Posted on 10/13/2009 12:56:05 PM PDT by editor-surveyor
Liberal and conservative Catholics alike would prefer not to discuss how the Catholic Church, here and abroad, functions like a liberal/left-wing political lobby.
Some pro-life Catholics are acting shocked that the Vatican warmly greeted the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama, who is pro-abortion. They don't seem to understand that the Vatican and Obama agree on most major international issues.
This is the untold story-how Obama and the Vatican accept major ingredients of what has been called a New World Order.
Another untold story is how, despite a disagreement over abortion, the U.S. Catholic Bishops and the Obama Administration agree on major aspects of so-called health care reform.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldviewtimes.com ...
Huh? The guy who praised Obama's Nobel was one official in the Vatican Press Office. This got turned into "the Vatican said" by the left-wing media, as though it were an ex cathedra Papal statement.
He ain't my husband.
...if I were your supervisor...
Dream on.
"The guy who praised" was Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi. The follow-up correction was written by author Lucetta Scaraffia, in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, which doesn't enjoy a good reputation among politically conservative Catholics already. I find it hilarious that FRCatholics are now praising the L'Osservatore Romano editorial as being more authoritative of the Vatican position than Fr. Lombardi's.
Related threads:
Editor of Vatican newspaper says Obama is not pro-abortion
L'Obsservatore Romano Needs a New Editor
Vatican newspaper says Obama sought 'common ground' at Notre Dame
Vatican Paper: 'Angels & Demons' Harmless
I’ve learned that with some
RC’s as well as some REPLACEMENTARIANS et al
the nose on their face is not obvious
and some fantasies tend to be construed as obvious fact.
Fascinating.
Poor reality testing to the max.
It’s
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!TRADITION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When the newspaper leaves the Pope sounding TOOOOO GLOABLIST in his priorities and values . . .
then it’s a horrid rag not worth mopping the floor with.
When the newspaper softens a more radical Vatican pontificator . . . then it’s a wonderful voice of reason.
DUPLICITY is !!!!!!!!!!!!!TRADITION!!!!!!!!!!!!!! in some quarters.
Uhhhhhhh no.
That would not be the Vatican/Roman Catholic Church
. . . particularly after subtracting out for their horrors . . .
That would be the
UNIVERSAL CHURCH OF JESUS THE CHRIST made up of every believer in Him as Savior in whatever group they were in all around the world.
An excellent description of the rest of your post.
Most all of them, actually.
THANKS.
It would be hard to get a better endorsement of my views than to have you hostile to them.
You just defined the word Catholic.
His formal title is "Director of the Holy See Press Office," not "Vatican spokesman".
Wikipedia kindly states:
Upon assuming the directorate, Lombardi said he would not be a papal "spokesman" since he believes Benedict XVI does not need an interpreter, saying, "I don't think my role is to explain the Pope's thinking or explain the things that he already states in an extraordinarily clear and rich way."
I think it's pretty clear that Fr. Lombardi was expressing his personal opinion.
The follow-up correction was written by author Lucetta Scaraffia, in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, which doesn't enjoy a good reputation among politically conservative Catholics already.
LOR is a semi-official newspaper, which is a whole lot more official than a "Vatican spokesman said". That's just a fact.
Is everything LOR prints the ipsissima verbi Papae? Of course not. In fact, it usually isn't.
Neither are the statements of the Director of the Holy See's press office, Fr. Lombardi.
But I had no idea you were an authoritative spokesman for politically conservative Catholics! I'll just shut up now and let you tell me what to believe and whom to trust.
Which the Vatican/Roman church
does NOT hae exclusive right to
by a very wide margin.
This, BTW, is "making it personal".
Oh, Dear . . . let me reword it . . .
YEA! WONDERFUL CONFIRMATION STRIKES AGAIN!
the hostility of some RC’s and some REPLACEMENTARIANS et al to my posts . . .
is wonderful endorsement in the eyes of many.
It is also nice that so many
RC kettles are so acquainted with so many RC pots.
I didn't have to read anyone's mind. I simply read their words. Unsubstantiated and untrue adhominem attacks on the Catholic Church and its Pope are making it pretty damned personal to many.
For future benefit of all posters why don't you attempt to make a clear delineation between the forbidden act of mind reading, begging a question, and the interpretation of words actually posted.
Really?
Have you read the 144-page document?
Are you aware that the Vatican has stated it's pleasure that Obama has 'won' the Nobel Peace Prize?
Read the 'thing' and then comment instead of jumping on someone as being paranoid.
Actually, I think, at worst, it’s borderline.
The subject was the endorsement of a written form of hostility.
The many who view ad hominem as a legitimate form of argumentation, that is.
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.