Honestly, this is kind of edifying for faithful Catholics. The thought has crossed my mind before of “am I just making excuses for Pope Francis? Maybe there is something to the idea that he really is trying to liberalize the Church by changing teaching on items the secular left would like the Church to change.”
Well the secular left definitely does not like Putin, so Pope Francis’ careless language which is prima facie interpreted as favorable to Putin is evidence that Pope Francis does indeed speak somewhat carelessly and justifies our defense of his orthodox intent on other matters.
Between comments like these and the recent ecumenical setbacks with several Orthodox churches, the Pope seems lately to be speedrunning an agenda to sabotage relations with our Eastern brethren.
The obvious problem with a call for negotiations with Russia, is simply that Putin cannot be trusted to uphold any agreement that would be reached, even if he were so inclined to enter into honest negotiations, which I think it is safe to say he is not, especially since Russia seems to have some slight momentum going in eastern Ukraine. I think the comparison to the Pope living in a fairy tale land is particularly apt given that he seems to sincerely believe that Putin is a perfectly sane and honest individual that can be counted on to negotiate in good faith.
I get that he wants the fighting to stop so that lives can be spared. There would be nothing morally wrong with the choice to negotiate, if Ukraine was so inclined. But I also think it is a moral choice to continue the fight as they are doing, given that there is a very real, and even likely chance that entering into negotiations at this stage would be self sabotaging for Ukraine. The Ukrainians understand that a strongman like Putin would see a willingness to enter into negotiations as a sign of weakness, and would likely only offer impossible demands in an attempt to make Ukraine look like warmongers (See, look how unreasonable Ukraine is - we offered peace!) Of course most sane people would see through the charade, but others, possibly including Pope Francis, would just use this as more ammunition against Ukraine (remember his comments about NATO "barking at Russia's door"). The Ukrainians realize that entering into negotiations is almost certainly a pointless, no-win situation.
I find it truly astonishing how many within the Catholic community perceive Pope Francis as a mere stumble-prone figure due to his shifts in stance, especially on issues like LGBT blessings and Ukraine's sovereignty. While some may view his approach as erratic, the Pope's discernment reflects a deliberate evolution of thought rather than mere caprice, though often communicated in a Machiavellian manner. A Machiavellian communication style can be confusing but it has proven to be effective when dealing with highly divisive issues like these where one wants to effect attitudinal change incrementally.
Intellectual growth is a hallmark of wisdom. My own perspective on the Ukrainian conflict has shifted. Initially, I anticipated that Allied sanctions on Russia would be decisive, only to witness their limited impact. Similarly, I hoped that Putin, recognizing the broader geopolitical stakes, would seek diplomatic avenues. Yet, reality has proven otherwise. Lives lost. Billions spent. Deadlock.
Recognizing the diminishing appetite for a prolonged proxy conflict with Russia, particularly within the United States, it's evident that a pivot towards resolution is coming. Despite the outcome's implications, the Pope’s foresight is astute. Each life now lost , underscores the urgency of his vision.
As one more eloquent than I would express: “Time's unerring narrative shall vindicate his stance, casting him as a visionary whose foresight will echo through the annals of history.”. Said more simply, the Pope's prescience far outweighs any superficial label of incompetence.
And what in Machiavelli's "The Prince" contains one jot or tittle of the Gospel?
If Our Holy Father was even aware of how all his fumbling, his "yes" meaning "no" and "no" meaning "yes" added to his so called ""prescience" is affecting the Church and the world, he, I'd like to think, would be ashamed.
Between his all but banning of the Old Rite, his shows of vengeance and his love of "shock value" who know what he stands for?
His ministry is to confirm his brothers and sisters in the Faith, not confuse them.
On the anniversary of his election he and the Church need a great deal of prayer.
While the "white flag" language certainly is insensitive and badly phrased; and while legitimate criticism may well be raised against Pope Francis' basic perspective on the war and his counsels in this particular instance; and while I have deeply admired the UGCC's witness and Patriarch Shevchuk's witness for many years, and continue to: it nonetheless has been extremely disconcerting and scandalous to see the episcopate of an entire nation-state not only act consistently in effect as a tool of government war-effort propaganda and recruitment (which while intrinsically dangerous certainly may be said to reflect their recognition of the justice of the Ukrainian cause and closeness to the people of Ukraine), but also in recent weeks categorically and publicly denounce and rule out, in multiple public official pastoral communications, all negotiations between the two parties to the war, and explicitly state that all cessation of this war will be immoral unless and until it involves not only recovery of all lost territory, but also regime change in Russia, a "de-Nazification" process, and punitive and wide-ranging war crimes tribunals analogous to Nuremberg.
