Did you read the Time article on the pope!?

the 1st sentence was so biased... didn't want to read the whole thing..

June 2007 was the issue date..

i have to go now.. but if you have read this.. maybe you can finish what i am starting to say..

Yikes!!! :eek:

You just caught a glimpse of the real world.

we Catholics should stop buying and reading papers and magazines with biased reporting. they aren’t getting any of my money.

i didn't buy the *** thing... read it in a waiting room.. I don't support any of those trashy magazines... and the language used in that article was totally trashy, not only biased, but very unprofessional.. in the wording..

the author at one pt said that Catholics want a more modern way of.. accountability.. not mealy-mouthed [something or other statements] based on arcane religious [beliefs]... something to that effect.. don't have the article in front of me.

i only read about 5 paragraphs... fortunately i had to go take care of some b usiness... :)because o/wise would have been tempted to read the whole thing..

i was :mad::mad: enough just w/ those paragraphs..

i do kind of wonder about the pope covering up stuff...

anyone here know much about THAT???

sorry, i HATE ... uh... no.. .wait... I DESPISE .TV!!

& don't get these "news" magazines... so i just don't know much about the sex scandal...

What i do know is that protestnat "churches" have a higher rate of pedophilia than the Catholic ones.. Yet all we hear is about our priests and how perverted virtually all of them are... geeze...

i just googled the article and George Weigel has written a commentary on it..

I laughed when i read this cuz it says what i was trying to say only better:

"The lengthy essay inside breaks no news,” Weigel asserted, “it recycles several lame charges against Benedict XVI that have been flatly denied or effectively rebutted,” and “it indulges an adolescent literary style.”


i wonder why Weigel doesn't mention t he ridiculous comparison the article makes between the Inquisition and the sex scandal... uh... :confused:Am i missing something here? :confused:i mean... should those things -- can they be.. compared ?? i tend to not think so but again, i might be missing something.. :shrug:Of course, the author of that article seems to be missing something as well...:rolleyes:

yes, its amazing wht adolescent "style" (lack thereof) passes for jouranlism these days..

reminds me of that term "deliberate dumbing down of America"

geeze.... Beam me up, Jesus... :rolleyes:

[quote="Advocatus_Fidei, post:2, topic:204568"]
You just caught a glimpse of the real world.


unfortunately i've had far more than a "glimpse" of that... :(:mad::eek:

but with all the information being spread via internet and etc... e tc.. these days.. you would think that MAYBE... just maybe... people would understand the true teachings of the Church and her histroy...

but then again maybe thats the problem... information..

so much information... so little time.. :hypno:

research? who has time for research?

and when they do find the time to do "research" they use anti-Catholic sources...

hmmm... wonder why it never seems to occur to them to consult a devout, educated, catechized Catholic??

hmm... :hmmm::coffeeread::hmmm::banghead:

Maybe they don’t want to know. There is more anti-catholic content on the internet than there is pro anyway even if they did look.

Try this little experiment, go to google and type in “The Pope is” and see what google suggests you might like to search for in the auto complete box.

The world is our enemy and always will be so till Christ comes again.

[quote="Advocatus_Fidei, post:9, topic:204568"]
Maybe they don't want to know. There is more anti-catholic content on the internet than there is pro anyway even if they did look.

Try this little experiment, go to google and type in "The Pope is" and see what google suggests you might like to search for in the auto complete box.

The world is our enemy and always will be so till Christ comes again.


the weird thing is that they are against something that could do them so much good..

but i believe God shows everyone the good of theCatholic Church... If they reject until the end.. well... i can't say exactly cuz everyone's life is different.. and only God knows a person's heart.. .but i just know that God shows everyone .. or i should say allows them to see.. the good things ofthe Church..

now i will go google that...

Don't be angry. Just remember that when everyone dies, they either:

1) regret everything bad they've done and are punished eternally for it


2) regret everything bad they've done but are forgiven and become perfect for eternity.

This often stops me from feeling angry.

The article may have been badly written (IMO), but did any of you read the entire thing? It is available online.

The article just reports how many, many people feel. And in some way its kinder than the masses. I agree, there is nothing new or shocking, but a good look into how many folks now feel about the church.

Too bad it wasn't written more coherently...

