Forums

Being American, it was almost predestined to happen. After the praise and adulation for an American Pope, now come the recriminations against the Church. No matter that Pope Leo might have had nothing to do with the abuses and the diatribes against homosexuality and abortion, for example, he cannot escape them. He was after all not always based in Peru as some of the media seem to have suggested. He received his Masters Degree in Chicago in 1982. Only part of his time thereafter was spent as a missionary in Peru. He returned full time to Chicago in 1999 for 15 years before going back to Peru as Bishop of Chiclayo. Pope Francis brought him to Rome in 2023 to assume the presidency of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America. One who does not like Leo is Trump's pal Steve Bannen. "He's the worst pick for MAGA Catholics!" Which problably shoots him way up the rankings in most of the rest of the world! Laura Loomer, the far-right American conspiracy theorist and general nut case, accuses him of being "anti-Trump, anti-MAGA, pro open borders and a total marxist like Pope Francis." Another ringing endorsement sure to please most!  More seriously, though, he will have to deal some of the scandals which happened more or less under his watch. What we know so far is that he is regarded as a moderate, although one more open to dialogue that perhaps his predecessor was. He is passionate about helping migrants and the poor, about climate change. On the still pressing matter of sexual abuse, he faces some difficulty. Survivors and advocacy groups claim that he failed to act on serious child abuse claims. The abuse is alleged to have happened during his tenure in both Chicago and Peru. The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) and other advocacy groups have expressed deep concern over Leo's past handling of cases. SNAP had given evidence to the cardinals who entered the Conclave about his alleged inaction. “This person will be scrutinized from left to right. That’s helpful for victims everywhere because we have this pope who will be under the public eye in terms of things he was involved with in the past,” said Lopez de Casas, himself a victim of abuse. He added, “Staying silent is a sin. It’s not what God wants us to do." In the early 2000s, he allegedly permitted a priest suspended as a result of serious abuse charges to stay in a Friary close to an elementary Catholic parish school. Despite alarm among school officials, the priest remained there for 2 years.  According to reports Leo did not inform the school. Later in Peru he was allegedly notified of allegations of serious abuse by two priests but failed to take any action. Although the two young sisters involved spoke directly to Leo in April 2022, the case was dropped for lack of evidence and expiry of the statute of limitations. Then there is Leo's position on homosexuality. Pope Francis did probably as much as he could do to welcome LGBTQ members into the Church's community. He stated it was not up to him to judge a person's sexuality. Leo has not gone nearly as far. In a 2012 Address to Bishops, he said he was pained that Western media and society created "sympathy for beliefs and practices that are at odds with the gospel," citing "homosexual lifestyle" and "alternative families comprised of same-sex partners and their adopted children." While serving as a bishop in Peru, Prevost opposed government plans to add teachings about gender in school, calling "the promotion of gender ideology...confusing" since they "create genders that don't exist," according to the New York Times. I suspect Pope Francis' views were formed long before his election. Might Leo's views have changed? We will no doubt discover eventually. https://www.yahoo.com/news/pope-leo-xiv-accused-ignoring-133056079.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall https://people.com/where-does-pope-leo-xiv-stand-lgbtq-issues-what-we-know-11731335

He enjoys the shoving.

Not true! You even parrot back to us the Kremlin PR that you have read.

Never mind the hyperbole of your post, and the wildly inaccurate use of the word genocide. I could chide you for the Russian imperialism in the Caucasus which was a violent, calculated, and deeply transformative process that reshaped the region’s political, cultural, and demographic realities. It combined military aggression with ideological pretence, drawing heavily on both pragmatic geopolitical aims and a self-righteous narrative of civilisation. The legacies of this imperialism—displacement, trauma, ethnic tension, and resistance—remain highly relevant to the region’s politics to this day. I don’t overly moralize about this. Russia acted like one imperial power among many. The Poles rightly recognised the continuity of this imperialism under Bolshevik rule even though the ideological garbs were new. It more accurately describes what US foreign aid is being transformed into. The purpose of having a relatively independent USAID was to keep direct political meddling at an arm lengths distance and keep the development focus (termed globalism by its detractors). Many other western countries have rolled back this model and subsumed their aid agencies directly under their foreign ministries. In that model aid becomes instrumentalised and transactional. 

Yeah, thank you. Good people didn't do this job🤣