Editor of Vatican newspaper: Obama’s “not a pro-abortion president”
posted at 6:14 pm on May 21, 2009 by Allahpundit
If you were wondering whether their squishy editorial celebrating The One’s “common ground” nonsense at Notre Dame might have been mistranslated, rest assured that it wasn’t.
I don’t know what to say anymore, guys.
In the interview with Rodari, Editor-in-chief Gian Maria Vian discussed his thoughts on President Obama at the University of Notre Dame. “Obama has not upset the world,” he said. “His speech at Notre Dame has been respectful toward every position. He tried to engage the debate stepping out from every ideological position and outside every ‘confrontational mentality.’ To this extent his speech is to be appreciated.”
Vian continued, “Let me be clear, L’Osservatore stands where the American bishops are: we consider abortion a disaster. We must promote, always and at every level a ‘culture of life’.”
“What I want to stress is that yesterday, on this precise and very delicate issue, the President said that the approval of the new law on abortion is not a priority of his administration. The fact that he said that is very reassuring to me. It also underlines my own clear belief: Obama is not a pro-abortion president,” he told Rodari.
Abortion’s a “disaster,” and Obama’s almost certainly the most comfortable with it of any president in American history, and all it takes to let him off the hook is the fact that he’s not terribly eager to expand the policy further? By that same logic, a legislator who voted to legalize rape would only be considered “pro-rape” if he supported commission of the deed itself, never mind the incentives involved in lifting penalties for it. In fairness to Benedict and his staff, other Catholic commentators have stressed that the paper isn’t exactly a house organ for the Church and so its position shouldn’t be confused with the position of the Holy See. The Church can replace the editor, though, can’t it? Why’s he still there, then?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
You can fool some of the people part of the time…
liquidflorian on May 21, 2009 at 6:16 PM
The Vatican has lost its way.
Diogenes of Sinope on May 21, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Journalists are slugs the world over, apparently.
Y-not on May 21, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Talk about under cutting his own staff. I truly feel bad for the American bishops that took a firm stance on this.
catlady on May 21, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Jesus is turning in his gra…oh wait. Never mind.
Jesus is pissed.
portlandon on May 21, 2009 at 6:19 PM
They can spin it all they want, the Catholic Church is in trouble and pandering to those who feel abortion is “OK” so they will come to church and throw some money at them is just wrong.
izoneguy on May 21, 2009 at 6:19 PM
I don’t know why people try to look for what Obama believes or wants.
Obama could not care less about women and abortions.
Obama doesn’t know his own stance on issues. Not unless he can get votes, and if he can’t …he changes his stance.
He doesn’t give a crap about anything except his own personal power and glory.
bridgetown on May 21, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Oh please. He’s laying down the gauntlet. As soon as Obama signs some new infanticide legislation, they’ll be able to publish an editorial that says Obama is a pro-abortion president AND a liar. They’re settin’ him up.
Rational Thought on May 21, 2009 at 6:20 PM
They have been hoodwinked.
Firebird on May 21, 2009 at 6:20 PM
This man needs a licensed deprogrammer. There can’t be any other explanation for such a ludicrous statement.
sherry on May 21, 2009 at 6:22 PM
I do not think this is a set up, I think they are trying to suck up to him for some strange reason.
catlady on May 21, 2009 at 6:23 PM
And still people wonder why so many Catholics voted for Obama? Must be something lost in translation.
katiejane on May 21, 2009 at 6:24 PM
I’m livid and Outraged!
I’m kidding!
Was the Pope for it before he was
against it,and yes,I’m being very
sarcastic!
canopfor on May 21, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Worse, he’s a pro-infanticide president.
Someone needs to straighten the Vatican out about this, as it stands it’s pretty much a disaster.
Rebar on May 21, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Oh, c’mon now…the editor of the Vatican paper is hardy representative of the Holy See, as you just pointed out. So why even give him any credence?
Firing the guy would only serve as counter to free speech.
As a pro-lifer, and a Catholic, I’m hardly concerned with it.
JetBoy on May 21, 2009 at 6:26 PM
Reminds me of the movie in the Left Behind series where the Antichrist murders two people in front of about 20 and only one who leaves the room remembers accurately what happened. The rest believe the lie they are told by the Antichrist: that the men tried to kill him and were shot by security. Guess all those babies Obama has voted to murder were killed by security in self-defense per the Vatican.
Christian Conservative on May 21, 2009 at 6:26 PM
heh!
JetBoy on May 21, 2009 at 6:27 PM
That is the most mind numbingly, idiotic, rationale I’ve ever read as a pretext for accepting either a proposition or act. There is no way to respond to this logically. To approach it in terms of priority is futile, because the only way to prove that it is one of Obama’s top priorities is for he, himself, to say it is so. Yet, to approach it from the standpoint of abortion being an atrocity, the Vatican simply would say, “yes it is, and we’re so glad Obama thinks so too.” This is asinine. Thank the Lord for Luther and the movable type printing press!
Weight of Glory on May 21, 2009 at 6:28 PM
I’m not a historical scholar,but didn’t the
Vatican kinda act this way on the run up to
1938-39,jus sayin!!!!!!!!!!
canopfor on May 21, 2009 at 6:28 PM
incredulous. is this really happening?
sheesh on May 21, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Lambs, sheep, wolves, wool.
Speakup on May 21, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Well
If they will label Obama as not pro abortion
What is a Christian slaying AQ op?
blatantblue on May 21, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Hey they even thought Hitler was an OK guy.
Rick007 on May 21, 2009 at 6:33 PM
The church cares more about “social justice” i.e., socialism, rather than abortion. I don’t know many socialist countries where religion and the Catholic Church continue to have any influence. They have just made themselves extinct.
Blake on May 21, 2009 at 6:34 PM
Newspaper Editor + European = Ultra Obama fan. Its science.
AbaddonsReign on May 21, 2009 at 6:34 PM
The Vatican is only after gelt.
Rick007 on May 21, 2009 at 6:34 PM
“No one is pro-abortion.”
-Barack Obama Quote.
canopfor on May 21, 2009 at 6:34 PM
The Catholic Church is pragmatic, in exactly the same way the Nobama is pragmatic. They are just voting present.
TruthToBeTold on May 21, 2009 at 6:35 PM
Guys…this is not an official Vatican statement…only something the editor of the paper wrote.
Sheesh.
JetBoy on May 21, 2009 at 6:36 PM
As much as I hate to admit it, both the Roman Catholic Church and Protestant Churches were led astray. There is a great essay called, Theologians in Nazi Germany by A. James Reimer, that is really good. Not perfect but very good. In fact, I’ve been really studying it lately in order to do what I can to not allow it to happen again.
Weight of Glory on May 21, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Eventually, leftist/socialism consumes all institutions – even the Church. Some might argue that liberalism is an inexorable force of human history that pushes us in that direction. The fact is that the Church is run like a business and they need customers, and they are not going to stand on principle if it means shrinking an already shrunk customer base. Ironically, as Darwin would say, those that refuse to adapt to new environments, will die out. They have chosen to adapt rather than die. Just as the GOP chose. Unfortunately, for both the GOP and the Vatican, what they become may not be all that successful. After all, if a feel good liberalism is what humanity wants, and it seems to want it, why take liberal-lite, when you can have the real thing.
keep the change on May 21, 2009 at 6:37 PM
The Vatican even has to approve of the version of the Holy Bible that Catholics can use and you say the editor of this paper can just say anything he wants to without fear of the wrath of the church officials
TruthToBeTold on May 21, 2009 at 6:38 PM
Is there anybody here who can play this game besides Dick Cheney? I’m sick and tired of the deference, faux goodwill, and kid gloves. When is somebody other than Cheney going to man up and call this motherf*cker out? The Pope can opt not to use that language, but the message can still be clear: “they say that cat Obama is a bad motherfu-shut yo’ mouth–I’m just talking ’bout B’rack.”
PD Quig on May 21, 2009 at 6:40 PM
What is a Christian slaying AQ op?
blatantblue on May 21,2009 at 6:32PM.
blatantblue:
Ahem. A Exorcism!
canopfor on May 21, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Is the editor of that paper trying to run as a “moderate” in the republican office so he can run?
broker1 on May 21, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Krauthammer is on Fox,now,Live!!
canopfor on May 21, 2009 at 6:41 PM
Clearly the POPE does not want his knees broken by offending the REAL Messiah…….
