Posted on 01/23/2014 4:54:43 PM PST by ebb tide
While some of the media’s claims about Francis are excessive, at least one is dismayingly real, one which Coppen never allows: that Francis is more liberal than his predecessors. Indeed, not a week passes without some new papal statement or action to puzzle conservatives and embolden liberals.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
What do you mean by you think you read the book? Did you or didn’t you? Do you remember Francis urging Skorka to convert to Catholicism in the book? If you do, you’re mistaken.
I mean that I read a lot of books, and they don't all stick in my mind. It's not unknown for me to check out a book, start reading, and realize partway through that I've read it before.
I'm not a young woman.
You are absolutely right.
American Spectator is liberal media? You have not addressed one point in the posted article; you have just posted your own personal opinions about Fantasy Francis, regardless of the facts in the article.
Unfortunately he was replaced by Wuerl in the Congregation of Bishops.
I'm really disappointed that you would ask such a question. Do you think St. Stephen, the first martyr, and Caiphas were in the same relationship the one "God"?
When a Spectator contributor collects several snippets from the liberal media and thus behave in the same manner as the liberal media, they turn the vehicle that publishes their material into a de-facto liberal media outlet, do they not? That therefore is the problem with uninformed editorializing. (Of course, some people would never imagine that Fox News turned liberal, but they absolutely did.)
One typical example is the “who am I to judge” quote taken out of context all the time w.r.t. homosexuals. That was uttered in the context of homosexuals repenting of their behavior; it’s not hard to find online.
Relativism run riot.
That’s informative, thanks.
You equating Caiaphas with all of the Jewish religion and Jews that subscribe thereof?
“There is a phrase from the Second Vatican Council that is essential: it says that God showed Himself to all men and rescues, first of all, the Chosen People. Since God is faithful to his Promise, He did not reject them. The Church officially recognizes that the People of Israel continue to be the Chosen People. Nowhere does it say, ‘You lost the game, now it is our turn’. It is a recognition of the people of Israel. That, I think, is the most courageous things from Vatican II on the subject.”
I recommend you read the article below by John Vennari to see how wrong the above statement is:
Caiphas, Foxman, Skorka: take your pick.
They represent all of Judaism to you?
Whoever John Vennari is, bless his heart, I’m not going to have anything to do with anti-Semitism. One thing an observant person notices about all the Wrong People is that they have a gripe on about the Jews.
“Wrong People” - cute term. Did you learn that from Obama? Resort to insults when you have no logical rebuttal.
There is no mention of any need for conversion to Christ and His Church …Someone is looking for another Charlemagne, methinks?
The same Jesus Christ who said, "[6] Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me." John; Chapter 14
What part of this Gospel do you all not understand?
Venarri is not an anti-Semite. I challenge you to prove your accusation.; otherwise please retract it.
That's not true. Who taught you that nonsense?
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.