5 ms·
I strongly believe the American choice was a strategic decision made by a group of highly intelligent individuals.
by I_am_tiberius 1y ago
I strongly believe the American choice was a strategic decision made by a group of highly intelligent individuals.
- echelon 1y agoTo placate or appeal to the current American leadership? What's the desired outcome? European, NATO, or Ukrainian security guarantees?
- ok_dad 1y agoFrom what I read, the new pope is much like Francis on human rights and political topics, but a bit more conservative about church doctrine. Perhaps it's to have a counterpoint to Trump in America, to show that not all American-born leaders are trash? Time will tell, I suppose.
- awnird 1y ago[flagged]
- wahern 1y agoI wouldn't presume Prevost is more doctrinally conservative than Francis, just because Francis wasn't as liberal as popularly claimed. Rather, American conservative bishops attempted to paint Francis as doctrinally liberal as part of their rhetorical strategy to attack Francis' non-doctrinal liberalism (e.g. on high-profile but non-doctrinal matters related to discipline, liturgy, etc). Similarly, progressive activists chose to interpret Francis' policies as doctrinal shifts, when they weren't. Though it's possible the latter phenomenon was something Francis was content to leave uncorrected. Francis seemed to embrace ambiguity in his pronouncements as a method of rapprochement.
- ok_dad 1y agoThanks, I am not that informed, I don’t know why I even commented.
- vixen99 1y agoHere's an oddity: apparently Noam Chomsky doesn't fully agree with you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmSJnuF7_zg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmSJnuF7_zg
- SirSavary 1y agoWhat relevance, in any way, does this hold to the current discussion? Additionally, Noam refers to Trump's statements from the beginning of the Ukraine war. Trump's position on the matter has done a total 180 since. Why would Noam continue to hold the same view if Trump doesn't?
- register 1y agoTo exert political pressure on the current American leadership by influencing the masses and achieve the objectives of the Catholic Church? Have you forgotten what happened with Wojtyła and Solidarność?
- progbits 1y agoCurrent USA leadership is already taking actions well aligned with the church (such as stripping rights from women, homosexuals).
- lenerdenator 1y agoOn some things. On others, like social safety nets, rights for migrants (particularly those from Latin America where Leo XIV spent a lot of time), and militarism, the RCC and Trump's GOP are at stark odds.
- BirAdam 1y agoWhile the Church is conservative in some ways people dislike it also advocates things like peace, ending capital punishment, and nondescrimination based upon race. In my home city, the Church was the only place that wasn’t racist. For my entire life, the Church has been the only place in America with a majority that didn’t want to bomb poor brown people all over the planet. In modern America, not wanting to bomb people is… umm… foreign to both sides of the political spectrum.
- EasyMark 1y agoMaybe the Roman Catholic Church* is that way. Evangelicals are not. They are for whatever their crazy leaders want, including blowing up brown people whenever they get in the way or cross borders. Also counting fascism as family values.
- grg0 1y agoYeah, peace on their own terms and ideology.
- dathinab 1y ago> What's the desired outcome? European, NATO, or Ukrainian security guarantees? that would be pretty dump to try, I don't think there are any such goles > To placate or appeal to the current American leadership? only we speak about "appealing to them to be more human", "appealing to them to follow christian values", denouncing people which claim to represent christian values in their action which in fact are opposite to what the Roman Church things Christian values are etc. if we speak about directly influencing politics, especially geopolitics that seems very unlikely to be the intend, or doable
- axus 1y agoThey picked an American, who actually lived and worked in Peru, and not archbishop of New York that Trump suggested.
- jsnider3 1y agoIf they want someone who can effectively oppose Trump, why would they pick someone he suggested?
- amelius 1y agoWhat did any pope actually do to oppose anybody?
- niij 1y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investiture_Controversy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investiture_Controversy
- I-M-S 1y agoI believe the question implied "in living memory". Popes notoriously don't directly speak up even against atrocities such as genocides, let alone act on it (with levers that are most certainly in their control, such as excommunications).
- gambiting 1y agoPope John Paul II was a crucial figure in the fall of communism in Poland, even though he never opposed the state directly - just the fact that he was Polish and that the state couldn't censor his speeches and visits and demonstrated to the deeply religious nation that there is a path outside of the the one dictated by the state that is credited with a significant contribution to the forces that eventually led to the events of 1989.
- gitaarik 1y agoDidn't Trump suggest someone from NYC?
- srameshc 1y agoIs it possible that this move is to reinstate Catholicism in the United States, given that Evangelicals appear to be gaining influence?
- defen 1y agoWhat do you mean reinstate? The country was founded by the descendants of people who for the most part hated Catholicism.
- carefulfungi 1y agoYes, but... the Spanish reached present-day New Mexico before the English reached present-day New England.
- defen 1y agoSure, but the Spanish colonization had virtually no impact on the ethnic, political, or religious development of the United States other than some water and land rights in the Southwest.
- carefulfungi 1y agoI suppose like so many historical discussions, it depends on where you draw the starting line. Personally, I find understanding the colonization of the Americas and the emergence of the United States more effectively as a continuum that includes the Spanish, who were the dominate initial "new world" colonial power for a couple hundred years. Not to mention, who actually funded Columbus ;-). I understand this isn't the popular or common place to draw the starting line when reading US history, though. (And maybe not even a good way - just a way that I find personally more interesting.)
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- entropicdrifter 1y ago>Sure, but the Spanish colonization had virtually no impact on the ethnic, political, or religious development of the United States other than some water and land rights in the Southwest. Texas, California, Florida, totally unimportant backwater states, right? No Latin American culture, ethnicity, political or religious influence to speak of.
- rocqua 1y agoMy national news agency (the NOS) reported that this happened despite his nationality, not because of. According to their article, the dislike of most of the world against American happenings made him a less likely candidate.
- I_am_tiberius 1y agoI consider that as very unlikely, as he wasn't on top of the list of favorites. But of course we don't really know.
- cvoss 1y agoThe deliberations of the conclave are secret in perpetuity. It is not possible for your news agency to report on why this candidate was selected. Whatever they said is an outsider's guess.
- disgruntledphd2 1y agoI mean, if the person above is Italian, and live in Rome, they can probably get a much better quality of gossip than you or I.
- gambiting 1y agoI mean, the choice of John Paul II was also a "strategic" choice - he(or simply the fact that he was Polish) was credited with contributing to the toppling of communism and Poland, and in a broader sense with the collapse of the Iron Curtain.