Francis in Cuba

 

From an editorial in the Washington Post:

A Cuban dissident is prevented by securiThe pope is spending four days in a country whose Communist dictatorship has remained unrelenting in its repression of free speech, political dissent and other human rights despite a warming of relations with the Vatican and the United States. Yet by the end of his third day, the pope had said or done absolutely nothing that might discomfit his official hosts.

Pope Francis met with 89-year old Fidel Castro, who holds no office in Cuba, but not with any members of the dissident community — in or outside of prison. According to the Web site 14ymedio.com, two opposition activists were invited to greet the pope at Havana’s cathedral Sunday but were arrested on the way. Dozens of other dissidents were detained when they attempted to attend an open air Mass. They needn’t have bothered: The pope said nothing in his homily about their cause, or even political freedom more generally.

m.5207_pope-john-paul-krakowCare for a contrast? Just look at this picture of Francis’s predecessor, St. John Paul II, embracing Lech Walesea, the leading dissident in Communist Poland. It is possible to reign as supreme pontiff, remaining, fundamentally, above politics — and yet to stand with those fighting for human liberty.

Photo above: AFP/Getty via the Telegraph

Published in General, Religion & Philosophy
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 123 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    I can only assume this editorial is not online.

    • #1
  2. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Don’t you have to meet with the bad guys?   I’ve written about this before –  why did it change?

    Didn’t Roosevelt meet Stalin?  Reagan meet Gorbachev?

    Aren’t there times where you have to grab the bad guy by the lapels, look him in the eye and give him the business?

    It seemed to turn with that picture of a young Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein.  The left used that constantly to say, “See we met with the bad guy, we are the bad guy.”

    After that it became politically unsavory to be seen with a bad guy, lest the media and the left proclaim meeting the bad guy means giving license and acceptance to all that bad guy is and has done.

    Good grief.

    Not talking to the bad guys makes war more likely.

    • #2
  3. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    • #3
  4. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    On every trip?

    Isn’t that what Obama is imposing on the Pope this week (not calling transvestites and gay priests the bad guys, but certainly they are detractors of the Pope).

    • #4
  5. Peter Robinson Contributor
    Peter Robinson
    @PeterRobinson

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    Exactly.

    • #5
  6. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Tommy De Seno:Don’t you have to meet with the bad guys? I’ve written about this before – why did it change?

    Didn’t Roosevelt meet Stalin? Reagan meet Gorbachev?

    Aren’t there times where you have to grab the bad guy by the lapels, look him in the eye and give him the business?

    It seemed to turn with that picture of a young Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein. The left used that constantly to say, “See we met with the bad guy, we are the bad guy.”

    After that it became politically unsavory to be seen with a bad guy, lest the media and the left proclaim meeting the bad guy means giving license and acceptance to all that bad guy is and has done.

    Good grief.

    Not talking to the bad guys makes war more likely.

    Have you seen the picture of them together?  Does that look like lapel grabbing to you???  That was a fellow traveler enjoying a laugh.

    • #6
  7. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Peter Robinson:

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    Exactly.

    You probably would know Peter and I wouldn’t, but did Reagan meet dissenters each time he met Gorbachev?

    • #7
  8. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Concretevol:

    Tommy De Seno:Don’t you have to meet with the bad guys? I’ve written about this before – why did it change?

    Didn’t Roosevelt meet Stalin? Reagan meet Gorbachev?

    Aren’t there times where you have to grab the bad guy by the lapels, look him in the eye and give him the business?

    It seemed to turn with that picture of a young Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein. The left used that constantly to say, “See we met with the bad guy, we are the bad guy.”

    After that it became politically unsavory to be seen with a bad guy, lest the media and the left proclaim meeting the bad guy means giving license and acceptance to all that bad guy is and has done.

    Good grief.

    Not talking to the bad guys makes war more likely.

    Have you seen the picture of them together? Does that look like lapel grabbing to you??? That was a fellow traveler enjoying a laugh.

    Reagan-Gorbachev---resized

    • #8
  9. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Tommy De Seno: Not talking to the bad guys makes war more likely

    War??  Between Cuba and the Catholic church, is that your premise?  This is the definition of a straw man argument.  The pope not glad handing with a communist dictator in no way makes war more likely.

    • #9
  10. Vance Richards Inactive
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Peter Robinson: The pope said nothing in his homily about their cause, or even political freedom more generally.

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    Do we have reason to believe he was “giving them the business”?

    • #10
  11. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Concretevol:

    Tommy De Seno: Not talking to the bad guys makes war more likely

    War?? Between Cuba and the Catholic church, is that your premise? This is the definition of a straw man argument. The pope not glad handing with a communist dictator in no way makes war more likely.

    General principles translate to all or most scenarios.

    I don’t like a policy of not engaging the bad guys.

    Diplomacy is owed first to the soldier.

    • #11
  12. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Apparently the few dissidents that tried to make the Pope’s “homily” (not sure on the term) were arrested on the way there….so there’s that too.

    • #12
  13. Casey Inactive
    Casey
    @Casey

    Have we conservatives really gone this far off the deep end?

    No wonder nobody agrees with us.  No wonder we’ve lost everything.

    • #13
  14. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Vance Richards:

    Peter Robinson: The pope said nothing in his homily about their cause, or even political freedom more generally.

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    Do we have reason to believe he was “giving them the business”?

    This was announced as an apostolic visit.

    He’s preaching.  In a pastoral sense, that could very well be giving Castro the business.

    • #14
  15. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Tommy De Seno:

    Concretevol:

    Tommy De Seno: Not talking to the bad guys makes war more likely

    War?? Between Cuba and the Catholic church, is that your premise? This is the definition of a straw man argument. The pope not glad handing with a communist dictator in no way makes war more likely.

    General principles translate to all or most scenarios.

    I don’t like a policy of not engaging the bad guys.

    Diplomacy is owed first to the soldier.

    I get that I really do.  The Pope however has no soldiers and there is zero chance of war with Cuba so I don’t think it does apply in this case.  Should we talk to China for those very reasons, yes.  Cuba is no threat except to it’s own citizens and the Pope couldn’t be bothered to mention the ones locked in their Gulag.  This is the man that is supposed to be standing up for the poor and needy of the world, not to mention the wrongly imprisoned and tortured.

    • #15
  16. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Casey:Have we conservatives really gone this far off the deep end?

    No wonder nobody agrees with us. No wonder we’ve lost everything.

    How are we off the deep end?

    • #16
  17. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Concretevol:

    Casey:Have we conservatives really gone this far off the deep end?

    No wonder nobody agrees with us. No wonder we’ve lost everything.

    How are we off the deep end?

    Hypocrisy.

    Pope failure to meet dissidents in Cuba – labeled bad thing.

    Pope failure to meet dissidents in White House – labeled as good thing.

    • #17
  18. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Tommy De Seno:

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    On every trip?

    Isn’t that what Obama is imposing on the Pope this week (not calling transvestites and gay priests the bad guys, but certainly they are detractors of the Pope).

    I thought Obama is the bad guy.

    • #18
  19. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Concretevol:

    Tommy De Seno:

    Concretevol:

    Tommy De Seno: Not talking to the bad guys makes war more likely

    War?? Between Cuba and the Catholic church, is that your premise? This is the definition of a straw man argument. The pope not glad handing with a communist dictator in no way makes war more likely.

    General principles translate to all or most scenarios.

    I don’t like a policy of not engaging the bad guys.

    Diplomacy is owed first to the soldier.

    I get that I really do. The Pope however has no soldiers and there is zero chance of war with Cuba so I don’t think it does apply in this case. Should we talk to China for those very reasons, yes. Cuba is no threat except to it’s own citizens and the Pope couldn’t be bothered to mention the ones locked in their Gulag. This is the man that is supposed to be standing up for the poor and needy of the world, not to mention the wrongly imprisoned and tortured.

