Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaggy001
Nah .. this one was too busy sucking up to the military junta while it was kidnapping torturing and murdering ordinary people.
|
Perhaps at least for the sake of balance it is important to put this particular allegation into context and note that it is not the majority view in Argentina that portrays the Pope as some kind of lapdog ghoul who gleefully lapped up the junta's atrocities with relish. Especially as neutral observers who were there at the time for the most part do not see Pope Francis in any way complicit of the horrors of the junta period.
Ronald Reagan should be far more ashamed of this era as should Margaret Thatcher who ignored and refused to condemn similar atrocities on a far more barbaric scale taking place in Chile. Thatcher and Reagan were happy to support and cosy up to the monstrous fascist dictator General Pinochet despite intimate knowledge which was widely known of his sickening reign of murder, mayhem, terror and horrific human rights violations in Chile.
As for the Pope well he was in a very difficult position. I think this balanced perspective from Nobel Peace Prize winning Adolfo Perez Esquivel (human rights activist and pacifist) may be a more reasonable estimation of the Pope during this period:-
New pope's role during Argentina's military era disputed | World news | The Guardian
'Adolfo Perez Esquivel, who won the 1980 Nobel peace prize for documenting the junta's atrocities, takes a similar view. "Perhaps he didn't have the courage of other priests, but he never collaborated with the dictatorship," he told the Associated Press. "Bergoglio was no accomplice of the dictatorship. He can't be accused of that." The vast majority of Argentinians view the dictatorship era as appalling.
It's very easy to be a crusader from afar, but such situations are rarely black and white for those caught in the midst of them. It's also very easy to judge from the comfort and prism of a country that would have undoubtedly been an avid supporter of the junta regime had it not been for the Falklands dispute.
Criticism of the Catholic Church should remain on the issues where it has severely failed and fallen behind shifting tides of public opinion. I accept the Church will probably always remain a socially conservative institution but this doesn't mean it should be immune from criticism. There is much to be critical about at this moment in time and the Catholic Church has suffered as a result of a radical lurch to the conservative right during the 20th Century.
I don't think the issue of the Falklands Islands is a big issue for the Pope. The Pope and the Argentine PM Kirchner will spend far more time at odds with each other as they sit on opposing ends of the political spectrum, especially on social reform. They will certainly disagree on far more than they agree so it is important to remember that.
Even if the Pope were to come out in support of Argentina's claim to the Falklands he would only be representing the majority opinion in not just Argentina but the continent as a whole. It may play as a tabloid bug-bear here but it wouldn't impact on opinion at all outside the UK. Even inside the impact such a statement would have would be minimal.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