SIGH!
SDarchitect on May 21, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Yep…more or less.This paper is actually a Liberal European rag, and it’s only claim to fame is being allowed to get first right to publish Papal statements. It is purely autonomous and the person responsible for the articles is the director, who is not at all required to have them inspected before they are printed.
Deanna on May 21, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Perhaps they are talking about a different Obama?
Mr. Joe on May 21, 2009 at 6:48 PM
As much as I….
Weight of Glory in May 21,2009 at 6:37PM.
Weight of Glory: I will look that book up,I like any
history related to WW2!
I’m sure there must be documentary’s
of the Vatican Church and its history
through the war!:)
canopfor on May 21, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Dear Pope Benedict: You need to replace this editor. Quickly.
Pope Paul VI once said that the smoke of Satan had entered the Church. He wasn’t kidding.
Steve Z on May 21, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Only the second-best review of the President, behind the new L’Obersvatore Obam-o.
Weigel says it doesn’t reflect “The Vatican”‘s position, so I’ll trust him.
But: can the editor, now. I get that he’s a European, an but come on. This is an embarrassment to all pro-life Christians. I’m not a Catholic, and even I’m offended.
emailnuevo on May 21, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Cool. Here’s the book. The essay I referred to is just one of many in this book. For those who love theology, this is a great book with a bit of a twist. Rather than it being a book on the history of theology, it’s rather a book that shows how theology was “done” differently, as affected by historical events. It’s a fresh perspective.
Weight of Glory on May 21, 2009 at 6:58 PM
nice try. realize it is wiki; but still true:
Branch Rickey on May 21, 2009 at 6:58 PM
Good thing the Vatican has a “Free and Independent” Press……..
……… just like the United States of America.
Whew…….
……….. for a moment their, I was getting worried.
Seven Percent Solution on May 21, 2009 at 6:59 PM
A good example of what “reaching across the isle” gets you…the taste of desperate compromise, phoniness and a future of complete irrelevance.
Just say no.
Itchee Dryback on May 21, 2009 at 7:00 PM
Maybe the Vatican is hoping for a bailout. After all, they are to big to fail.
RobertInLexington on May 21, 2009 at 7:09 PM
and there are no gay pedophiles in the Church.
Wade on May 21, 2009 at 7:13 PM
If the Vatican really cared about abortion, it would not only fire the editor, it would also withdrawn any funding to Notre Dame
flytier on May 21, 2009 at 7:13 PM
just wondering what kind of drugs do you idiots us
wade underhile on May 21, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Editor of the Vatican’s newspaper: “Obama’s not a pro-abortion president, Stone Mountain is not a massive hunk of granite, Steven Tyler does not have a big mouth, and bears do not do their business in the woods.”
jimmy2shoes on May 21, 2009 at 7:27 PM
Gosh, well I’m convinced.
CDeb on May 21, 2009 at 7:28 PM
The Catholic Church has become like the Republican party: It can’t figure out it’s own message.
As such, they both slide into irrelevancy. Sad really.
smartsy on May 21, 2009 at 7:31 PM
The best insight into this story and why it happened is told by an American insider in the Vatican here. Look for subsequent comments on the story there too.
marti124 on May 21, 2009 at 7:32 PM
Nice. That post made me laugh and be sad all at the same time.
Ampersand on May 21, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Obama uses the exact same language when he talks about gun control: “Right now, I don’t have the power to instantly and single-handedly rescind the Second Amendment. So it’s just plain silly of you to worry about what my intentions are.”
What kind of imbecile would find that comforting? It’s the same sort of rhetoric Hitler used right before he invaded Europe. But I suppose there were an awful lot of idiots in the world then too.
logis on May 21, 2009 at 7:34 PM
The Church has gone way out of its way to avoid schism. At one point in the 80s the Church in much of the west was in de facto schism. Bishops ignored the teachings of the Church and went their own way with the infamous results we’ve all observed.
