Early flame war?
I won't give him a pass to be an idiot just because he's the pope. Popes come and go, and there have been lousy popes in the last. This is just another one in the succession of lousy popes.
He's no Benedict, that's for sure.
“Jesuit seminaries either look like ghost towns or gay bars...”
Quite a line!
Indeed, but I am not convinced there is such an agenda. The worst I can say about the Pope is that he is not terribly aware of the condition of American Jesuits. The spectator is being a bit parochial.
Coincidence or plan?
“Just look at the U.S. Congress: it is overflowing with Jesuit graduates who have abandoned the faith and support abortion and gay rights.”
Anybody have a list of these so-called “Jesuit graduates” who now serve in our Congress?
Paul and Peter were members of the same church, weren’t they?
And Peter made the speech.
Ah, but the Pope when speaking on matters of doctrine is supposed to be infallible.
Of course I accept no pope, and this biblical history of the rebuke of Peter illustrates why very well.
Peter was an apostle, a godly man, but not the head of the church. Jesus is head of the church, and needs no ambassador. Jesus is the Mediator between God and man; there is no Mediator between us and the Mediator.
I can’t tell from this article what this pope has done that the author finds objectionable. That is not the quality of writing one tends to find in the American Spectator.
I really don’t think it was Peter’s adherence to Jewish Culture that Paul took issue with, but instead, Peter’s dalliance with Jewish ceremonial law, to the neglect of the Gospel’s message of Salvation through Grace without the works of the law.