Regarding Popes, Dopes And Hopes
Did you see the AI-generated photo Trump posted of himself as pope on his Lying Social Network? In response, the bishops of New York State solemnly said, 'There is nothing clever or funny about this image.' Perhaps, but a body can't help but laugh.
The global media is reporting, with a mock serious tone, that 'the men responsible for picking a new pontiff are enjoying rock-star status in Rome as they prepare for conclave: the secret, centuries-old ritual of electing a leader of the Catholic church that is due to begin on 7 May.'
'Until they are sequestered, it is in the bars and restaurants in the area surrounding the Vatican where the real talking happens, with some mischievous cardinals exploiting the press while they can to leak tidbits or to discredit the main candidates.'
Though the Oscar-nominated movie 'Conclave' has a properly progressive ending, and though its message is irredeemably conflicted as it tries to give relevance to a medieval ritual, it gets one thing right: The conclave is as political as any smoke-filled room.
As was also reported today, 'Luis Antonio Tagle, a reformer from the Philippines and a strong favorite, had a rough ride from conservative cardinals after a video of him singing John Lennon's Imagine emerged on the internet.'
So it's likely that the soon to be beatified Pope Francis, who dubiously represented one small step for the Church (even though he was unable or unwilling to root out the rot of sexual abuse by priests, not to mention condemn the Church's complicity in the Argentinean atrocities during the 1970's), will be replaced by a man who will represent one giant leap backward for humankind.
The lawn signs popping up for Trump for Pope compel the question: Is there any more true holiness in the Catholic Church than there is this putz of a POTUS?
As a boy when the Mass was still in Latin and the priest faced away from the congregation, the mysterious rituals of the Church had their desired effect, producing in my imagination as a child a sense of wonder and grandeur, just as they have in the childlike minds of unaware people over hundreds of years.
And though it was still before Vatican II when I became an altar boy and the rituals remained remote, I saw firsthand that it was all a big show. Now that's all that remains, which is why the headline, 'Rock- Star Cardinals' is so fitting.
The Roman Catholic Church is shot through with darkness and corruption, from its secular power during the Holy Roman Empire, to its vast wealth accumulated over the centuries, to the minimally addressed pedophilia of its priests and abuse by its nuns.
Without doubt, if there was a Second Coming, the first thing Jesus would do would be to disavow any connection with Catholicism and Christianity.
Though the worldwide obsession with one man (the dope or the pope) is understandable given the pathocracy that the USA has become, one cannot lose sight of the fact that America's complete conduit of collective darkness is a product of American socio-political culture.
The darkness in human consciousness is playing for all the marbles. Never in human history has a non-theologized, non-psychologized philosophy of evil been more urgently needed.
People on the right project the darkness within them onto people on the left, whereas people on the left psychologize evil to the point of writing 'evil' with quotes, as if it doesn't exist except in each person's interpretation.
The underlying question is: Can the inward, spiritual dimension can inform and be harmoniously combined with the outward political dimension of human life? Of course, not even the Dalai Lama could sustain that balance, and formally relinquished his political position in 2011 over the Tibetan government in exile.
Taking the word catholic literally, Pope Francis attempted to universalize all religions under the banner of inclusiveness. But he was jesuitical by ignoring the inherent contradiction of simultaneously trying to evangelize Catholicism.
Thus his inclusiveness was a whitewash of exclusive Catholic doctrine, ash heap ideas of sin, and the gilded trappings of institutional power that he left intact for the next pope.
The world desperately needs a true moral conscience, one that is both authentically spiritual in that it eschews power in perpetuity, and effectively political in the sense that declares the sovereignty of humanity, upholds the wholeness and health of the Earth, and prioritizes the needs of the poor and marginalized.
Institutions of the past, whether supposedly spiritual or blatantly political, represent mindsets that are utterly irrelevant to the immense challenges of the present.
Reform, whether of the Catholic Church or the United Nations, is completely secondary to a psychological revolution and the creation of a living global body of dialogue and deliberation.
Martin LeFevre - Meditations
Scoop Contributor
Martin LeFevre is a contemplative and philosopher.
His sui generis 'Meditations' explore spiritual, philosophical and political questions relating to the polycrisis facing humanity.
lefevremartin77@gmail
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
23 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Trump touts ‘done' deal with Beijing on rare earths, Chinese students
US President Donald Trump has touted 'excellent' ties with China, saying the superpowers reached a deal after two days of talks aimed at preserving a truce in their damaging trade war. Trump said on his Truth Social platform that China would supply rare earth minerals and magnets – vital elements
National Business Review
an hour ago
- National Business Review
US-China trade deal ‘done'; Musk says Trump comments went too far
Happy Thursday and welcome to your early morning wrap of the key business and political headlines from around the world. First up, a trade deal between the United States and China is 'done', according to US President Donald Trump. Reuters reports that negotiators from both sides have agreed on a framework to get a fragile trade truce back on track and remove Chinese export restrictions on rare earth minerals and other critical industry components. Trump took to social media to confirm the deal, which is subject to final approval from him and President Xi Jinping. "Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China,' he said on his social media platform Truth Social. 'Likewise, we will provide to China what was agreed to, including Chinese students using our colleges and universities (which has always been good with me!). We are getting a total of 55% tariffs, China is getting 10%." A White House official said the 55% represents the sum of the 10% baseline 'reciprocal' tariff Trump has imposed on most of its trading partners; 20% on all Chinese imports that followed Trump's accusation the country, along with Mexico and Canada, facilitates the flow of fentanyl to the US; and the pre-existing 25% levies on Chinese imports Trump imposed during his first time in the White House. Meanwhile, Wall Street's main indices were down overnight despite the preliminary trade truce and softer-than-expected inflation data. The main indices were between 0.15% and 0.6% lower. The decline comes after a week of consistent gains, with the S&P 500 rising in six of the last seven days. 'Inflation in May was lower than anticipated, suggesting the tariffs aren't having a large immediate impact because companies have been using existing inventories or slowly adjusting prices due to uncertain demand,' Goldman Sachs Asset Management global co-chief investment officer of multi-asset solutions Alexandra Wilson-Elizondo told CNBC. Donald Trump. In other global news, signs are emerging that the worst of the feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump is over. According to the BBC, Musk posted on his social media platform X overnight that he regretted some of the posts he made about the president. 'They went too far.' The two were caught in a war of words last week after the Tesla owner stepped back from his White House role and called Trump's tax bill a 'disgusting abomination'. He also made comments claiming that Trump appears in unreleased government files relating to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In response, Trump said Musk had 'lost his mind' and threatened to cancel his government contracts, which are worth billions. But overnight Trump told the New York Post he was open to reconciliation and there were no 'hard feelings'. Elon Musk. To Gaza, where Al Jazeera reports that the Palestinian death toll has eclipsed 55,000 since the Hamas-led attack in late 2023 killed 1,195 Israelis and foreign nationals. At least 120 Palestinians have been killed and 474 injured in Israeli attacks across Gaza in the past 24 hours, according to the enclave's health ministry. Closer to home, The Australian is reporting that the Pentagon has launched a review into the Aukus partnership to ensure the agreement is aligned with Donald Trump's 'America First' agenda. In a statement to the newspaper, the Pentagon confirmed the review, noting that it was an initiative launched by the previous administration. Under the Aukus arrangement, the US has agreed to provide Australia with between three and five nuclear-powered submarines. But concerns have emerged over whether the US industrial base can meet the target of producing the required 2.33 Virginia-class submarines per year – the rate needed to replace the boats sold to Australia. Australia made the first $500m down payment to the US under the deal in February. The Virginia-class fast-attack submarine USS Minnesota arrives at HMAS Stirling, Western Australia in early 2025. (Source: Wikimedia Commons.) Finally, Brian Wilson, the frontman and co-founder of The Beach Boys, has died at the age of 82, according to the BBC. "We are heartbroken to announce that our beloved father Brian Wilson has passed away," his family said in a statement shared online. "We are at a loss for words right now.' Born in 1942 and raised in Hawthorne, California, Wilson formed a group along with his younger brothers Carl and Dennis, cousin Mike Love and friend Al Jardine. They went on to become one of the country's biggest rock bands, The Beach Boys. Music magazine Rolling Stone ranked them at 12 on the list of the '100 Greatest Artists of All Time'.
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
On The Making Of King Donald
After decades of watching the US prop up dictatorships in Central America, South America and the Middle East, there's a certain irony in seeing authoritarian rule play out on the streets of Los Angeles. No doubt, Donald Trump's deployment of the National Guard - and the US Marines! - to quell what were (initially) peaceful protests against his harsh immigration policies has been deliberately provocative. That's the point. The enemy is whoever opposes him. As for the legal basis for the steps he has taken…Trump's actions appear to violate the terms of the 1807 Insurrection Act, the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, and several sections of the US Code of federal laws. As you might expect, all of these legal mechanisms limit the ability of a US President to deploy US military forces on home soil, as a tool of civilian law enforcement. So far, the White House attitude to these legal guardrails has been…a contemptuous so what? No real surprise about that, either. Last year, the US Supreme Court decision in the Trump v US case - one of the worst rulings the Supreme Court has ever made - gave President Trump the powers of an absolute monarch, by exempting him from the laws that govern the conduct of every other American. When faced with Trump's attempt (a) to prevent the lawful handover of power to the winner of the 2020 election and (b) to hijack the US Constitution, the Court simply caved in: 'The former president is entitled to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his 'conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority.'' Absolute immunity? Meaning : if President Trump calls his criminal actions 'official' then bingo, they become legal. You almost have to feel sorry for Richard Nixon. If only this same licence had been available to him, Nixon would have never had to resign over Watergate. In vain, Nixon argued in a subsequent TV interview with David Frost that 'When the President does it, that means its not illegal.' No one believed him. Yet last year, the Supreme Court conferred those powers on King Donald. No wonder he's using them now in Los Angeles, and elsewhere. In the face of the Trump v US precedent, the threats by California governor Gavin Newsom to sue the President over the deployment of the National Guard in California without reason or invitation, are bound to fail. Moreover, the 1807 Insurrection Act does give the President some limited ability to deploy the military, even without the consent of the state governor. During the civil rights era, presidents Dwight Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy both used the Insurrection Act to justify their sending in of US troops to enforce the country's laws on the de-segregation of schools, despite fierce opposition from the governors of Alabama and Mississippi. It is not as if the Supreme Court stopped at Trump v US. Earlier this year, the Court further extended Trump's powers by granting him the interim authority to fire the heads of independent state agencies (eg the National Labour Relations Board) at will, until such time as lower courts rule on the matter, and until the issue has finally wound its way back up to the Supreme Court. That process will take years. Meanwhile, Trump has been handed unlimited power to fire his opponents in state agencies, and hire his minions in their place. Making the federal government's independent regulatory agencies bend to his will is part of Trump's plan to concentrate all of the effective executive power solely in the White House. In doing so, he will demolish the system of checks and balances that has under-pinned America's democratic political system since the country's inception. Trump's exercise of these powers also pose a threat to global economic stability. Thanks to the same interim authority granted to him by the Supreme Court, there is no legal barrier to stop Trump from firing Jerome Powell (the chair of the US Federal Reserve) without a reason, beyond Trump's desire to make US monetary policies serve his own short-term political interests. Here's why he might do it. As yet, Trump's tariffs have not fed through substantially into higher prices because many US firms are still burning through the inventories on their shelves. That means Powell can't cut interest rates until he sees the full extent of the inflationary spike when US firms like Walmart re-stock over summer, at tariff-inflated prices. Trump is not pleased about the delay, since he will (justifiably) cop the blame from angry consumers. Currently, the market turmoil that the firing of Powell would create seems to be the only thing that's staying Trump's hand. Thankfully….despite the abject complicity of the Supreme Court, not every part of the US legal system is currently bowing to Trump. The US Court of International Trade for instance, hears disputes over trade practices. In late April, as the Brennan Center has pointed out, a panel of three judges - appointed by Presidents Reagan, Obama, and Trump — ruled that most of Trump's tariffs are unlawful. As the Center's Michael Waldman has pointed out, the US Constitution clearly states that only Congress - not a President acting alone - can impose such tariffs : The International Emergency Economic Powers Act provides presidents lots of specific tools — just not this one.A few hours later, another federal judge reached a similar conclusion. However, an appeals court kept the tariffs in place, for now. Inevitably this issue too, will head on back to the US Supreme Court (yikes) for a definitive ruling. Point being, Trump's legal justification for what he is doing is pretty shaky - or would be - if the Supreme Court wasn't enabling Trump to over-ride so many of the precedents set over the past century or more. The three arms of the US political system - Congress, the Presidency and the Courts - are supposed to act as effective balances on each other, along with the legal precedents built on the foundation of the US Constitution. Trump is dismantling that entire system. Unwinding the US Constitution The unwinding of those core US traditions began with the rise of the 'originalists' on the Supreme Court. This legal school of thought - once marginal, and initially championed on the Supreme Court bench by Antonin Scalia - now dominates the reasoning of the six judges (out of nine) who comprise the Court's conservative majority. According to the originalists, judicial decisions need to be grounded in the text and history of the Constitution, as conservatively (or, as they would say, neutrally) interpreted. In practice, this approach has led to a highly selective originalist opposition to many of the laws and precedents ( e.g. the right to abortion enshrined in Roe v Wade, the right of the accused to be informed of their rights enshrined in Miranda v Arizona) that are not explicitly stated in black and white in 1792, in the text of the Constitution. A strict originalist reading would mean that so many modern rights (e.g. to contraception?) can be jettisoned as having been the alleged by-product of years of ad hoc judicial activism. In reality, the originalist justices - e.g. justice Samuel Alito - actively pick and choose what they see as being the founding fathers intention in the text, how they read subsequent history, and what roles for legal precedent they are willing to recognise. (Alito skated around the right to contraception in his Dobbs ruling that scrapped Roe v Wade by simply asserting that abortion is different. Uh, OK.) As even conservative commentators on the Court have pointed out, a division is emerging between the originalist hardliners (Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch) and the two conservative but more moderate judges (Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett). As for Chief Justice John Roberts…he has said publicly that he is not an originalist, although he often sides with the hardliners. It's a moot point, anyway. After all, it was Roberts who (a) opened the floodgates to corporates buying US elections by writing the 2010 Citizens United decision and who (b) took the leading role in the 2013 Shelly County v Holder decision that effectively gutted the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which had been the crowning legislative achievement of the American civil rights era. Those cases have been two of the most socially damaging decisions made by the Court in the modern era, right up there with the overturning of Roe vWade. My point being, the Roberts Supreme Court was already on its sick bed before the Trump era began, but the close and partisan links that Alito and Thomas (in particular) have with the Republican Party (and its major donors) have also severely compromised the Court's credibility. Alito has even flown an upside down flag (a symbol of support for the Jan 6 Capitol rioters) from the porch of his Virginia home. In the face of such partisan behaviour, it's probably naive to expect any kind of moral or legal consistency. Yet even so…how can judges who claim to be originalists wedded to the Founding Fathers' intentions, be so openly supportive of undermining America's system of checks and balances, by handing unbridled power to the Trump presidency? Having the country ruled by an American monarch was exactly what the founders of the American revolution fought so long and hard, against. Closer to home Jerome Powell has not been the only independent central banker to come under political pressure in recent months. The full story about the resignation of RBNZ governor Adrian Orr will probably never be known, but the driving force seems to have been the decision by Finance Minister Nicola Willis to cut the Reserve Bank's operational funding by 25% annually, over the next five year funding period. That reduction amounts to a loss of $50 million annually over that period, down from $200 million in the current financial year. The Bank's capital expenditure would also be restricted to $25.6 million. A raft of OIA-released emails this week has covered the period surrounding Orr's resignation. Having the politicians cut the operational spending of the 'independent' central bank by 25% and freezing it at that level for the next five years certainly looks like the actions of a government hellbent on dealing a significant blow to the bank's fabled independence. Yes, the Bank's operational spending and staffing levels had increased substantially since 2018 - although there is absolutely no reason to regard 2018 as being the gold standard on funding and hiring. True, the RBNZ board had undercut Orr's position by agreeing to swallow the funding cuts that Willis was seeking - but since Orr had been governor during the last few years of an expansion that he strongly endorsed, Willis (and his own board) had placed him in an untenable position. And so, he resigned. Not without a fight though, as the OIA emails indicate. Reportedly, Orr had offered to accept a 16.5% funding cut and lose 100 jobs at the bank. Elsewhere in the de-classified correspondence, Orr gave his reasons for holding the line against the extent of the further cuts being proposed: Orr…. linked a number of concepts which suggest how he came to a view about the funding level the bank of those was operational independence, which he strongly linked with sufficient funding. He said having sufficient funding is necessary for the bank to function effectively, meet its mandate, and maintain the operational independence required to make key decisions. He explicitly mentioned this independence is important for core central bank tasks, specifically monetary policy and prudential settings. So was this a resignation based on principle? Had Orr's exit been engineered in part at least, by a government intent on restricting the central bank's operational funding - and related ability to function independently - for the rest of this decade? We will probably never know. Yet interestingly, Radio New Zealand - which is no stranger to having downwards pressure put on its operational budget - treated the resignation rather differently. RNZ business editor Gyles Beckford for instance, chose to attribute the resignation to Orr's 'somewhat volatile personality' before adding that Orr 'basically, he threw his toys out of the cot.' Nothing to see here folks, move on. From Los Angeles, with love All praise to the late Brian Wilson, and this late-career release was one of his most delicate, intricate compositions and performances: Over the past week, L.A. musician Jessica Pratt and her band have performed in Christchurch, Wellington and Auckland. A reclusive presence on stage, Pratt's voice is so unusual and her music so well constructed that each element - percussion, sax, keyboards - took its turn on stage this week to add fresh colourings to songs that still remained subject to her own vision. From her most recent album, here's Pratt and her band on Stephen Colbert's Late Show, doing a live version of the single ' Life Is.' Note the 1960s 'Be My Baby' style drumbeats that kick the song into motion: While Pratt's music is always intense and personal, her live sets this week also had an airy, floating quality reminiscent of late 1960s Brazilian tropicália. Traces of that movement were already evident on this live track recorded by KEXP back in 2015:
