Magister eloquently states my case. I don't trust Francis and I feel a real sense of loss when I compare Francis' comments to Eugenio Scalfari with Benedit's written response to the atheist Piergiorgio Odifreddi that begins..."What you say about the figure of Jesus is not worthy of you as a scholar".
odifreddi could in no way conclude that Benedict was anything but a fully orthodox believer and Teacher of the Faith. But Scalfari wrote about his conversations with Francis..."his mission contains two scandalous innovations: the poor Church of Francis, the horizontal Church of Martini. And a third: a God who does not judge but forgives. There is no damnation, there is no hell."
posted on 10/03/2013 6:54:28 AM PDT
I am uneasy with Francis so far. He says things like (paraphrasing) "well of course the church position is clear on this and I am in conformance. But...." and then he goes on to say some fairly radical things. Like there are no real moral boundaries, each person has their own code and as long as they live within their personal code, that's good enough. What? So faith isn't important in any way? Adherence to the commandments isn't important? He comes across as at best ambivalent about the big issues the church championed over the past 25 years (pro-life, for example) because while to him it is a sin, he feels that he has no right to judge it.
If the Church offers no moral boundaries, no standards, and faith isn't important then really, what's the point if the Church?
posted on 10/03/2013 7:57:01 AM PDT
(Who is John Galt?)
It must be noted that in the previous conclave when Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope, Cardinal Bergoglio received the support of Martini’s liberal faction against Benedict XVI.
posted on 10/04/2013 9:34:10 PM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson