Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: johnb2004; heyheyhey
I agree with your observations john, with emphasis [on my part] that I do not wish to second guess JP2, nor do I envy being in his position with the mess we are in.

Having stated that, we can safely agree a faithful catholic can indeed "discuss" the Pope's actions without malice.

With respect to discipline, there is precedence that JP2 has put the foot down when he wanted to, for instance, in the case of firing the "Condom bishop -- Jacques Gaillot of France" in 1995.

As far as that missing phrase "with due reverence ...." in Canon 212, it is irrelevant in light of the substance of the discussion. Besides, the authors did not display disrepect or malice towards the Holy Father. The article is a fair and honest critical analysis of the "content" of his speech.

81 posted on 04/02/2004 2:32:31 PM PST by m4629
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: m4629
Besides, the authors did not display disrespect or malice towards the Holy Father.

No. He says the Pope is useless (just read the article, please).
I see nothing wrong with the Pope, I say the author is useless, and the publication that printed his heretical diatribe is useless.

82 posted on 04/02/2004 4:25:27 PM PST by heyheyhey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson