If you’re not reading Abbey Roads, you ought to be. Terry Nelson’s some kind of brilliant.
“He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.”
The problem with the Pope – really?
Why do they attribute some sort of strategy behind the Holy Father’s response to journalist’s questions? His answers are matter of fact – simple, clear, understandable. He knows exactly what he is doing and saying – but I seriously doubt he’s playing war games with journalists. I also do not think the Holy Father needs handlers to censor him.
Yet EWTN spokesman Raymond Arroyo seems to think the Holy Father needs handlers, that he needs distancing from speaking directly to people – lest he be misinterpreted.
“The entire episode reminds us that papal handlers do have their place. As cumbersome as they are, and as much as they distance the pontiff from his people, handlers can protect the Pope from this sort of misinterpretation. Off the cuff, vigorous expressions have their place, but so do unambiguous, vetted statements—especially when dealing with a media unversed in Church teaching.”
Likewise, others express worry – ‘concern’ over how the MSM and dissidents will misinterpret what the Pope said, and most especially, what he meant. Just about everyone from self-appointed apologist-theologians with their own brand of online tenure and EWTN sponsorship, to Cardinals and bishops bend over backwards to clarify that the Pope’s words were somehow impossible for ordinary people to understand without a clear understanding of what the catechism teaches. They claim the Pope speaking in ordinary language is a “problem” – because his words may be hi-jacked by the enemy.
Don’t cry for me Argentina.
I commented on a post a few days ago and said I doubt the Pope sees others as enemies. I also doubt he needs handlers. He’s from Argentina people. He lived through some pretty gruesome history and his life was anything but comfortable. He knows how words are twisted, how propaganda works against the Church. People are concerned about what and how the Pope speaks? That’s absurd. Who do you think you are?
You want to censor the Pope? You want handlers to keep him distant from the people? You are afraid that he will be misinterpreted? That’s totally hypocritical. That’s like Peter remonstrating with Christ, trying to hold him back, saying he shouldn’t have to suffer, he should avoid the cross. Christ whipped around and said, ‘get behind me Satan’. The Gospel story should be sufficient to put us in our place.
The Pope said what he said. Stop trying to speak for him.
Every Pope has said things and has done things that have been twisted to suit agendas. How is that our concern? Why do we think we have to worry about how the Pope’s words are perceived? Haven’t we lived through misinterpretation of actual documents of Vatican II? What about St. JPII kissing the Koran? How about Benedict’s condom statement? It is not long ago pious pundits were worried Benedict wasn’t allowed to do what he wanted, that his desires were not being met – handlers/bureaucrats were holding things up. (Seriously – do you people talk and write so much you no longer remember what you say?)
There’s more to his post. I encourage you to read the whole thing.
The answer to his title-posed-as-question? Otherwise they’d have no reason to blog.
Terry encapsulates what I’ve been feeling the past few days, perhaps even the past few weeks, when it comes to people parsing the Pope. Seems like everybody has their own stinking opinion on what the Pope says, what it means, what he possibly couldn’t have meant, how he’s “using” the media, how the media is taking advantage of him, how he’s squelching this thing or that other thing, how he’s promulgating that thing or this other thing, how he’s so humble, how he’s so frustrating, how “conservatives” hate him, how “liberals” love him, how “traditionalists” fear him, everyone thinking everything and letting everyone know about it.
Noise. Unfiltered, space-chewing, opinionated, unending noise. From faithful Catholics – wanting to be heard, and yet saying nothing worth hearing. More people ought to be listening to the Pope rather than interpreting him. He’s really not that difficult to understand.
People can’t shut up long enough to hear themselves think – and like Terry wrote: “Seriously – do you people talk and write so much you no longer remember what you say?”
I’ve been reading fewer and fewer Catholic blogs as of late. So many say the same thing, most say nothing at all. They populate their pages with posts of pablum in order to meet a deadline, generate traffic or cause a stir. All at once, most of the time. The Internet needs more prophets and a hell of a lot fewer pundits.
There is little New Evangelization going on throughout the Internet – not from the blogs, leastwise. Rather than reflecting on what the Holy Father has been saying, many have been pontificating about it. I can see why Christ only chose 12 Apostles. If there were any more, even He wouldn’t have been able to hear Himself.