    Is that like looking the other way while Afghan officers rape boys on our military bases because we’ve not gotten to the point in our diplomacy to tackle cultural differences?

    • #19
  20. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    BrentB67:

    Tommy De Seno:

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    On every trip?

    Isn’t that what Obama is imposing on the Pope this week (not calling transvestites and gay priests the bad guys, but certainly they are detractors of the Pope).

    I thought Obama is the bad guy.

    I concede.

    • #20
  21. Peter Robinson Contributor
    Peter Robinson
    @PeterRobinson

    Tommy De Seno:

    Concretevol:

    Tommy De Seno:Don’t you have to meet with the bad guys? I’ve written about this before – why did it change?

    Didn’t Roosevelt meet Stalin? Reagan meet Gorbachev…?

    Have you seen the picture of them together? Does that look like lapel grabbing to you??? That was a fellow traveler enjoying a laugh.

    Reagan-Gorbachev---resized

    Tommy, if I may, you’re missing the point. The Washington Post editorial doesn’t suggest the pope shouldn’t have visited Cuba, or shouldn’t have visited the Castros while he was there. It suggests he should have demonstrated the importance of human liberty.

    When Reagan visited Moscow he was gracious to Gorbachev personally, but he held important meetings with dissidents. John Paul II? When he visited Poland he met the Communist leaders–but dressed them down and insisted on demonstrating his support for dissidents again and again.

    In Cuba, Francis uttered not a word–not a word–that would have caused the Castros any discomfort or unease whatever. The Washington Post very understandably headlined its editorial, “Pope Francis appeases the Castros in repressive Cuba.”

    The appeasement of a brutal regime–that is the point.

    • #21
  22. Kate Braestrup Member
    Kate Braestrup
    @GrannyDude

    It does seem as though everyone who is willing to take a rhetorical punch at the U.S. will refuse to even raise their voices around a dictator. Possible reasons include:

    a.) They agree with the dictator and all he/she stands for

    b.) They hold the U.S. to a much higher standard, and know we hold ourselves to that same standard

    c.) We’re big and strong and can take criticism, even abuse, from unhappy people; Cuba is small and weak and can’t.*

    d.) Being nice to small, weak, dysfunctional tyrannies is a way of coaxing them to behave as if they were normal countries. Talking to enemies may make them into friends not because you’ve come to understand them differently, let alone been persuaded to their point of view, but because the engagement itself alters their sense of their own relationship to the world. That’s the hope, anyway; we can all point to cases (with embarrassing photographs) of spectacular failures on this score. But Reagan pulled this off with Gorby; cheerfully assert your values, imply that your enemy, deep down, shares those values, get him to at least appear to agree (the photo of Saddam with Rummy is also a photo of Rummy with Saddam) and then call him on the inconsistencies (“tear down this wall.”).

    * (This, incidentally, is my theory as to why police officers doing death notifications occasionally get hit by distraught mourners while I never do; I’m obviously female, unarmed, middle-aged and weak—someone who would hit a big strong cop would never punch a dumpy Mom).

    • #22
  23. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Vance Richards:

    Peter Robinson: The pope said nothing in his homily about their cause, or even political freedom more generally.

    BrentB67:No issue talking to the bad guys and giving them the business, but shouldn’t we meet the good guys also?

    Do we have reason to believe he was “giving them the business”?

    I don’t have any reason to think that, Tommy may have more coherent thoughts on the meeting. I read that Pope Francis gave Castro a book, not sure what it was.

    • #23
  24. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Tommy De Seno:

    Concretevol:

    Casey:Have we conservatives really gone this far off the deep end?

    No wonder nobody agrees with us. No wonder we’ve lost everything.

    How are we off the deep end?

    Hypocrisy.

    Pope failure to meet dissidents in Cuba – labeled bad thing.

    Pope failure to meet dissidents in White House – labeled as good thing.

    We have political dissidents under the threat of arrest in the White House?!  I had no idea.

    I don’t remember labeling anything the pope has done as a good thing so I am free of the hypocrisy charge.  We are specifically criticizing this Cuba visit, how is that going off the deep end?

    • #24
  25. Peter Robinson Contributor
    Peter Robinson
    @PeterRobinson

    genferei:I can only assume this editorial is not online.

    Added the link. Thanks for pointing out the omission.

    • #25
  26. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    We have no way to know what was said in the private meetings between the Pope and Cuban officials. History can give us a glimpse of why the meetings were private.

    When Nancy Pelosi and her family met with Pope Benedict XVI she and her staffers put out the word that the meeting was all sweetness and light. The Vatican had no intention of publicizing what was said until that moment. The Vatican simply reported that there was no official photographer provided to record the event and the discussion concerned abortion.

    During WWII the Polish Primate begged the Vatican to stop talking about Nazi atrocities in Poland. Whether it was Vatican Radio or Pope Pius XII in written statements or speeches criticizing Nazi Germany concerning Poland the reprisals were swift and brutal.

    When Dutch bishops and the Vatican spoke up about the persecution of Jews in Holland the SS immediately started arresting Jews and Jews that had converted to Catholicism and shipped them to Auschwitz.

    • #26
  27. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Peter,

    I am not going to judge the Pope. I think here on Ricochet we have many highly intelligent Catholic voices who’s opinion I will listen to. However, I would ask a question. When does Detente cross the line and become enabling tyranny? WFB answered that question by accepting Detente but not “moral equivalence”. Ronald Reagan embodied that principle with his “Evil Empire” speech. Without firing a shot the Soviet Union fell. How close are we to seeing the Castro regime collapse if the American President took the WFB principle to heart?

    The Pope is coming very close to going over the line to enabling.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #27
  28. Peter Robinson Contributor
    Peter Robinson
    @PeterRobinson

    Doug Watt:We have no way to know what was said in the private meetings between the Pope and Cuban officials. History can give us a glimpse of why the meetings were private.

    When Nancy Pelosi and her family met with Pope Benedict XVI she and her staffers put out the word that the meeting was all sweetness and light. The Vatican had no intention of publicizing what was said until that moment. The Vatican simply reported that there was no official photographer provided to record the event and the discussion concerned abortion.

    During WWII the Polish Primate begged the Vatican to stop talking about Nazi atrocities in Poland. Whether it was Vatican Radio or Pope Pius XII in written statements or speeches criticizing Nazi Germany concerning Poland the reprisals were swift and brutal.

    When Dutch bishops and the Vatican spoke up about the persecution of Jews in Holland the SS immediately started arresting Jews and Jews that had converted to Catholicism and shipped them to Auschwitz.

    You certainly raise valid points, Doug (as you always do). But in the case of Poland and the Netherlands during the Second World War, the pope didn’t visit those countries, meeting smilingly with Nazi leaders as the cameras rolled, and then say nothing as dissidents attempting to attend a papal mass were hauled away. Prudence is one matter, appeasement another.

    • #28
  29. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    According to this report, Pope Francis was going to be the first of the 3 Popes to visit Cuba recently to address dissidents, but for reasons unknown, that ended up not being the case.

    Who are we to blame for that that?  Frank for Fidel?

    Should the Pontiff have cancelled the trip, considering how Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II didn’t meet with dissidents either while there (that last part, I say respectfully, really puts the unreasonableness of this OP’s complaint in perspective).

    • #29
  30. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    BrentB67: I don’t have any reason to think that, Tommy may have more coherent thoughts on the meeting. I read that Pope Francis gave Castro a book, not sure what it was.

    Report on the meeting, which includes the following:

    “Francis gave Castro several of his official papal writings, two books on spirituality and a book and CD on the writings of Father Armando Llorente, a priest who taught Castro in Jesuit prep school more than 70 years ago.”

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.