Back in the 80s you wouldn’t have had 70+ American bishops condemn Notre Dame. The “mandatory” (mandatory without a waiver) retirement age rule instituted by Pope John Paul II has gotten rid of a lot of bad bishops, and there have been a number of high profile reassignments to dioceses that haven’t existed for 1500 years. The Church acts slowly, glacially. As an ancient proverb says: “The mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small.” Progress HAS been made. The worst seminaries have been closed, others have been cleaned up or are being cleaned up.
This editor will be replaced with a real Christian in time, but not in a way to cause scandal if they can avoid it.
Consanescerion on May 21, 2009 at 7:35 PM
Good one. That’s you, me, and 80% of the United States.
Blacksmith8 on May 21, 2009 at 7:37 PM
liberalism is a cancer. I’m not Catholic or all that religious, but there is something really tragic about seeing the Vatican succumb to this disease.
Ampersand on May 21, 2009 at 7:38 PM
smartsy: The Catholic Church, L’Osservatore; one of these things is not like the other.
Blacksmith8 on May 21, 2009 at 7:39 PM
Both abandoned their principles.
Wade on May 21, 2009 at 7:47 PM
Well … technically, that’s correct. He’s a pro-abortion precedent.
progressoverpeace on May 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Here’s the book.
Weight of Glory on May 21,2009 at 6:58PM.
Weight of Glory: Thanks for the link,WoG:)
canopfor on May 21, 2009 at 7:53 PM
I wouldn’t know. Where do you go to church?
Blacksmith8 on May 21, 2009 at 7:53 PM
L’Osservatore Romano is a privately owned newspaper printed in the Vatican. I suppose the Vatican could stop the paper from being printed there, but the Pope does not control the newspaper’s content or editorials. And, given its long relationship with the Church, and that the Vatican hierarchy often use this it to express their views, when the paper is not on point, it is very disappointing. However, it does happen.
Therefore, unless an article is written by one of the Vatican hierarchy, which this editorial was not, any assumptions being made about the Church or the Pope, based on any article in “The Vatican newspaper,” may or may not be correct, but it is only an assumption.
For a history of the newspaper, written by the current editor, see:
“L’Osservatore Romano” Has a New Director. A Concise Reader’s Manual
Loxodonta on May 21, 2009 at 7:55 PM
If Ed this doesn’t get Ed blogging while on vacation, nothing will. My heart goes out to all Catholics on this betrayal of their faith, support, and money.
I’m not Catholic, but I hate abortion. This just makes me angry. And while I’m at it…
He’s just pay-grade challenged.
Laura in Maryland on May 21, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Laura in Maryland on May 21, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Oops, I only needed one “Ed” (but don’t we all).
Laura in Maryland on May 21, 2009 at 7:58 PM
Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness.
- The Eighth Commandment
MB4 on May 21, 2009 at 8:02 PM
But in vain they do worship me.
- Jesus Christ
Whatever you have done to little children you have done to me.
- Jesus Christ
MB4 on May 21, 2009 at 8:10 PM
And this was the problem and the reason the country was OK with Roe in the first place. If Catholics had started speaking out against abortion as vociferously in the 70′s as they are now, we wouldn’t have abortion on demand in America.
I, and my Christian Protestant pro-lifers welcome the change in sentiment of many Catholics. But I don’t see how the reaction would be any different if the pope had said this instead of their paper.
This is the problem with having HUMAN people tell you what to think spiritually. Humans interpret what is written, but to have a human tell you what God says is asking for trouble.
Again, people say ‘oh this wasn’t the pope saying this so it doesn’t matter’. I say even if it was the pope saying it, the reaction would be the same. Because of how the Catholic Church is set up, the pope (a person) COULD say that, and all the Catholics would have to believe it.
ThackerAgency on May 21, 2009 at 8:13 PM
People, stop posting as if Catholic bashing is going out of style and read the links before you start talking about the Catholic Church being morally bankrupt. ;)
Vatican Watcher on May 21, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Just goes to show you how easily an Italian editor sitting in Rome can be bamboozled by our “shuckin’ an jivin’” Obamination of a president. If one just charted Obama’s words at ND, you might come, in some parallel universe, to this conclusion. However, if this man had bothered to see what Obama has done and plans to do, he would not be saying this.
