francis grounded his speech in the examples of the lives of four great Americans: Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day and Thomas Merton. From Lincoln he invoked the principle of liberty, "a new birth of freedom that requires a love of the common good." The Pontiff counseled "suspicion against any kind of fundamentalism" that draws simplistic good versus evil or righteous versus sinners pictures and that promotes polarization. Stop with the intransigence and get things done for the people, seemed to be his message here.

The Pope brought up Martin Luther King to highlight equal rights and dignity for all. He here devoted most of his message to inveighing against fear and rejection of immigrants, "I say this to you as the son of immigrants, as I know many of you are the descendants of immigrants." He grounded his point in the Golden Rule. He said, "When the stranger appears to us we must not repeat the errors of the past." Francis's frequent references to Dr. King's "dream" made it clear he supported the concept of the American Dream Act. There was not a lot for conservative immigrant-bashers to like in this segment.   

The next passage was based on the example of Dorothy Day, founder of the "Catholic Worker" publication and a lifelong fighter for the poor and oppressed. Francis no  doubt dismayed conservatives when he explicitly brought up the inequitable "distribution of wealth." He called for an economy that is "modern and sustainable," and specified "The common good includes the Earth." He referred to his recent encyclical on environmentalism, saying, "The environment concerns us all, and environmental deterioration is caused by human activities. We can make a difference, I am sure. Now is the time for courageous action. America can make a vital contribution in the years ahead." At this the Democrats enthusiastically rose while the Republicans sat on their hands. 

Finally, Pope Francis turned to the example of Thomas Merton, a 20th century monk famous for his spirituality. Here the Pope advocated sincere dialogue in the spirit of peace and brotherhood to address all human problems. He specifically brought up the arms trade, indirectly chastising America's role in perpetuating wars that shed "innocent blood." He got applause from conservatives by mentioning his commitment to the value of human life "at all stages of development," but they then sat down in confusion when he immediately pivoted to calling for the worldwide end to the death penalty. He spoke of "threats to the family," including the "redefinition of relations," a likely dig at the recent U.S. acceptance of same-sex marriage. But he then broadened the appeal by speaking for "the richness of family life" and calling for the legislators to do all they could for the "vulnerable young" who have "possibilities, but may be trapped in violence, abuse and despair." This call was rousingly supported by all.

The partisan divide was much more muted than in a normal congressional session, or a State of the Union message, but was present nonetheless. Francis skillfully negotiated the shoals while still getting his message out. And while I would say the lion's share of his message supported the liberal approach to solving human problems, he gave everyone a great deal to think about, regardless of their ideological persuasion. 

 

Pope Speaks Out on Climate Change

Today Pope Francis released his encyclical on human-generated climate change and the need for the people and governments of the world to band together to reverse the damage being done to creation and to our ecological home. As he put it, "Once we start to think about the kind of world we are leaving to future generations, we look at things differently; we realize that the world is a gift which we have freely received and must share with others," he said.  The Archdiocese of Los Angeles is teaming up with the Sierra Club to ask people to sign a petition calling on world leaders to act to fight this threat.

Conservative figures such as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and candidates Jeb Bush and Rick Santorum have already weighed in against the pontiff for "politicizing" the climate issue. What they don't seem to realize is that the scientist pope (master's degree in Chemistry) is merely reporting the science and combining that with his moral focus as a religious leader to call for mitigation of the effects of this preventable tragedy on the "least among us." As Francis pointed out, it is the poor and powerless who pay the highest price for drought and sea level rise. See the entire text of the encyclical (184 pages) here. See the informative article on the encyclical, Laudate Si, (Praise be to you) in the New York Times here.

It is well past time for the narrative to change. Scientists who report the findings of science and moral leaders who report the human dimension of issues are not the ones "politicizing" this issue. People who know better but play to the fear and ignorance of their political base by denying fact and reason are the ones doing so. It is well past time for them to be called on this dissimulation, and it is good to see the Pope doing so.

Time's 2013 Persons of the Year

I hope the day after Christmas finds you well and happy.  We are having a welcome visit from our daughter Jeanette and will soon be visiting our larger family in Southern California and our younger daughter Marie and her husband.  Renewing family ties is one of the most rewarding activities of the holiday season.

Today my comments are on the top five Time Magazine "Person of the Year" choices.  Time's criterion for inclusion is the magnitude of the person's impact on the world--be that for good or ill--during the year.  The 2013 selectee for Person of the Year is Pope Francis.  Places two through five went to Edward Snowden, Edith Windsor, Bashar Assad and Ted Cruz.

