[Mrs. Don-o]

Hasn't this thread shown several outstanding examples of a superficial level of news-reading? All we know about Rainer Woelki is that he:

• got his doctorate in an Opus Dei institue (known for being unbending on the principle that moral law is objective and unchanging, and conservative in the doctrines of the Christian faith);
• was not on the "short list" preferred by the liberal locals;
• made statements reaffirming the Church's teaching that homosexual acts are sinful;
• was howlingly rejected by the organized gay movement in Berlin.

I think we can also be fairly confident that

• He said more than a few lines, but
• only a few lines were quoted---
• by Reuters, whose bloggers are not gripped by a need to give a "reactionary" bishop a platform for a full exposition of Christian principles.

OK. So, we're critiquing the few lines quoted by a Reuters news blog for being incomplete? ---of course, they're incomplete,there's a selection process going on here which is under Reuters' control, not Woelki's.

This is so elementary.

It reminds me of just a few days ago, when certain FReepers who shall remain nameless, fell for a blog post that said the Southern Baptist Convention approved of gay marriage.

Because Richard Land (SBC) said God approved of sexual relations in marriage!

And I had to jump into the thread and defend the Southern Baptist Convention--- on a point that should have been obvious to a competently-educated middle-schooler!

Now you've got somebody saying Bishop Woelki would approve of gays having sexual relations with each other, if that would help them "find happiness in life"?!

Slander. Rash judgment. Silly-on-stilts. Do our critical faculties turn into Play Doh in the hands of a Reuters blog writer?

Note to you, and to me, too: always ask Cui bono? And Sez who?

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

well, if you feel the man was edited why don’t you provide the quotes where he proclaimed the need for Faith in Christ or the reality of sin, including homosexual acts?
no, i am reading the words of a weak man who is looking to gain approval from the left and unbelievers by saying he just wants “hapiness” for everyone.
you misquote me, i didn’t he would approve of homosexual acts, i merely took his weasely words and asked if they included homosexual acts if that’s what made the homosexuals “happy”
is it too much to ask to have a bishop not be ashamed of the Gospel? to have a bishop declare the Word of God in it’s entirety and without compromise?
he had the perfect opportunity with 100 members of the press there and what did he do? he basically said to the left and the homosexual community “don’t worry about me, i will not proclaim Christ to you, i want you to be happy”
i repeat, is it too much to ask to have a bishop who is not ashamed of the Gospel?