Did they replace the editor of this paper’s brain with that of the abortion apostate Obama-bot, Doug Kmiec?
The Church’s view is immutable about abortion, and this editor is just a moron. Benedict XVI knows exactly where Obama stands, and that’s probably why Obama is quite noticeably “skipping” Rome on his next little jaunt to Italy.
marybel on May 21, 2009 at 8:21 PM
And of course there is that whole thing about letting born babies die Mr. Editor.
Sickening
CWforFreedom on May 21, 2009 at 8:24 PM
Thank you, Vatican Watcher, for reposting the link from Marti 124 @ 7:32 with George Weigel’s take on this editorial nonsense. That was helpful and kind of you to include it in your post.
marybel on May 21, 2009 at 8:36 PM
…and the Vatican bowed to the true spiritual leader of the world.
Star20 on May 21, 2009 at 8:36 PM
…black.
ddrintn on May 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM
Ahha…L’Osservatore Romano…Reminds me of that paper’s gossip columnist, Father Guido Sarducci…
JetBoy on May 21, 2009 at 8:46 PM
L’Osservatore Romano will be forced to eat those words when the One gets his other priorities wrapped up…and turns his laser focus on FOCA. How naive to believe his words when his actions tell such a different story.
Dee2008 on May 21, 2009 at 8:53 PM
This isn’t sad it’s dishonest. Obama has done more for the Death Cult than any other President in our history. That’s the Truth. The Catholic Religion needs to get out of the nuance business, they are no good at it.
Sheppard, there are wolves among your flock.
Dr Evil on May 21, 2009 at 9:05 PM
whats next? gay marriage is ok with the vatican?
right4life on May 21, 2009 at 9:12 PM
Except when they are.
CP on May 21, 2009 at 9:32 PM
The pope
sees allVibrioCocci on May 21, 2009 at 9:32 PM
First of all, the editor is a woman according to the article — a “she”, not a “he” as you say in your article.
Secondly, one commenter had it correct with the excerpt from wiki. It’s bad enough having people out there who think the Vatican newspaper is the Magisterium, let alone thinking a misguided statement by its editor in an interview situation somehow indicates the thoughts of the Pope.
I recommend you give this the attention it deserves and that is, yes, report on it, but don’t be shocked and don’t consider for a moment that this is anything remotely close to an official betrayal by the Vatican. We need to give this a “wait and see” form of analysis.
The American bishops have finally found their spines at long last. Remember how it was in the days of PJPII? He was criticized for not doing more to “rein in” America’s rogue bishops but had he been more forceful, there likely would have been a schism. NOW, they have spines and we’re going to let this non-authoritative editor dictate for us the official Church position? We know better, don’t we?
The American bishops have actual authority in the Church whereas this editor has none. Watch to see if they react. I suspect they will. It is doubtful the Pope will. If he reacts at all it will be to fire her, I think. I doubt there will be a statement of any kind, though, and even if he doesn’t fire her, it doesn’t mean he is on the same page as she is, so to speak. She is not the Pope. Benedict is the Pope.
I’m not worried. I’ve worked for sixteen years as a faithful Catholic to end abortion and nothing this woman says concerns me. Wait and see.
The really “meaty” part of what she said is that the Pope “observes” what is happening in America at Notre Dame, and takes no position. That one statement is the most instructive, but it is not clear and it lacks important elaboration. I have written a piece on the Pope’s role in this that you might find instructive. You can find it here.
http://genuinegopmom.blogspot.com/2009/05/notre-dames-decision-and-voice-of-pope.html
I have no authority in the Church, either, but I agree with her that it is not particularly the Pope’s role to express a position on this. My explanation for his silence on the specifics at Notre Dame gives, I think, a deeper view of the matter, particularly in light of Obama’s narcissistic need to be seen as “special” and, as such, exempt from certain truths.
Take it for what it’s worth. Note, it was written before I learned of this interview.
Lisa Baker Graas
gocatholic on May 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM
great website and thanks for your post above!!!
Branch Rickey on May 21, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Look up social justice on Wikipedia. That might give you a clue.
gh on May 21, 2009 at 10:07 PM
National Review Online
Parsing the Vatican Newspaper
– George Weigel, Distinguished Senior Fellow at Washington’s Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.
Loxodonta on May 21, 2009 at 10:45 PM
If there’s nothing inherently wrong with abortion, then that statement of Obama’s is as silly as saying “No one is pro-appendectomy”.
ddrintn on May 21, 2009 at 10:48 PM
The Vatican is a joke. And I am a Catholic. Hey Pope STFU. Obama is not only PRO ABORTION he is PRO infanticide.
Geochelone on May 21, 2009 at 11:45 PM
I guess Joe Klein is not the only ghost writer for Rahm Emanuel.
Baxter Greene on May 22, 2009 at 12:26 AM
Please read the article posted by George Weigel on NRO regarding the “journalists” who contribute to the Vatican newspaper – it certainly clears things up for me.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2I5MGM2NGY1ZDA0YTk5OWZhNGM2NTlmNWE4YzQ0ZTc=
mayowan on May 22, 2009 at 3:45 AM
oops.
Here I sit in Qingdao, and it is a beautiful city, but I click on the ” it wasn’t ” link and get a 404. Completely in Chinese, but I know a 404 when I see one.
ericdijon on May 22, 2009 at 5:26 AM
Check that.
Here it is.
You’re not in China anymore.
ericdijon on May 22, 2009 at 5:35 AM
I’m about ready to help start a movement of faithful Catholics to Orthodoxy. I swear, how much harder could that be than to remain Catholic with the urge to smack-down so many of our leaders?
Randy
williars on May 22, 2009 at 7:11 AM
But why is it that the editor doesn’t get reprimanded? When it concerns clarification Rome prefers obfuscation even when it declares itself the sole entity declared by God for that very purpose.
Just incredible.
shick on May 22, 2009 at 7:17 AM
So your a protestant? I’d warn you of the risk of being anenthematized, but after Rome learned from the consequences of its action from Trent, there’s no need. That’s why charismatics, sedevacantists and ultraconservatives are not corrected.
shick on May 22, 2009 at 7:24 AM
No, no… I’ve got this one…
The Pope and Vian are… not real, mass-attending Catholics.
mankai on May 22, 2009 at 7:58 AM
I hate to say it, mostly because I’ve always said that a lot less whining about race would go a long way toward making things better.
But it’s true, and Notre Dame serves as irrefutable evidence. The entire event was drenched in racial salvation. A crowd that is 97% white, unburdened themselves of their white guilt by praising “our first black President”, and ignoring the uncomfortable fact that he is a pro-abortion radical and they are Catholic.
Race trumped abortion. (OK, most of them are pro-abortion, too, but still).
Jaibones on May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM
You’re in denial, JB. There are about 100 Catholics who had a problem with our abortionist-in-chief: the Pope, 34 Bishops, 2 Cardinals, and 63 Notre Dame alums.
Everyone else was good with it. Sheesh, indeed.
Jaibones on May 22, 2009 at 8:45 AM
…and you wonder why Catholics get knocked around.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would be a Catholic…so many other Christian religions have not crossed that social liberal line that Catholics want to.
They are pro Socialism, pro illegal immigrants, they do not lead the fight on abortion, as can be seen by this editorial, they are more political then spiritual, their “leader” is in another country with different ideals, pomp and circumstance is more important, and the ones who are doing God’s work, the ones really toiling for the “least among us” are forsaken for political reasons.
The Catholic worshipers are the real driving force, the Catholic leadership is a waste of humanity…from supporting for decades child abuse, to supporting socialist regimes…it is only the faithful that keeps the Church alive, not the leadership.
right2bright on May 22, 2009 at 8:48 AM
Luther beat you to it…by about 500 years.
Luther did, what is needed again. To shake the Catholic leaders into the realization that they are doing Christ’s work, not the Pope’s work, or political work.
I am amazed how so many of Luther’s demands have taken nearly 500 years to sink in, but they have.
Time for another wake up call, you would have thought the child abuse and the cover up would have been enough.
Maybe the fact that the Church supports abortion now, maybe the real Catholics will begin to demand some accountability.
right2bright on May 22, 2009 at 8:53 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »