Posted on 01/16/2015 6:37:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind
“Cannot” means “shouldn’t” in this context, not literal impossibility; I am surprised Harsanyi did not catch on to that, even while disagreeing.
Even the bible warns, however, that things can and sometimes will come to such a pass, indeed that “those who kill you [Christian believers] will think they are doing a service for God.”
It might come across better if this Pope had a better proposal for what to do than morally tut-tutting and launching a silly attempt to establish an ecumenical vision with a religion that can’t (as in impossibility) even acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord. A skilled Pope would be able to point out the advantages offered to all by Jesus Christ, and would not be ashamed to do it. But it has to be more than just “Jesus happens, and just be moral somehow .”
I no longer pay any attention to this man or anything he says. He is irrational. I had a lot of respect for Popes John Paul and Benedict. But this man is as much bad news for the world as John XXIII was bad news for the Catholic Churchin in general.
They don’t say “ God is great” before slaughtering a village, they say say “allah akbar” which addresses satan.
Church leaders should focus on saving souls, not “saving the planet” from fake crisis.
He’s an Argentine Socialist.
Nothing new here...
RE: John XXIII was bad news for the Catholic Churchin in general.
Can you elaborate as to why?
Church vision has never been the same since the church accepted the plea of a newly believing Caesar to help him govern a difficult territory.
This was the stellar opportunity for the church to say the kingdom of God is not the kingdom of earth nor can it be until the Savior returns. They will be tickled to evangelize wherever it is allowed, but will not try to take a land under their wing en masse.
But the church didn’t; it got “practical” i.e. worldly.
This attitude colors the Vatican attitude today. It feels it has to pontificate to the world on how to be a better world. God is not interested in a better world that has no particular evangelical interest. This better world is going to die and be replaced.
I think the Catholic Church GAINED adherents under John Paul and Benedict because they represented and reinforced traditional Christian beliefs: anti-abortionism, sanctity of marriage, rejection of homosexuality, etc, etc. All things which were abandoned by “traditional” Protestantism at that time.
I think the current Pope is a Marxist menace - a dilusional product of “liberation theology”, who will, in the long run, irreparably damage the Catholic Church and Christianity as whole which has always looked to the Catholic Church to help formulate a consensus on group morality.
I agree in part but going too far in that direction borders on Islamic.
Yup. You can take the Priest out of Argentina, but you can’t take the Argentine out of the Priest.
I miss John Paul.
He knew a socialist when he saw one.
Perhaps the Pope’s reservations about Charlie Hedbo stem from the fact that the magazine often skewered Catholicism.
In fact, on one cover, the magazine pictured the figures of the Holy Trinity engaging in anal sex.
Did you see any reports of outraged Catholics trying to murder the staff of Charlie Hedbo?
There is a difference between what is legally permissible, and what should in not be done, in terms of common decency. To ignore that will only result in ever increasing requests for the State to regulate speech, which coincidentally, is exactly what has happened in Western secular democracies over the last several decades.
Self-regulation is the key here, not government intrusion.
You are free to write all kinds of trash. Doesn't mean it's a good idea though. And just because you are free to do so does not mean that I have to buy or read your magazine, or celebrate it.
I agree. But not just Obummer. Socialist, leftists, communists, environazis, islamists... they all must love this pope.
He is also a Muslim "Usefull Idiot". -Tom
The pope is a vain old fool who wants to be loved by the world.
What also disturbed me was that he thought it was cute to suggest punching somebody in response to an insult his mother (and then, of course, he used this to justify the Muslims slaughtering 12 people). I guess he missed the part in the gospels about returning good for evil, turning the other cheek, praying for those that persecute you, etc., etc. And that would certainly mean tolerating or ignoring real or imagined verbal insults.
To have a Christian leader making such statements was appalling.
Roger that. If Obama were Pope, that’s what he’d say and do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.