Trump not Christian says Pope

 

The New York Times reports…

“Supporters of Donald J. Trump were quick to suggest on Thursday that Pope Francis was being hypocritical to criticize as un-Christian Mr. Trump’s proposal to build a wall between the United States and Mexico because the pontiff himself lives in Vatican City, a small state with sturdy walls of its own.

“Amazing comments from the pope — considering Vatican City is 100% surrounded by massive walls,” Dan Scavino, Mr. Trump’s social media director and senior adviser, said on Twitter after the pope suggested Mr. Trump, a Republican presidential candidate, was “not Christian.”

Mr. Scavino tweeted a picture of Vatican City with an outline around its border that suggested walls stood on some territory where no walls, in fact, stand.

 

 

Similar criticisms could be found on news media outlets like Fox News and T.M.Z. Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman turned MSNBC host, posted on Twitter a picture of a looming stone wall Thursday with the remark, “Pope Francis, tear down that wall!”

 

 

But scholars who study Medieval Italy and the history of the Roman Catholic Church dismissed those criticisms as the product of a basic misunderstanding of both the geography and the history of Vatican City, a roughly 100-acre enclave in Rome that is the seat of the Holy See.

“The rhetoric from Trump’s team is misinformation, and it is not true,” said Gerard Mannion, a professor of Catholic Studies at Georgetown University in Washington.

“It isn’t all surrounded by walls, and it’s not like you need a separate visa or a passport to enter,” he said. “You wouldn’t know, almost, when you even entered Vatican City. There is a white line painted on the ground in St. Peter’s Square, but that kind of thing is not obvious everywhere.”

There are, to be sure, formidable walls in Vatican City, and much of of the site, including the gardens and the modest guesthouse that is home to Francis, is set behind them. But the walls do not entirely enclose the city-state, and in the modern era they are not meant to, historians said.

“Anybody can walk into St. Peter’s Square — that’s the whole point of it,” said Dr. Mannion. “It was designed to be welcoming and to draw people in like two open arms, to draw them into the heart of the church.”

Some of the walls in Vatican City were built in the ninth century by Pope Leo IV in an attempt to protect it from attacks by pirates and other marauders, historians said. But other stretches of wall were built during the 15th and 16th centuries, Dr. Mannion said, less as a defensive measure and more as “a political and cultural statement” about the cultural and political power of the pope.

Today, the public can freely enter some parts of Vatican City, including St. Peter’s Basilica, St. Peter’s Square and the Vatican Museum (which charges for the price of a ticket). Those areas receive millions of visitors each year who are able to enter and exit the tiny city-state as they wish.

Areas of the Vatican that are involved in the day-to-day governance of the church or that house officials, like the pope himself, are more difficult to gain access to, said Diane Apostolos-Cappadona, also a Catholic studies professor at Georgetown.

“That’s the same as any government structure in the world,” she said. “You can’t just walk into the White House.”

Gaining access to some parts of the Vatican, such as the library or the archives, is more complicated than just strolling into St. Peter’s Square. But the process does not appear to be too cumbersome.

Ken Pennington, a professor of medieval history at the Catholic University of America, in Washington, said his research on canon law had brought him into the Vatican many times over the past four decades.

Visitors must show some form of identification to a guard and explain the purpose of their visit, he said, but if they have a library card from the Vatican Library, they can use that to gain entry, too.

“When I am there I show the guards my library card and they let me right in,” he said. “It’s the only place in the world where a library card gets you into a country.”

Walls like those found in some parts of the Vatican were a fixture in almost every significant city of the medieval period, including London, Paris and Jerusalem, said Professr Apostolos-Cappadona.

“The walls are a fortification, there is no question, but they were a fortification built at a time when armed invasions by barbarians and other forces were happening,” she said. “And that is not the same thing we are talking about with a wall between the U.S. and Mexico.”

From http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/world/europe/in-defense-of-trump-some-point-wrongly-to-vatican-walls.html?_r=0

 

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “Trump not Christian says Pope

  1. You dummies have been lapping up the news from the corrupt totally biased liberal media.
    Here’s a recap!

    Yes read Wazza!!!

    1. Trump couldn’t win election -he won!
    2. Trump colluded with Russia – Debunked by Comey
    3. Obstruction of justice by Trump – debunked by Comey
    4. Trump with prostitutes in Russia – debunked
    5. Trump under investigation – Comey denies.
    6. Trump soon to be impeached ? Lol please hold your breaths!!! Please!

    Hours, days, weeks of coverage have been used to rile up you knucklehead liberals .

    On the other hand ….
    Comey gets told by Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch to say Hillary’s investigation is a matter and COMPLIES!!!

    Comey LEAKS information to press via a friend..,,

    You FOOLS woken up yet???
    No???

    Re-think your news sources at least!

    See a lot of you think you were brainwashed in Charismatic mega churches.

    JUST THINK FOR YOURSELVES!