Pope Francis is the absolutely right and fitting choice for Person of the Year in 2013, in my view.  The man Time calls "the people's pope" heads the Roman Catholic Church, the largest religious body in the world, with some 1.2 billion members.  In addition, a pope's influence can extend also to some degree over the 1 billion Christians who are not Catholic, and can do much to form views about Christians and predominantly Christian nations among those of other faiths, particularly Islam and Judaism, but others such as Hindus, Buddhists and the nonreligious as well.

By choosing the papal name Francis, the only pope to do so, the first non-European pope in over 600 years served notice that his emphasis would be on loving pastoral care, especially for the poor.  Francis has certainly followed that path.  The previous two popes were canon (religious) lawyers by training, and spent a great deal of effort fighting the culture wars, particularly on sexual issues, and enforcing orthodox teachings.  Francis, a pastor by experience and inclination, stresses the messages of mercy and love.  His famous response, "Who am I to judge?" when asked about gay clergy, was an astonishing pronouncement from a pontiff.  He has censured prelates for spending undue sums on pomp and luxury, blasted unfettered capitalism for forgetting the poor, and removed culture warriors from prominent church positions.  The findings of a panel he appointed to make recommendations about the Curia, the Vatican bureaucracy, could well presage a needed house cleaning there as well.  Pope Francis's vigorous efforts to steer his church toward Saint Francis's vision as a hospital for deprived and wounded souls rather than a scolding organization could begin to revolutionize many things within western civilization, the more so if the health of the now 77-year old Francis holds up.

Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor and leaker,  is a deserving choice as number two.  His revelations, while certainly no surprise to the informed such as those who read this blog, appear to have come as amazing revelations to many.  Ever since 9/11 the electronic reach of the NSA has pervaded society in unprecedented and clearly unconstitutional ways.   The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution reads The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.  In bringing the true scope of surveillance to the attention of the public at large, Snowden has succeeded in sparking the national discussion he sought.  It will take years to properly delineate the proper balances between privacy and security, but much more of the debate will now take place in public, where it belongs in an ostensibly democratic society.

Edith Windsor, the number three Person of the Year, has been a catalyst for one of the most rapid and sweeping societal transformations in American history.  Her case United States v Windsor was the one in which the U.S. Supreme Court this June overturned the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, thus opening the way for recognition of marriage equality rights across the United States.  Her specific case dealt with her contention that her same-sex marriage, recognized by the state of New York, should entitle her to inherit the estate of her deceased spouse without the assessment of inheritance taxes, the same as heterosexually-married couples enjoy.  With this ruling, for instance, military same-sex spouses became eligible for many benefits heretofore denied, and further challenges keep widening the effects.  Six new states have recognized same-sex marriage in the U.S. this year, the latest being Utah in a Federal District Court decision partially based on Windsor that may well eventually end in the Supreme Court making a definitive ruling on the entire permissibility of excluding same-sex marriage throughout the nation.

As number four, dictator Bashar Assad of Syria simply shows the enduring problem thugs of his ilk can still cause this world of ours.  The civil war in his country has drawn Iran, its Shi'ite Muslim Hizbollah terrorist minions, the  European Union, Russia, the United States, the conservative Arab gulf states and Sunni jihadist al-Qaeda linked fighters into a Middle Eastern maelstrom.  The conflict was initially inspired by the Arab spring in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, and began as an effort by moderate, pro-democracy Syrians to free themselves from the Assad regime's oppressive authoritarian rule.  The scope of those involved certainly shows Assad's "contribution" to important world events, and continues to point up the seemingly intractable difficulties of untangling the problems of that byzantine portion of the globe.

Tea Party firebrand Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was chosen as number five.  His demagogic rantings led to the futile government shutdown, an attempt to stop Obamacare, this fall.  The fact that the three-fourths of Republican representatives and senators who are not tea-partiers felt constrained to cave in and go along with this kind of action when they knew it was bad for the country and couldn't even work speaks volumes about the Republican rank and file these days.  The right-wing media has created an extreme base which few in GOP circles will even dare publicly talk reality and sense to.  Cruz reminds me of earlier demagogic congressional leaders, most notably the Democrat Huey Long in the 1930s and the Republican Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s, who for a time gained impressive sway founded on incendiary and nonsensical ravings pitched to the most gullible and fear-motivated people in society.  Hopefully, his political importance will in the end be the same as theirs: a cautionary lesson of shame and disgrace.