Pope Francis Answers Criticism from the Political Rght

[Barb]

For everyone who thinks they have all the answers, let me lay out a timeline for you. A few years ago various pundits decided to announce that the next pope would be different. They declared that he would allow married men to be priests.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/opinion/10iht-edkristof.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/opinion/new-pope-ive-given-up-hope.html

There was even speculation that he would allow women priests, and that he would finally back down from the church's opposition to homosexuality and abortion. When Benedict announced his retirement the media went into a feeding frenzy speculating about the changes the new pope would make in the church.

Since that time they have been poring over every word he says looking for what they want to see, something that would prove that, this time, they were right. That, this time, they picked someone who agrees with them, and wants to change the world to be the way they want it to be.

Benedict hasn't changed a single fucking thing in the priorities, or the views, of the church. This is the exact same church today it was 100 years ago, and it will be the same church in another 100 years. Only idiots look for proof they are right, intelligent people take the world the way it is. Obama did not stop the rise of the oceans, and Benedict did not change the the priorities of the church.

For the record, it would be easier to stop the rise of the ocean than change the Catholic Church. If it was actually going to change it would have done so when Luther published his Ninty-Five Thesis to the door in 1517. It took them centuries after that just to stop doing the mass in Latin, and to not kill people just for owning the Bible.

One link, from almost a decade ago, details transformations of the Church over time and the differences of its practice depending on place and culture.

The second didn't "give up hope" on anything; he wrote a whole book against having priests to begin with, and wrote another on "Papal Sin."

The links are pointless to the conversation, and don't support your post in any meaningful way.

My admiration is for the MAN, not the institution he heads. I like that he confronted "trickle down" economics as the failure it is, and I admire what he's done and said so far. Not a thing you write is going to change that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

For everyone who thinks they have all the answers, let me lay out a timeline for you. A few years ago various pundits decided to announce that the next pope would be different. They declared that he would allow married men to be priests.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/opinion/10iht-edkristof.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/opinion/new-pope-ive-given-up-hope.html

There was even speculation that he would allow women priests, and that he would finally back down from the church's opposition to homosexuality and abortion. When Benedict announced his retirement the media went into a feeding frenzy speculating about the changes the new pope would make in the church.

Since that time they have been poring over every word he says looking for what they want to see, something that would prove that, this time, they were right. That, this time, they picked someone who agrees with them, and wants to change the world to be the way they want it to be.

Benedict hasn't changed a single fucking thing in the priorities, or the views, of the church. This is the exact same church today it was 100 years ago, and it will be the same church in another 100 years. Only idiots look for proof they are right, intelligent people take the world the way it is. Obama did not stop the rise of the oceans, and Benedict did not change the the priorities of the church.

For the record, it would be easier to stop the rise of the ocean than change the Catholic Church. If it was actually going to change it would have done so when Luther published his Ninty-Five Thesis to the door in 1517. It took them centuries after that just to stop doing the mass in Latin, and to not kill people just for owning the Bible.

One link, from almost a decade ago, details transformations of the Church over time and the differences of its practice depending on place and culture.

The second didn't "give up hope" on anything; he wrote a whole book against having priests to begin with, and wrote another on "Papal Sin."

The links are pointless to the conversation, and don't support your post in any meaningful way.

My admiration is for the MAN, not the institution he heads. I like that he confronted "trickle down" economics as the failure it is, and I admire what he's done and said so far. Not a thing you write is going to change that.

I don't recall saying anyone gave up.

 

[Barb]

For everyone who thinks they have all the answers, let me lay out a timeline for you. A few years ago various pundits decided to announce that the next pope would be different. They declared that he would allow married men to be priests.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/opinion/10iht-edkristof.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/opinion/new-pope-ive-given-up-hope.html

There was even speculation that he would allow women priests, and that he would finally back down from the church's opposition to homosexuality and abortion. When Benedict announced his retirement the media went into a feeding frenzy speculating about the changes the new pope would make in the church.

Since that time they have been poring over every word he says looking for what they want to see, something that would prove that, this time, they were right. That, this time, they picked someone who agrees with them, and wants to change the world to be the way they want it to be.

Benedict hasn't changed a single fucking thing in the priorities, or the views, of the church. This is the exact same church today it was 100 years ago, and it will be the same church in another 100 years. Only idiots look for proof they are right, intelligent people take the world the way it is. Obama did not stop the rise of the oceans, and Benedict did not change the the priorities of the church.

For the record, it would be easier to stop the rise of the ocean than change the Catholic Church. If it was actually going to change it would have done so when Luther published his Ninty-Five Thesis to the door in 1517. It took them centuries after that just to stop doing the mass in Latin, and to not kill people just for owning the Bible.

One link, from almost a decade ago, details transformations of the Church over time and the differences of its practice depending on place and culture.

The second didn't "give up hope" on anything; he wrote a whole book against having priests to begin with, and wrote another on "Papal Sin."

The links are pointless to the conversation, and don't support your post in any meaningful way.

My admiration is for the MAN, not the institution he heads. I like that he confronted "trickle down" economics as the failure it is, and I admire what he's done and said so far. Not a thing you write is going to change that.

I don't recall saying anyone gave up.

The title of the article in question is:

New Pope? I’ve Given Up Hope
By GARRY WILLS
Published: February 12, 2013

 

[HenryBHough]

And here we thought Islam held the patent on the time machine that swept you back to the 14th Century!

Silly us.

 

[FJO]

The far right religious folks are afraid of messing with the Pope. Rightfully so.

The self declared expert on the far right doesn't know that the far right thinks the Catholic Church s the Whore of Babylon?

Catholic America: Hagee and the "Whore of Babylon" - On Faith at washingtonpost.com

Whores like Hagee claim that Catholics are "godless" until they want to claim that 87+% of Americans believe in God and then miraculously Catholics suddenly believe in God.

From your link:

No where does he retract the virulent anti-Catholic bigotry of his several books such as From Daniel to Doomsday (1999), Jerusalem Countdown (2005) and the earlier work, “Should Christians Support Israel?”(1987), which calls Catholicism a “Godless theology of hate.”

Whores like Hagee forget that there were no Christians, other than Roman Catholics, until the reformers came along. You know, reformers like English king Henry VIII, the worst of them and John Calvin and Martin Luther, whose reformation of the Church was sorely needed at the time, but obviously not enough to alter the entire Church.

To a larger or smaller degree, all those reformers built their "religion" based on the Roman Catholic Church.

Let them be as phony and righteous as they want to be, but in their own hearts they know that they are nothing but theological thieves, robbing the Roman Catholic Church.

I am a Roman Catholic, and I disagree with some of the teachings of my Church. But I NOT a smorgasbord Catholic, who picks something he likes and rejects another thing that he likes not.

Until the Holy Father of my Church declares an old teaching obsolete (as Pope Francis seems to do regarding gay sex) I abide by those teachings.

If false prophets like Hagee want to earn respect from people other than their misguided foolish followers, he and those like him has to learn to show tolerance to others.

Pope Francis is a breath of fresh air in the several-hundred-year-old stale air in the Roman Catholic Church.

People like Hagee know that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

One link, from almost a decade ago, details transformations of the Church over time and the differences of its practice depending on place and culture.

The second didn't "give up hope" on anything; he wrote a whole book against having priests to begin with, and wrote another on "Papal Sin."

The links are pointless to the conversation, and don't support your post in any meaningful way.

My admiration is for the MAN, not the institution he heads. I like that he confronted "trickle down" economics as the failure it is, and I admire what he's done and said so far. Not a thing you write is going to change that.

I don't recall saying anyone gave up.

The title of the article in question is:

New Pope? I’ve Given Up Hope
By GARRY WILLS
Published: February 12, 2013

Newsflash, I linked to the column, I didn't write it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The self declared expert on the far right doesn't know that the far right thinks the Catholic Church s the Whore of Babylon?

Catholic America: Hagee and the "Whore of Babylon" - On Faith at washingtonpost.com

Whores like Hagee claim that Catholics are "godless" until they want to claim that 87+% of Americans believe in God and then miraculously Catholics suddenly believe in God.

From your link:

No where does he retract the virulent anti-Catholic bigotry of his several books such as From Daniel to Doomsday (1999), Jerusalem Countdown (2005) and the earlier work, “Should Christians Support Israel?”(1987), which calls Catholicism a “Godless theology of hate.”

Whores like Hagee forget that there were no Christians, other than Roman Catholics, until the reformers came along. You know, reformers like English king Henry VIII, the worst of them and John Calvin and Martin Luther, whose reformation of the Church was sorely needed at the time, but obviously not enough to alter the entire Church.

To a larger or smaller degree, all those reformers built their "religion" based on the Roman Catholic Church.

Let them be as phony and righteous as they want to be, but in their own hearts they know that they are nothing but theological thieves, robbing the Roman Catholic Church.

I am a Roman Catholic, and I disagree with some of the teachings of my Church. But I NOT a smorgasbord Catholic, who picks something he likes and rejects another thing that he likes not.

Until the Holy Father of my Church declares an old teaching obsolete (as Pope Francis seems to do regarding gay sex) I abide by those teachings.

If false prophets like Hagee want to earn respect from people other than their misguided foolish followers, he and those like him has to learn to show tolerance to others.

Pope Francis is a breath of fresh air in the several-hundred-year-old stale air in the Roman Catholic Church.

People like Hagee know that.

People like Hagee probably have a better grasp of church history than you do. There were sects in the Christian way back when Paul was still alive, Luther was hardly the first person to split with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[tinydancer]

The far right religious folks are afraid of messing with the Pope. Rightfully so.

I ditched the big guy in Rome a while back.

Long journey. In faith by myself. Cover to cover.

Religion. It's all a game. Pity is, I think this Pope really doesn't get it. Faith. He doesnt get faith. It's been an RC issue for forever.

 

[Esmeralda]

The far right religious folks are afraid of messing with the Pope.

I seriously doubt that..........

I agree. These are the same people who say Jesus would be against food stamps and feeding poor children.

They show themselves to be idiots and fools and are an embarrassment to all other Americans.

 

[Barb]

I don't recall saying anyone gave up.

The title of the article in question is:

New Pope? I’ve Given Up Hope
By GARRY WILLS
Published: February 12, 2013

Newsflash, I linked to the column, I didn't write it.

Links to columns are generally used to buttress a point YOU are making. Those links did not do that, which I explained in my reply to the post you made which contained them.