    Now you’ve just replaced your senior pastor with leftist journalists and ignorant late night comedians and Madonna.

    Think.

    I wish the Bundaberg Boofhead were here because he would have been delighting over Comey – and he would have been humiliated again.

    No wonder he’s just retreated to his den .

    Like

  2. “When you were a child, Q, were you afraid of the tickly monster?”

    No.

    ” were you afraid at all?”

    No.

    Sing along now,

    No,

    “”I’m not afraid of the Muslim terrorist”

    Correct

    “I’m not afraid at all.”
    Amen

    “And he goes bang, bang, …”

    Yes they do. Bang bang bang Allahu Akbar bomb bomb bomb allahu akbar slash slash allahu akbar slash

    But we can defeat them. That is if uninformed, unintelligent, cowardly, liberals start seeing reality.

    Keep singing to yourself.

    Like

  3. When you were a child, Q, were you afraid of the tickly monster, were you afraid at all?

    Sing along now,

    “I’m not afraid of the Muslim terrorist
    I’m not afraid at all.
    And he goes bang, bang, …”

    Like

  4. No. Liberal theology is just a front for people who have no brains and no faith.

    Re Trump / some advice from Poland.

    The only way to protect Poland from Islamic terror attacks is to not allow Muslims to migrate en masse, a British-born, senior MEP for the nation’s ruling party said on Monday.
    “When it comes to reducing the chances of Poland being hit by [Islamist] terror attacks, the only proven method is to not allow in Muslim migrants,” Ryszard Czarnecki told local radio after an attack in London on Saturday killed seven and injured at least 48 others.

    Noting the children of Islamic immigrants have been responsible for a large number of ISIS-inspired attacks on European soil, the London-born Law and Justice (PiS) MEP said Poland is “learning from the mistakes” of other nations in the West, and so refuses to “open [its] doors to Islamic migrants.”

    Asked whether he thinks the politicians running Poland have any good advice on how to avoid terrorism for Britain, which has experienced three Jihadist attacks in three months, and other countries in Western Europe, Czarnecki said the country has “a very specific concept — no Islamic immigrants.

    …………..

    Common sense really.

    Facts and logic girls.
    The truth shall set you free!

    Like

  5. Trump not Christian?
    Terrorists not Muslim?
    The peaceful 30’000 fictitious marchers linked by Greg aren’t considered Muslims by the other Muslims …..
    Confusing isn’t it.

    “ONE of the London Bridge terrorists was a known Islamist who had been reported to police several times for his extremist views.

    The 27-year-old known as “Abz’’ is believed to have been born in Pakistan but raised in Britain and was apparently radicalised by watching YouTube videos of the Arab-American hate preacher Ahmad Musa Jibril.

    On Saturday night, Abz and two other jihadists launched a deadly attack with a car and a knife, killing seven people and wounding 48 more in a rampage through London Bridge and the Borough Market.”

    Islamist???
    Was that journalist allowed to say that?
    Everyone thought this guy was a Muslim???

    Luckily we have a Newcastle Anglican priest who knows who’ve everyone is…..

    Wait? Maybe Greg isn’t really an Anglican ??
    I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

    Like

  6. “POLICE are investigating possible terror links to a siege in which police gunned down one man and found another dead in Melbourne’s southeast.

    Police shot dead a gunman, a second man was found dead in the foyer of an apartment building in Brighton and three cops sustained gunshot wounds in the bloody hostage drama.

    The Herald Sun can confirm the gunmen is known to counter-terrorism police.

    A male caller to the Channel 7 newsroom in Melbourne said: “This is for IS” and “this is for Al-Qaeda.” The station said a woman could be heard screaming in the background.”

    Yeah I know what you’ll say Greg.
    Islam is great, Muslims are nice, Trump is evil, there was lightning in Melbourne today too, and well after all, Margaret Court is the real problem in Australia.

    Getting tired.

    Like

  7. This is what I tried to post, but original had too many links in it and went into meltdown
    June 5, 2017 at 2:33 pm
    Trump was terrorized by the London attack, while Britain stood firm

    On Saturday night, terror again struck Britain’s capital. At least seven people are dead and dozens hospitalized after assailants in a van barreled into pedestrians on London Bridge and then embarked on a stabbing rampage at a nearby market crammed with restaurants, bars and tourists. They were shot dead by police within eight minutes of the first emergency call.

    Authorities said the incident was being investigated as a terrorism attack and eyewitness accounts suggested the attackers were Muslim, making it the third deadly event carried out by Islamist extremists on British soil in as many months.

    What followed was the tragically familiar loop of condemnations and appeals for calm by major British politicians. But then there was President Trump.

    While spending the weekend at a golf course for the 16th time in his presidency, Trump first retweeted a report from the right-wing Drudge Report on suspected casualty numbers — before British authorities had even confirmed the details of the incident. Then he issued a series of conspicuous — and to some, infuriating — tweets Saturday evening and Sunday morning.

    Let’s take these one at a time.

    Before even issuing a message of condolence, Trump sought to use death in London to justify his controversial travel ban on people from several Muslim-majority countries. Two versions of Trump’s executive order have been stymied by federal courts and widely criticized by counterterrorism experts, who argue that the ban does nothing to address homegrown threats while dangerously stigmatizing entire communities. At best, it seemed a questionable matter to raise while the United States’ closest historic ally was still counting the dead.
    Trump returned to his old hobbyhorse of “political correctness.” Trump built his brand on saying supposedly unvarnished truths (or racist lies) to an American public he claimed was sick and tired of liberal niceties. “Getting smart” for Trump and his fellow travelers is a vague dog whistle for a more blunt message: Muslims are the problem, and we need to wise up to the threat. Curiously, such tough talk was nowhere on show when Trump toured Saudi Arabia last month.
    (In a statement, British Prime Minister Theresa May said there was “far too much tolerance for extremism in our country,” although it was unclear what steps May, who served as home secretary for six years, may take. Her critics, including Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, pointed to the British government’s close ties to the Saudis and Gulf states that “have funded and fueled extremist ideology.”)
    Trump then resumed his running feud with London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who is Muslim. In this instance, he twisted Khan’s message — in which the mayor urged residents to not be alarmed over a surge in police forces deployed across his city — to somehow suggest Khan was not taking the attack seriously.
    Lastly, Trump tried to score a bizarre point about gun control, but misfired. Were British gun laws as lax as those in the United States, one shudders to think how much potentially worse Saturday’s attack could have been. Moreover, it’s an odd thing to emphasize given that it took Trump three whole days to react to knife-wielding terrorism in his own country after a Trump-supporting white nationalist fatally stabbed two men on a Portland train.
    “A traditional president would have reacted carefully to the London Bridge terrorist attack by instilling calm, being judicious about facts and appealing to the country’s better angels,” wrote Philip Rucker, The Washington Post’s White House bureau chief. But Trump, Rucker added, “reacted impulsively to Saturday night’s carnage by stoking panic and fear, being indiscreet with details of the event and capitalizing on it to advocate for one of his more polarizing policies and to advance a personal feud.”

    The American Embassy in London went out of its way to praise Khan in a series of its own tweets, while a spokesman for the mayor dismissed Trump’s comments, saying that Khan “has more important things to do than respond to Donald Trump’s ill-informed tweet that deliberately takes out of context his remarks.”

    Commentators back home expressed outrage and embarrassment.

    “This is vintage Trump — impulsive and cruel, without an ounce of class or human decency,” The Post’s conservative columnist Jennifer Rubin wrote in a scathing attack on the president. “His behavior no longer surprises us, but it should offend and disturb us, first, that he remains the face and voice of America in the world and, second, that his fans hoot and holler, seeing this as inconsequential or acceptable conduct.”

    Rubin’s second point — that there is an audience for Trump’s fear-mongering — is all the more alarming when you consider the actual conversation about mass deportations and Muslim internment camps happening among some right-wingers in both Britain and the United States. Well before Trump was elected, experts on extremist groups feared his brand of politics would play into the hands of the jihadists. We’re getting closer to a moment where we may be able to measure whether that’s true.

    Nevertheless, the real story about Trump’s messaging is how it was almost totally at odds with Britain’s national mood in the wake of the attack. As Trump appealed to fear and division, Britons showed humor, defiance and unity.

    They saw the funny side of tragedy: An image of one man fleeing the scene of the attack with a full pint in his hand went viral.

    And they celebrated at a powerful and optimistic concert in Manchester, where American pop star Ariana Grande headlined just weeks after her earlier show was struck by a suicide bomber. Her poise and compassion offered a stark contrast to the American president tweeting fearfully at home.

    • President Trump is not alone in taking opportunistic, unfair potshots at London Mayor Sadiq Khan. The far-right in Britain and elsewhere still harp on an earlier statement where Khan said terror threats were “part and parcel” of urban life, but in the same breath called for tighter policing and greater vigilance. As I wrote last year, Khan, as the first Muslim mayor of one the world’s most cosmopolitan cities, is anathema to Trump’s anti-globalist, ultra-nationalist worldview and a target of far-right ire. Khan has loudly denounced the perceived xenophobia of Trump and his Islamophobic counterparts in Britain, defended the politics of multiculturalism and inclusion and championed — alongside other mayors of major cities — the fight against climate change.

    Like

  8. The Pope doesn’t say that now.
    They had a great meeting.
    Melania is Catholic.

    If you are going to post an unsmiling Pope photo, I can post smiling ones.
    And I can post another sad face when he’s with the Canadian PM.

    Although I can see you didn’t actually have anything here..

    Nothing more to say?

    Finally!!

    Like

  9. Isn’t it against protocol for a head of state to comment on another country’s internal politics? When the pope does that he’s not a Catholic.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s