While these communications and goals are not unreasonable in the abstract, and while they certainly reflect the trauma of Russia's aggression and genocidal actions and the heightened distrust of all things Russian resulting from it: it is nonetheless important to acknowledge that it is difficult to impossible to imagine any of this happening, especially given the bishops' concomitant acknowledgment of the popularity of Putin and Russian among the general Russian population, without some kind of invasion of Russia and/or a total overthrow of the Russian political system and/or large-scale punitive and coercive action against the Russian people. One may perhaps hope for, but not expect, a miracle from God in a just cause: but I, at least, would have grave doubts about the justice of this cause in practice, or at least the competence and trustworthiness of the Ukrainians in carrying it out. The USA's actual historical record in occupying and collectively punishing with Germany after WW2 is not a good model to follow, and does not fill one with the hope that it might be repeated. Calls for "de-Nazification" are also disconcertingly close to Putin's own propaganda against Ukraine.
This is in effect the difficulty of the situation as it stands between Russia and Ukraine: neither side views the other as at all trustworthy or capable of negotiating in good faith, precisely because both perceive the other as unwilling to settle for any less than revolutionary collapse in the other.
Pope Francis is attempting to walk an extremely difficult line here, with generally poor success. It is understandable and at times reasonable to accuse him of (involuntarily) reflecting Russian propaganda, of being insufficiently condemnatory of Russian aggression (while explicitly condemning it from the beginning), perhaps even and at worst aiding Russian war aims indirectly by calling for negotiations.
But I think it behooves Catholic commentators and clerics to at least *ask* the question of whether it is in the end a more moral stance, a more Christian stance, more in keeping with what we ask for from an episcopate or a Church of God, to invoke the authority of God and the Church to publicly oppose and reject and render impossible all possibility of negotiation or limited reconciliation or more limited war aims or even the temporary cessation of bloody hostilities.
Let's say it was your country that was invaded, your fellow citizens raped, tortured, made to flee their homes. What if it was your young people forced to fight for their homeland?
If you cannot see it from this angle and you cannot see that this aggression is totally unjust...well, we live in a very different world and have a very different understanding of ecclesiology.
Bishops and clerics need to be the ones, standing with the faithful, and rejecting the ham handed words of the bishop of Rome.
I have not heard Patriarch Sviatoslav (Eastern hierarchs are called by their title and Christian or monastic name) ask for blood, vengeance or state that this war is a good thing.
I have heard lies and treachery from Putin the Madman and Kyrill the Malevolent.
If one wants to speak about co-opting and using most of an entire nation's hierarchy look to Russia, not Ukraine.
I saw the movie Ryan's Daughter long ago, and one of the comments in it that really struck me was the Irishman saying to the Brit, "Get out of my country," 800 years after the English entered it. The situation in Ukraine strikes me as similar; no matter how long the Russians stay there the Ukraines will continue to revolt to get them out. It would be better to support the Ukrainians now and help them recover their country than see a war that lasts centuries.
I did too, but only because I recognized the homonym. Using the right word helps your readers, and the Pillar is a careful publication. Or am I just being a pre-Madonna?
“It is regrettable that someone must interpret and clarify the recent words of the pope, this time - Matteo Bruni.”
This entire pontificate has been marred by utter carelessness, unworthy of the Vicar of Christ--a title which, even if eschewed by Pope Francis--is worthy and appropriate. From Day 1 it has been "clean up on Aisle 266!" No matter the subject, Pope Francis has demonstrated an extraordinary recklessness and even malfeasance in his public communications--routinely requiring functionaries and sycophants to "clarify" what he was, apparently, incapable of stating clearly in a manner consistent with the Magisterium of his predecessors, let alone the Gospel of Our Lord (c.f. - Fiducia Supplicans). His egregious and foolish statement regarding the conflict in Ukraine are only the latest evidence of his unworthiness to hold this office. As a faithful, orthodox Catholic, I will NEVER leave the one true Church. Nevertheless, I pray for humility and understanding. Suffering through such an incompetent and heterodox pontificate not only calls for TRUE faith and allegiance--it demands it.
Surprise, surprise: more sloppy communications from Rome and Number One.
Honestly, this is kind of edifying for faithful Catholics. The thought has crossed my mind before of “am I just making excuses for Pope Francis? Maybe there is something to the idea that he really is trying to liberalize the Church by changing teaching on items the secular left would like the Church to change.”
Well the secular left definitely does not like Putin, so Pope Francis’ careless language which is prima facie interpreted as favorable to Putin is evidence that Pope Francis does indeed speak somewhat carelessly and justifies our defense of his orthodox intent on other matters.
Between comments like these and the recent ecumenical setbacks with several Orthodox churches, the Pope seems lately to be speedrunning an agenda to sabotage relations with our Eastern brethren.
The obvious problem with a call for negotiations with Russia, is simply that Putin cannot be trusted to uphold any agreement that would be reached, even if he were so inclined to enter into honest negotiations, which I think it is safe to say he is not, especially since Russia seems to have some slight momentum going in eastern Ukraine. I think the comparison to the Pope living in a fairy tale land is particularly apt given that he seems to sincerely believe that Putin is a perfectly sane and honest individual that can be counted on to negotiate in good faith.
I get that he wants the fighting to stop so that lives can be spared. There would be nothing morally wrong with the choice to negotiate, if Ukraine was so inclined. But I also think it is a moral choice to continue the fight as they are doing, given that there is a very real, and even likely chance that entering into negotiations at this stage would be self sabotaging for Ukraine. The Ukrainians understand that a strongman like Putin would see a willingness to enter into negotiations as a sign of weakness, and would likely only offer impossible demands in an attempt to make Ukraine look like warmongers (See, look how unreasonable Ukraine is - we offered peace!) Of course most sane people would see through the charade, but others, possibly including Pope Francis, would just use this as more ammunition against Ukraine (remember his comments about NATO "barking at Russia's door"). The Ukrainians realize that entering into negotiations is almost certainly a pointless, no-win situation.
Is it time to consider the possibility that perhaps the Holy Father just isn't that sharp?
I suspect that there are very many people at the Vatican that aren't nearly as sharp as they think they are.
I find it truly astonishing how many within the Catholic community perceive Pope Francis as a mere stumble-prone figure due to his shifts in stance, especially on issues like LGBT blessings and Ukraine's sovereignty. While some may view his approach as erratic, the Pope's discernment reflects a deliberate evolution of thought rather than mere caprice, though often communicated in a Machiavellian manner. A Machiavellian communication style can be confusing but it has proven to be effective when dealing with highly divisive issues like these where one wants to effect attitudinal change incrementally.
Intellectual growth is a hallmark of wisdom. My own perspective on the Ukrainian conflict has shifted. Initially, I anticipated that Allied sanctions on Russia would be decisive, only to witness their limited impact. Similarly, I hoped that Putin, recognizing the broader geopolitical stakes, would seek diplomatic avenues. Yet, reality has proven otherwise. Lives lost. Billions spent. Deadlock.
Recognizing the diminishing appetite for a prolonged proxy conflict with Russia, particularly within the United States, it's evident that a pivot towards resolution is coming. Despite the outcome's implications, the Pope’s foresight is astute. Each life now lost , underscores the urgency of his vision.
As one more eloquent than I would express: “Time's unerring narrative shall vindicate his stance, casting him as a visionary whose foresight will echo through the annals of history.”. Said more simply, the Pope's prescience far outweighs any superficial label of incompetence.
And what in Machiavelli's "The Prince" contains one jot or tittle of the Gospel?
If Our Holy Father was even aware of how all his fumbling, his "yes" meaning "no" and "no" meaning "yes" added to his so called ""prescience" is affecting the Church and the world, he, I'd like to think, would be ashamed.
Between his all but banning of the Old Rite, his shows of vengeance and his love of "shock value" who know what he stands for?
His ministry is to confirm his brothers and sisters in the Faith, not confuse them.
On the anniversary of his election he and the Church need a great deal of prayer.
While the "white flag" language certainly is insensitive and badly phrased; and while legitimate criticism may well be raised against Pope Francis' basic perspective on the war and his counsels in this particular instance; and while I have deeply admired the UGCC's witness and Patriarch Shevchuk's witness for many years, and continue to: it nonetheless has been extremely disconcerting and scandalous to see the episcopate of an entire nation-state not only act consistently in effect as a tool of government war-effort propaganda and recruitment (which while intrinsically dangerous certainly may be said to reflect their recognition of the justice of the Ukrainian cause and closeness to the people of Ukraine), but also in recent weeks categorically and publicly denounce and rule out, in multiple public official pastoral communications, all negotiations between the two parties to the war, and explicitly state that all cessation of this war will be immoral unless and until it involves not only recovery of all lost territory, but also regime change in Russia, a "de-Nazification" process, and punitive and wide-ranging war crimes tribunals analogous to Nuremberg.
