| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 07/14/2007 1:07:11 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
flamewar |
Posted on 07/12/2007 6:25:21 PM PDT by xzins
In an act of jaw-dropping hubris, Pope Benedict Joseph Ratzinger recently declared Protestantism's churches "not true churches." In an effort to underscore the wisdom of such a position at this time, he then had his "document" signed by none other than Cardinal William Levada, a pro-gay, pro-pedophile, pro-molestation cleric hailing recently from San Francisco and Portland. Apparently hypocrisy is in abundant supply in the Vatican larder.
Levada is one of the papal appointments that causes either great puzzlement about (or gives great insight into) this Pope's orientation. Fresh off of scandals in his previous appointments, Levada received one of the Vatican's highest appointments to the post previously held by Benedict himself before his own ascension to the papacy. One of the most powerful positions in all of Catholicism, the Vatican’s “Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith” is Levada's launching pad to spread his peculiar influence to the remainder of the church. He seems just the guy a conservative church leader like Ratzinger would think of when puzzling the question, “Who should I have teach the people about Jesus?”
In having Levada sign this negative document rejecting Protestant churches and ministers, the Pope has displayed either blind incompetence or unbelievable hypocrisy. Others think he simply might not have been sleeping well…..for a long, long, long time.
William Donohue, head of the conservative Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights is on record castigating Cardinal Levada for blaming the female victim who was impregnated by one of Levada's randy underlings. At the time, Levada’s position was that the lady should have used “protection.” (Could Nancy Pelosi have said it better?)
Donohue's take was that the statement was no different than saying 'What's wrong with you, honey, aren't you smart enough to make sure condoms were used?' "
The Los Angeles Times, no conservative paper, had listed Levada among the area's most powerful gay-friendly Catholic leaders.
See links below
Wow, this is brillant too...
“To: xzins; Admin Moderator
It is a lie to refer to Cardinal Levada as a “Sex Molestation Advocate.” The case you site about an adult woman seeking child support from the Portland archdiosese after her sexual relationship with a seminarian has NOTHING to do with “molestation.”
This is reminiscent of the people who stupidly called Bill Clinton a “child molester” because of the age difference between he and Monica Lewinsky, who was a legal adult at the time. You may not like what the Pope has to say about Protestantism (I am not a Catholic, so I couldn’t care less about what the Pope says), but that’s no excuse for lying about the church. Get a grip.
14 posted on 07/12/2007 6:06:26 PM EDT by L.N. Smithee”
Why don't you just leave. There are dozens of Catholic only threads on Free Republic. Why are you hanging out here?
It’s because of this ridiculous effort to conflate “abetting” with “advocating.” The words are not equal, yet the untruthful headline remains.
Then you have “faith” in the RCC which is equal to or greater than your faith in Christ. I have faith in Christ and Christ alone. I do not put my faith in men or their institutions.
lol. I wonder how many times the Jews have been called "paranoid?" It's always easy for the slayer to marginalize and trivialize the resistence of those who are slain.
You say you think things are different now, and yet the painting commemorating the slaughter of Christians during the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre still hangs on the Vatican walls.
Is our concern "paranoia," especially in light of Ratzinger's recent remarks declaring non-Romanist churches to be "defective?" Were the Huguenots "paranoid?"
They were not bring any messages to us, they were with Jesus, our LORD and Saviour.
My reasons are in my posts.
I believe it is a violation of Religion Forum rules to "read one's mind" as you have attempted here.
tick-tock...
Is that an attempt to repress Catholic speech?
I really think you need to go find another thread. Obviously this thread is threatening to you.
I’m happy you are so blessed. Did you say you were married to a Protestant?
LOL!
I have provided you with sufficient links to find your answer. I will not engage in polemics with you.
As to these extraordinary statements you’ve made on this thread, do you intend to substantiate them, or will you leave them unsubstantiated?
When you’ve stopped laughing, perhaps you can answer the question.
Thank you for your concern.
How about that one? Is that an attempt to repress Catholic speech?
No FRiend, the message was that Jesus was Lord because those two prophets appeared with him. Big guys to the Jews that the message was being given to.
Just because it was not spoken or flashed in neon lights, doesn’t mean there wasn’t a message being sent. Kind of kills the whole idea of no messages from the dead.
LOLOL.
"A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight." -- Proverbs 11:1
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.