Posted on 02/16/2005 5:40:24 PM PST by Coleus
"Do you need any Cardinal from the Vatican to answer that?"-- are answers in the form of a question. This is a technique that avoids being quoted and perpetuates the ambiguity."ask the children for First Communion, they'll give you the answer.”
"These rainbow sash people, are they really saying we are homosexuals, we intend to remain so and we want to receive Holy Communion"
As I said, when I asked the Cardinal some challenging questions a decade ago, he was very evasive. It seems that he has simply refined his evasion techniques.
I hope he is not the next Pope.
Even in this interview he said communion should be denied to politicians who express support for abortion, but he said it in such a way that leaves a huge loophole. Read his statement carefully and you will realize that no Catholic liberal politician would necessarily fall under his prohibition, for no Catholic liberal politician will admit or is ever likely to admit that he favors the death of the innocent inborn. Catholic liberal politicians invariably claim to personally disapprove of abortion, but lament that they cannot make that decision for others.
It sounds hypocritical, but that's exactly the position they take.
The Catholic Church does not take its cues based on the American political calender.
The Cardinal is evasive. He will not address the discipline problem the Church has had under JPII.
(I love JPII, but the next pope needs to focus on cleaning house.)
Evasion is not a straighforward approach. It's a diplomatic approach. This isn't the UN, it's the deposit of faith. Make him the Vatican representative to the UN, but not the Pope.
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Nor can it be just a misplaced jocular tone. On other questions he had very clear answers. For example, in the same interview he gave a very detailed answer on the use of Latin in mass; it was very clear that he was making sure he was not misinterpreted and he spoke in declarative sentences.
I wonder if it is NOW clear with Archbishop Flynn.
Sorry- after the scandals that have occured in the Catholic church in recent years, I can no longer see them as pillars of virtue. Lost a ton of respect for them that can not be brought back.
Flynn and Pilla and McCarrick and Mahoney and the others, sadly, will continue their own way...because this is where they want to be. And there really isn't anybody on earth flexing authority at this time that can haul them into line.
But this isn't the first time in history that there have been rebellious bishops.
Still, it is sad.
Agreed. It is sad and TRAGIC.
Ping.
Cick the following and listen to Cardinal Arinze. He covers many topics and pulls no punches.
http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/latestadditions/seriessearchprog.asp?seriesID=-6892288&fldSeriesName=The+World+Over
Au contraire, mon frere. The Church specifically sat on this issue because of the political election. It is pretty well known that the heirarchy cozies up to the democratic party.
This guy is a day late and a dollar short. WHy couldn't he have said this during the election?
Thanks! I stand corrected!
We're talking about the Vatican here, not some radical American Bishop.
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.