While these communications and goals are not unreasonable in the abstract, and while they certainly reflect the trauma of Russia's aggression and genocidal actions and the heightened distrust of all things Russian resulting from it: it is nonetheless important to acknowledge that it is difficult to impossible to imagine any of this happening, especially given the bishops' concomitant acknowledgment of the popularity of Putin and Russian among the general Russian population, without some kind of invasion of Russia and/or a total overthrow of the Russian political system and/or large-scale punitive and coercive action against the Russian people. One may perhaps hope for, but not expect, a miracle from God in a just cause: but I, at least, would have grave doubts about the justice of this cause in practice, or at least the competence and trustworthiness of the Ukrainians in carrying it out. The USA's actual historical record in occupying and collectively punishing with Germany after WW2 is not a good model to follow, and does not fill one with the hope that it might be repeated. Calls for "de-Nazification" are also disconcertingly close to Putin's own propaganda against Ukraine.
This is in effect the difficulty of the situation as it stands between Russia and Ukraine: neither side views the other as at all trustworthy or capable of negotiating in good faith, precisely because both perceive the other as unwilling to settle for any less than revolutionary collapse in the other.
Pope Francis is attempting to walk an extremely difficult line here, with generally poor success. It is understandable and at times reasonable to accuse him of (involuntarily) reflecting Russian propaganda, of being insufficiently condemnatory of Russian aggression (while explicitly condemning it from the beginning), perhaps even and at worst aiding Russian war aims indirectly by calling for negotiations.
But I think it behooves Catholic commentators and clerics to at least *ask* the question of whether it is in the end a more moral stance, a more Christian stance, more in keeping with what we ask for from an episcopate or a Church of God, to invoke the authority of God and the Church to publicly oppose and reject and render impossible all possibility of negotiation or limited reconciliation or more limited war aims or even the temporary cessation of bloody hostilities.
Vrry well put.
Let's say it was your country that was invaded, your fellow citizens raped, tortured, made to flee their homes. What if it was your young people forced to fight for their homeland?
If you cannot see it from this angle and you cannot see that this aggression is totally unjust...well, we live in a very different world and have a very different understanding of ecclesiology.
Bishops and clerics need to be the ones, standing with the faithful, and rejecting the ham handed words of the bishop of Rome.
I have not heard Patriarch Sviatoslav (Eastern hierarchs are called by their title and Christian or monastic name) ask for blood, vengeance or state that this war is a good thing.
I have heard lies and treachery from Putin the Madman and Kyrill the Malevolent.
If one wants to speak about co-opting and using most of an entire nation's hierarchy look to Russia, not Ukraine.
I saw the movie Ryan's Daughter long ago, and one of the comments in it that really struck me was the Irishman saying to the Brit, "Get out of my country," 800 years after the English entered it. The situation in Ukraine strikes me as similar; no matter how long the Russians stay there the Ukraines will continue to revolt to get them out. It would be better to support the Ukrainians now and help them recover their country than see a war that lasts centuries.
I hope somebody has the courage to elect a respectable non-idiot for pope next time around.
". . . Francis’ comments, even allowing for the Vatican’s qualifications, represented a council of despair." It should be "counsel of despair."
True,but most of us got what was meant.
I did too, but only because I recognized the homonym. Using the right word helps your readers, and the Pillar is a careful publication. Or am I just being a pre-Madonna?
“It is regrettable that someone must interpret and clarify the recent words of the pope, this time - Matteo Bruni.”
This entire pontificate has been marred by utter carelessness, unworthy of the Vicar of Christ--a title which, even if eschewed by Pope Francis--is worthy and appropriate. From Day 1 it has been "clean up on Aisle 266!" No matter the subject, Pope Francis has demonstrated an extraordinary recklessness and even malfeasance in his public communications--routinely requiring functionaries and sycophants to "clarify" what he was, apparently, incapable of stating clearly in a manner consistent with the Magisterium of his predecessors, let alone the Gospel of Our Lord (c.f. - Fiducia Supplicans). His egregious and foolish statement regarding the conflict in Ukraine are only the latest evidence of his unworthiness to hold this office. As a faithful, orthodox Catholic, I will NEVER leave the one true Church. Nevertheless, I pray for humility and understanding. Suffering through such an incompetent and heterodox pontificate not only calls for TRUE faith and allegiance--it demands it.
Another embarrassing and ignorant comment upsets the faithful and denigrates the UGCC and the people of Ukraine.