Skip to comments.Pope Francis Said What?! Actually, No, He didn't
Posted on 09/27/2013 8:39:20 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
That NBC had doctored a 911 call for the purposes of making George Zimmerman look like a bigot was a shocking revelation. Yet cut-and-paste propaganda is a common media tactic, and I'm not sure anyone is victimized by it more than Pope Francis.
You've probably read the headlines. "Pope Francis urges global leaders to end 'tyranny' of money," "Pope Francis's stunning blow to conservatives," "Pope Francis assures atheists: You don't have to believe in God to go to heaven," "Pope Says Church Is 'Obsessed' With Gays, Abortion and Birth Control"; rinse, wash and repeat. Yet these headlines range from delusion to, possibly, deception. By and large, he said, she said is not what the pope said.
Let's start with the recent big news, the Jesuit magazine interview with Pope Francis called that "stunning blow to conservatives." The stunned (and stunted) journalist who wrote that line, the Guardian's Andrew Brown, used a Francis "quotation" prevalent throughout the media. To wit: "It is not necessary to talk about... abortion, gay marriage and [contraception] all the time." Now, it's not surprising Brown didn't provide a link to the actual interview. Because not only is his cut-and-paste job missing an ellipsis (between "and" and "all the time"), it's an elliptical formulation that omits 58 words -- and 58 miles of meaning.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Don’t tell the Protestant FReepers this...
Not every Protestant is low information.
Thank you for this. There are even some on FR who are believing the spew from the media and not looking beyond the liberal inferences of other liberals’ carefully selected and abused “quotes”.
He said, "We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time." He explained that the dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. Instead of focusing on controversial issues all the time, he wants to give primacy to the preaching of the gospel: "A beautiful homily, a genuine sermon must begin with the first proclamation, with the proclamation of salvation. There is nothing more solid, deep and sure than this proclamation. Then you have to do catechesis. Then you can draw even a moral consequence. But the proclamation of the saving love of God comes before moral and religious imperatives. Today sometimes it seems that the opposite order is prevailing."
After reading the words of the Free Republic Anti-Catholic League, it makes you wonder...
It is wide open for interpreatation. Maybe he should try it again, using a little more carefully thought out language.
No it isn't. See Post 6. But he needs to wise up about selective editing.
Yes, we do have our eyes and our ears open.
Doesn't matter...It's been far, far too long...Your pope has been shocking the word for some time now...And with the world-wide repercussions, there has been nary a single rebuttle or defense from your pope...
What we have here is someone trying to cover the pope's tracks, for him...So who do we believe??? The pope or another reporter???
How about the full quote in Post 6? It's from Christianity Today.
Btw, I'm not a Catholic. I just believe in honesty.
I don't believe for a second that your pope is ignorant of the world wide repercussions of his statements...
How is it that not a single news outlet posted the correct translation...Even the Vatican news outlet was shocked and tried to find a way to justify what your pope has been saying, but couldn't...
Now, weeks later, up pops a new version of what he said...
Didn't read the quote from Christianity Today, did you.
How is it that not a single news outlet posted the correct translation.
Are really asking that question? Seriously?
Did you read the article? I don’t think so. The author shows how in some cases the media has flat out LIED about the pope’s statements.
The article also admits that the pope’s instincts probably are modernistic.
Thank you, DJ
The National Director of Priest for Life is not worried about the Pope, why are others?
I happen to agree with the Pope on what i have heard him talk about, some assume that he shares the Marxist view, if that is the case i would not agree on that.
The pope seems to be interested in sharing the gospel rather than making Catholic authority on religion the main issue and i appreciate that.
How far would the Gospel have gone if the Apostles had of just been interested in who had the authority?
Paul may be an exception on this point in his accusation against The apostle Peter.
I hear mans doctrine from both Protestants and Catholic, vague scripture and assumptions that may or may not have anything to do with the subject.
Also i have no doubt that the Christian orthodox church who say they are the Church that descends directly from the early Church also has some man made doctrine.
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.