Here's how it starts out [Icons & clarifying comments added by distracted]:

"How do you atone for something terrible, like the Inquisition? :rolleyes: [Who says it was "terrible"... oh yeah... those ubiquitous anti-Catholic historians who were there...]
Joseph Ratzinger attempted to do just that for the Roman Catholic Church during a grandiose display of Vatican penance — the Day of Pardon on March 12, 2000, a ritual presided over by Pope John Paul II and meant to purify two millenniums of church history. [oh please]
In the presence of a wooden crucifix that had survived every siege of Rome since the 15th century, high-ranking Cardinals and bishops stood up to confess to sins against indigenous peoples, women, Jews, cultural minorities and other Christians and religions. Ratzinger was the appropriate choice to represent the fearsome Holy Office of the Inquisition: :) the German Cardinal was, at the time, head of its historical successor, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. When his turn came, Ratzinger, the church's [sic: should be: Church] premier theologian, intoned a short prayer that said "that even men of the church, in the name of faith and morals, have sometimes used methods not in keeping with the Gospel in the solemn duty of defending the truth."

If you detect ambivalence :confused: in those words, you are on the road to understanding the difficulty... Pope Benedict XVI... faces in leading the Catholic Church to properly atone for another stain on its history: the decades of cases of child abuse by priests and cover-ups by their bishops [Protestants are guilty of pedophilia at twice the rate Cathlic priests are... but that story's too boring... liberals feel no need to attack those who generally aren't radically different from themselves... don't tell everyone birth control is wrong & stuff...]. And while a...Cardinal has publicly speculated that Benedict will deliver a mea culpa in early June, the words of that apology — if that is what it proves to be — :rolleyes: will be severely limited by theology, history and the very person and office of the Pope [Says who? :rolleyes:]. It is unlikely to satisfy the many members of Benedict's flock who want a very modern kind of accountability, not just mealymouthed declarations buttressed by arcane religious philosophy. [this guy is claravoyant... can read the minds of all Catholics... & isn't it strange that they all (except me, of course) see things his way? who would have guessed such a thing???] "Someone once told me that if the church [sic] survived the Inquisition, it can survive this," says Olan Horne, 50, an American victim of priestly abuse. "But these are different times. And right now, the modern world is wrapping its head around the Catholic Church in a major way." [HUH????!!!! What???!!!]

The crisis facing the church [sic] is deeply complicated by the fact that in 1980, as Archbishop of Munich, the future Benedict XVI appears to have [APPEARS to have...] mismanaged the assignment of an accused pedophile priest under his charge. That revelation — and questions about Ratzinger's subsequent oversight of cases as a top Vatican official — has been the trigger in turning a rolling series of national scandals into an epic [according to the liberal media, which is always so truthful and unbiased and stuff...] and existential test [hmm... My faith hasn't been tested... What's wrong with me???!!! I'm not responding correctly to this awful scandal!!!!] for the universal church [sic], its leader and its faithful alike. It has blunted Benedict's ambitious enterprise of re-evangelizing Europe, the old Christendom. Over the past two months, the Pope has led the Holy See's shift from silence and denial [still have no evidence of that & none is given yet] to calls to face the enemies from within the church. What is still missing, however, is any mention of the Holy Father's alleged role in the scandal [oh, he finally uses the word "alleged".. How big of the guy...]. Can the Pope, the living embodiment of the ancient Gospel and absolute spiritual leader of the world's 1.2 billion Catholics, publicly atone for his sins and yet preserve the theological impregnability of the papacy? [Oh FREAKING please!!!!!]:hypno:

Without alluding to the crisis, Benedict told his May 26 audience in St. Peter's Square that "not even the Pope can do what he wants. On the contrary, the Pope is the guardian of obedience to Christ, to his Word."

Benedict now seems to understand the stakes. But Alberto Melloni, a church historian at the University of Modena, says other power brokers in the Vatican :rolleyes:think the church [sic] can just ride out the storm. "They don't realize the deep bitterness among the faithful,:confused: the isolation of the clergy. We can't predict where this is going to wind up." Speaking to TIME, a senior Vatican official foresees immense consequences for the entire church. "History comes down to certain key episodes," he says. "We're facing one of those moments now."

Benedict... atone for HIS sins??

again, this article and none other i have read has given me any proof that the pope himself covered up anything..

bishops did, probably, but i have no evdence shown to me that Pope B did...

true, i dont read every news magazine in the world.. too much bias... :rolleyes:

but still... you'd think we would be given some evidence....

oh that's right...

they're attacking the Catholic Church...

never mind.... :rolleyes:

as far as i can tell the Church has nothing to apologize for...

the Inquisition was NOT what anti-Catholics say it was... not even close.. In fact people who were convicted of crimes would often ASK to be tried in the Inquisition Court...

i thought people who wrote aritcles for Time were supposed to be educated...??!!

that's what i get for thinking...

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.