Skip to comments.Obama behind recent attacks against Pope Benedict
Posted on 03/25/2010 11:33:09 AM PDT by Balt
No doubt youve heard the story about how the Pope refused to defrock (a term not found in the Canon Law of the Catholic Church) a priest who abused 200 deaf children. Its been on television news because it was in the New York Times (remember that network news decides what to cover based on whats in the Times); and, of course, whenever the Times in involved, the truth is hard to find.
The story is actually an old one. The priest in question, Father Lawrence Murphy, abused his victims between 1950 and 1974, while assigned to a school for the deaf. Naturally, none of the stories, including the initial one in the Times, fails to mention that it took Archbishop Rembert Weaklandhimself a notorious homosexual linked to abuse in his own priesthood (a fact ignored in the Times article)until 1996 to ask the Holy See to act against the priest. The Times even suggests that Cardinal Ratzinger failed to reply to two letters by Weakland about the priest, an ascertion for which no proof is offered.
By the time the matter was brought to the attention of the Holy See, the priest in question was already no longer functioning as a priest, but was dying in a hospital. Given the fact that the priests abusing days were clearly over and he would be dead soon, Cardinal Ratzinger decided there was no point to doing anything. The priest died shortly thereafter. From this, the New York Times concludes that The sex abuse scandal enveloping the Catholic Church moved closer to Pope Benedict XVI today.... Naturally, they dont bother to tell us how something they, themselves, covered back in the 90s when it first happened has caused something to move closer to Pope Benedict XVI today; but your PP can: this ancient story was unearthed and rerun as new and current because the Catholic Church needs to be punished for opposing Obamacare.
Lets play devils advocate and say that the Holy See should have defrocked the priest (again I remind you theres no such word in Canon Law), and redundantly removed the priest from active ministrythe most the Church could do to himin spite of the fact that he was already not in active ministry. A couple of weeks after this he would have died (as he did). Then what? Would the scars of abuse from which this priests victims now suffer been healed or mitigated in any way? No. Theyre still abused. They still suffer. Nothing is accomplished.
Ever since his inauguration, President Obama has been working to drive a wedge between Pope Benedict and the Catholic faithful in the United States. The fact that Sister Carol Keehan, President of the Catholic Health Association, which defied the Church in its opposition to Obamacareand which descents against almost all of the moral teachings of the Catholic Churchwas invited to the signing of the health care act and received a pen from Obama, proves it. When viewed in the context of other anti-Catholic activities by the president, such as nominating numerous people to serve as ambassador to the Holy See knowing full well that they would be rejected because they were all lapsed Catholics who were pro-abortion, and personally deciding that Catholic Schools would, for the first time, not be invited to this years White House Eastern Egg Hunt, the pattern becomes clear.
Lets repeat: the story about Father Murphys abuse of deaf children and the Popes response to it is a reprint from an old Times story from the 90s, minimally edited to make it seem new for the purpose of punishing the Church for opposing Obamacare, probably at the request of the president himself.
I’m of course no fan of Obama’s meddling in just about everything. But to say that the Church’s taking action is of no use to the many victims is, I think, wrong. If the Church so wanted to spare a dying perpetrator, then I suggest it could have looked further up its hierarchy to whomever turned the offendingly blind eye.
Article: Obama, Black Liberation Theology, and Karl Marx
May 28, 2008
Just one nugget from the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Instruction on Certain Aspects of the Theology of Liberation': "...it would be illusory and dangerous to ignore the intimate bond which radically unites them liberation theologies), and to accept elements of the Marxist analysis without recognizing its connections with the (Marxist) ideology, or to enter into the practice of the lass-struggle and of its Marxist interpretation while failing to see the kind of totalitarian society to which this process slowly leads."--Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect, now Pope Benedict XVI; written in 1984
Understanding that black liberation theology is Marxism dressed up to look like Christianity helps explain why there is no conflict between Cone's "Christianity" [i.e. 'reverend Wright's thing] and Farrakhan's "Nation of Islam." They are two prophets in the same philosophical (Marxist) pod, merely using different religions as backdrops for their black-power aims.
Type alert: the third sentence of the second paragraph should begin: “Naturally, none of the stories, including the initial one in the Times, bothers to mention....”
"Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal".--James (Jim) Cone,
African American Religious Thought: An Anthology (Paperback)
by Cornel West (Editor), Eddie S. Glaude Jr. (Editor)
SEAN HANNITY: But Reverend Jeremiah Wright is not backing down and has not for years and in his strong stance on the teaching of black liberation theology is nothing new. He had the same things to say last spring when he appeared on "Hannity & Colmes:"
WRIGHT: If you're not going to talk about theology in context, if you're not going to talk about liberation theology that came out of the '60s, systematized black liberation theology that started with Jim Cone in 1968 and the writings of Cone and the writings of Dwight Hopkins and the writings of womynist theologians and Asian theologians and Hispanic theologians, then you can't talk about the black value system.
HANNITY: But I'm a reverend
WRIGHT: Do you know liberation theology, sir?
Obama's Church: Gospel of Hate
Kathy Shaidle, FrontPageMag.com
Monday, April 07, 2008
In March of 2007, FOX News host Sean Hannity had engaged Obamas pastor in a heated interview about his Churchs teachings. For many viewers, the ensuing shouting match was their first exposure to "Black Liberation Theology"...
Like the pro-communist Liberation Theology that swept Central America in the 1980s and was repeatedly condemned by Pope John Paul II, Black Liberation Theology combines warmed-over 1960s vintage Marxism with carefully distorted biblical passages. However, in contrast to traditional Marxism, it emphasizes race rather than class. The Christian notion of "salvation" in the afterlife is superseded by "liberation" on earth, courtesy of the establishment of a socialist utopia.
Catholics for Marx [Liberation Theology]
By Fr. Robert Sirico
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, June 03, 2004
In the days when the Superpowers were locked in a Cold War, Latin America seethed with revolution, and millions lived behind an iron curtain, a group of theologians concocted a novel idea within the history of Christianity. They proposed to combine the teachings of Jesus with the teachings of Marx as a way of justifying violent revolution to overthrow the economics of capitalism.
The Gospels were re-rendered not as doctrine impacting on the human soul but rather as windows into the historical dialectic of class struggle. These "liberation theologians" saw every biblical criticism of the rich as a mandate to expropriate the expropriating owners of capital, and every expression of compassion for the poor as a call for an uprising by the proletarian class of peasants and workers.
Where is the evidence that “Obama is behind recent attacks...”? Is the author just guessing? This the kind of claptrap I expect from the far-left.
Nobama vs Nopopa?
That’s not pugilism... more like anti-christ mud wrestling ala Rage TV and the creators of “Bum Fights”.
Circumstantial. The story has been known for some time. Nothing has changed. Why was it dredged back up now?
Wouldn’t surprise me in the least, and he’d be egged on by his ‘Catholic’ supporters who have never liked Pope Benedict, because they had too many run-ins with him when he was Josef Ratzinger, and was head of the office in charge of making sure Church teachings were being followed.
Who can tell where evil comes from?
It is not only about Obamacare. It is about the Church’s refusal to embrace the whole secular humanist agenda.
No one denies that abuse happened but if people can not see the true motive over articles such as this they need to consider the source.
The NYT promotes and approves of behavior and policy that is harmful to children.
Much more than a little plausible.
I don’t think so - It was an awkward sentence, but I think it is what he meant to say. Read it again.
See, the weird thing was, if they had just backed down on the stupak amendment, the Church would have hopped on board in a New York second. But, they weren’t backing down on anything. They think they have the winning hand and they are going to play it to the hilt. Or die trying.
We do know:
...it took Archbishop Rembert Weaklandhimself a notorious homosexual linked to abuse in his own priesthood (a fact ignored in the Times article)until 1996 to ask the Holy See to act against the priest.
I know Weakland is an old man, but he should be in prison IMO.
Daily Mail headline: 3-28-10
Pope Hits Back as Protesters Call for Him to Step Down.
excerpt: The Pope has been accused of ignoring concerns that American priest Father Lawrence Murphy and German cleric Father Peter Hullerman abused young boy...(also Ireland, Germany and Austria.)
protester sign... Pope protected paedophile priests.
Ironic... America government is funding viagra for paedophiles and rapists.
Two can play at that game, can't they?
Pope Benedict should demand that Obama resign.
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.