 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Pope in America
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Oct 15 - 12:27 PM Muckraker: person who you disagree with who digs up inconvenient truths. Whistleblower: person who you agree with who digs up inconvenient truths. Hatchet-jobber: person who digs up inconvenient truths who you think should have let sleeping dogs lie, no matter how scrofulous, mange-ridden and rabid the dogs were. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Oct 15 - 12:23 PM Not for you to decide Dave. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 15 - 11:23 AM Sorry, which bit of "Enough now" is so difficult? I am not getting involved in this sort of derailing as it will only lead to closure of this thread as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Oct 15 - 11:18 AM I am pretty sure that if any of the references were unhappy with the research they would have complained. If they happened to flick through "Religieuses" a French-language journal of studies in religion and sciences. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Oct 15 - 11:16 AM I have no idea where academics get stuff published Have you ever heard of a "team of academics" researching the activities of any other nun? Or any charity. Why do you suppose that they chose that subject? Theirs is education and psychoeducation. You expect investigative journalists to do that kind of work. Does it not seem at all strange to you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 15 - 10:56 AM It is just a hatchet job Is it? Where is your proof? I have no idea where academics get stuff published and have no knowledge of French Canadian research. Do you? I assume that they have done their homework because of the sheer volume of references they provide. I am pretty sure that if any of the references were unhappy with the research they would have complained. Enough now though. As I said earlier, just nit picking. And now looking for a fight. Boring. Did you have anything to do with boring a hole in St Albans by any chance? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 02 Oct 15 - 10:39 AM Now, c'mom KoAH - they're eminent, they're alive, their works are available in regular bookshops, and they pick their noses with the left hand. By your own criteria, they should obviouisly be believed as gospel (as it were). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Oct 15 - 10:31 AM I can only assume that a 'team of Canadian researchers' will have done their homework. Why? What might have motivated Serge Larivée and Genevieve Chenard from the University of Montreal's department of psychoeducation, and Carole Sénéchal of the University of Ottawa's faculty of education to write this report? What has it to do with their specialism? It is just a hatchet job, and they could only get it published in a very obscure journal. Had The Times Of India not searched it out, would anyone know about it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 02 Oct 15 - 10:28 AM As little as I like the practical operation & hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, bigotry and ignoring the law of the land are NOT "official positions". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: akenaton Date: 02 Oct 15 - 10:16 AM How can the Pope's encounter with Kim not be seen as support for her position? It is also the official position of the Catholic Church! And quite right too! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Oct 15 - 09:42 AM Teresa-believers should be careful what they wish for. The insistence on such high standards of evidence (which, I note, they never apply to anything in their own belief systems, oddly) for what she said and did merely serves to sting us to into finding even more murk. I came across this when following one of the references at the bottom of Monique's article. Mother Teresa appealed, successfully, for the reinstatement of one of her favourite priests, Donald McGuire, after he had been found to have been involved in child abuse. Her success enabled him to go on quite a little spree of further abuse. I'd say that, like many in the Catholic hierarchy of the time, steered of course by the ever so saintly John-Paul II, she was far more concerned for the reputation of the priesthood than she she was about the wellbeing of children. Once again, it's all out there. Don't take my word for it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 02 Oct 15 - 09:12 AM And now, today's nomination for the "Pull The Other One Its Got Bells On" Award: Vatican: Pope's encounter with Davis not a form of support Nicole Winfield, Associated Press Friday, October 2, 2015 VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Vatican on Friday distanced Pope Francis from Kim Davis, the focal point in the gay marriage debate in the U.S., saying she was one of dozens of people the pope greeted in Washington and that their encounter "should not be considered a form of support of her position." Maybe the Pope is an idiot after all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Monique Date: 02 Oct 15 - 08:44 AM Well thanks Dave, I veeeeery seldom post in the BS section but it doesn't mean that I'm not around or that I don't read anything there. I've tried to copy and paste a part of the pdf into Google Translation and it'd want a lot of work to get it translated because the accents come out separated from the letters they should be upon (é comes out as e' etc. and the translator can't work properly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 15 - 07:58 AM Thanks, Monique. Good to see you about and still posting :-) To those who have not opened the link, it is in French and if, like me, your French has not passed schoolboy stage, you may struggle. However, the list of references at the end is impressive and a lot is in English. Gives us further evidence that that they were not making things up anyway! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Monique Date: 02 Oct 15 - 07:22 AM I could only find the original version of this 2013 study. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Oct 15 - 07:22 AM Costs $30 to read it, Ed. Can't afford it. I've just given my last $30 to a Mother Teresa charity. Damn. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Oct 15 - 07:14 AM Wouldn't it be great if people of faith set their evidence bar just as high for the stuff they profess to believe in? As the Merkins say, just sayin'... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Ed T Date: 02 Oct 15 - 07:12 AM Not taking sides, or saying it was good research-but, a link to the paper noted: Mother Teresa |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 15 - 06:32 AM Sorry, Kevin, I can only suggest getting hold of quoted academic paper which will cite it's sources as evidence. I don't know how to do that but, in the meanwhile, I can only assume that a 'team of Canadian researchers' will have done their homework. Should someone post a link to their report on here, it would become apparent whether they have done a thorough job or made it up :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Oct 15 - 06:23 AM That piece briefly recapitulates the allegations Steve has given, but doesn't set out to provide any evidence. It's easy enough to find sites where that is done, but not sites where actual evidence is presented so people can make up their own minds. Even the quotes tend to be summarised interpretations of what she actually said, rather than her actual words. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Oct 15 - 05:33 AM Muckraker: person who you disagree with who digs up inconvenient truths. Whistleblower: person who you agree with who digs up inconvenient truths. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 15 - 04:39 AM Nit picking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Oct 15 - 04:24 AM It appeared in that paper, but is just a rehash of pieces originally in The Times of India, and Religieuses, a French-language journal of studies in religion and sciences. It does not "refers to research by the University of Ottowa" but to a study by three people from the education departments of two different Universities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 15 - 03:21 AM Sorry - Looks like the click was truncated. C&P the following instead - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/mother-teresa-was-anything-but-a-saint-new-canadian-study-claims/article9317551/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 15 - 03:17 AM I think you are being disingenuous, Joe. It took me about 30 seconds to find this article in the Globe and Mail , Canada's second largest daily paper. It refers to research by the University of Ottowa and provides a link to The Times of India. None of the three can be fairly described as 'muckraking sites' and they all confirm Steve's views. There are none so blind as those who will not see... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 01 Oct 15 - 11:39 PM I've done my own looking, Steve. I've found your accusations and partial quotes repeated over and over and over again, but only on muckraking sites, not in the legitimate press. So, how can I find what isn't there? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Oct 15 - 08:42 PM "But as you say, context is everything, and I'd question your evaluations.. For example to class abortion as murder is an inevitable conclusion of a definition of murder as the act of terminating a human life. I would take it that you would hold to a different definition, but Mother Teresa was hardly unique in accepting that definition. " Of course. But I'm Steve, with an audience of ten ( if I'm lucky). She was Teresa, with an immediate audience of tens of thousands and an ultimate audience of tens of millions. I can't manipulate anybody. She could manipulate millions. She utterly failed to exercise the responsibility that came with that power. She would far rather exploit that power. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Oct 15 - 08:16 PM And now for something completely different. Except that it's not. The name of Dorothy Day has come up a few times in this thread, thanks largely to the fact that Pope Francis cited her to congress as an example of a great American. Though I'm pretty sure she would have cropped up anyway. But it was wondersful tor have the Pope in that setting directing attention to the anti-war activist who set up the radical Socialist Catholic Worker. Here is a articleabout her, specifically in the cntext of the kind of issues this thread has honed in on |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:59 PM Enormous numbers of quotes from Mother Teresa are of course online. The mass of them show her in a very good light indeed. No doubt there are others, and you refer to a number which you see as uncontrovertible evidence that she was a dyed in the wool villain. But as you say, context is everything, and I'd question your evaluations.. For example to class abortion as murder is an inevitable conclusion of a definition of murder as the act of terminating a human life. I would take it that you would hold to a different definition, but Mother Teresa was hardly unique in accepting that definition. That does not imply that she can be assumed to have dealt with women who had had abortions in an accusing or punitive way. Mothers who kill their infant children are rightly liable to be treated with compassion and sympathy rather than punitive blame, and the act is likely to be termed "infanticide". Again, how poor and weak people should behave in the face of injustice is not a simple matter. People have to judge how far fighting back is the right way for them to deal with their situation, and it can be a choice between doing so and surviving. There are times when we have to just have to endure. "Offer it up" is the traditional counsel Catholics have often been given in such sitiations, and I believe it is good advice - even when we are engaged in fighting back, because that does not in any way remove the need to endure suffering. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:54 PM Well what else can you do, Kevin? Why do you think I'm telling Joe to do his own looking? "On the lines of Steve" is hardly fair. I invite anyone who thinks I'm making it up to do some digging. Joe is showing every sign of avoiding that like the plague. But there is plenty about her that is incontrovertible. Many of her quotations are on record verbatim. Context is everything, of course, but when someone says that Aids is your just dessert for being homosexual, or that mothers who abort are murderers, or that the poor shouldn't fight back, it's quite hard to find any context that mitigates. But you're right. As with any controversial matter, you have to apply your judgement about stuff you find online with skill and wisdom. But it isn't impossible. It does require removal of blinkers, however. And that isn't meant as a barb. It's meant as a plea. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Ed T Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:26 PM ""I have as much authority as the Pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it."" ― George Carlin |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:23 PM It's very easy to find highly partisan stuff about Mother Teresa online - denunciations about everything she ever did, and about how she was about the most wicked woman ever born, on the lines of Steve; and the hagiographic equivalent about he a flawless and perfect. But it's by no means easy to find anything that tries to give the facts without spin, leaving it to those reading to make their own minds up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:05 PM One very good example, pete, of what is wicked, immoral and full of wrongdoing is to ignorantly deny scientific endeavour in favour of creationism and try to persuade people to follow you on your trail of prejudice. Hope this helps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:58 PM Look, Joe, all this stuff is out there in the public domain. It's no good asking me when you know full well that you will deny everything I say. Apparently without even checking. I'll tell you what. As an exercise, take any specific point I've made about Mother Teresa. You have quite a few to choose from. Then look in your "legitimate press" (whatever that is), or anywhere else you like, and find the evidence that refutes what I've said. You told me earlier today that you didn't know much about Mother Teresa and the Duvaliers. Well why's that then? Not hard to find, the answer to that, is it? You haven't looked into it, that's why not! Wassup? Don't want to know the reality, that's why not! As for her message being justice for the poor, she spent her life telling the poor not to seek justice but to accept their lot. Another example of you refusing to dig below the spin. And sexual morality is quite a simple thing to discuss, actually. Your priests and nuns may want to make it difficult, but I can make it really easy for them. Unless there is abuse going on, it's none of their business. Any kind of sex you like with any partner you choose. Any kind of contraception you like. If there's no abuse and no exploitation, it's none of your business. And if there is abuse or exploitation, then the very last people you want poking their noses in are priests and nuns. The Church has made sexual morality its business because it sees sex as an instrument of control over its flock. And Mother Teresa, your simple Albanian ASEXUAL nun, was the very worst offender. As for her pronouncements about abortion, they are all out there. The last person you want to be relying on for information is me. Fortunately, it isn't hard to find lots of sources. Go for it. Until you do, quit denying what I say. You are arguing from ignorance, and that does not suit you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: akenaton Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:43 PM Calm down Greg, you know the Church opposes Homosexual "marriage", so why is the lady a "Piece of filth" for supporting her church's views? You are being unreasonable, if you wish to rant do it against Church policy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:34 PM So Joe, why is the Pope supporting Mega-Bigot Davis? He' just lost all of the credit he previously piled up for me. And if this pope is anything, he's not an idiot. He knew exactly what he was doing in annointing Mrs. Piece Of Filth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:08 PM well steve , since you are so keen on moralizing about others , what is your objective standard for what is wicked, immoral and wrongdoing. oh and btw, I do agree though, and thought the same, when I read joes post, that if a royal visit were expected that there would be a tidy up......whether standards were as best as possible or not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:04 PM Gee,. Steve,, did you type all of that at 06:48 AM in a single breath? I see you still haven't been able to find anything from the legitimate press to back up your accusations. Sexual morality is a difficult thing to discuss. There is a sacredness in the sexual relationships between persons, and respecting that sacredness can be a good and healthy thing. But there are no absolute answers to most of the questions, and everybody has a different opinion. I have no objection to churches voicing their opinions, but I don't thing it's appropriate for people to condemn or attack the private sexual conduct of others. And for the most part, I do not see public condemnation or attacks from the Catholic Church about the sexual conduct of its members or of others. Here and there, you'll find a rogue priest or nun or somebody who will get on a kick about something sexual, but it is generally considered in bad taste for priests and nuns to speak publicly about sexual conduct. The standards are in the Catechism for people to read. Even abortion is not spoken of from the pulpit very often in most Catholic churches. For Pope Francis, as it was for Mother Teresa, the big message is justice for the poor. Francis doesn't let other issues get in the way of his primary message. For the most part, it seems to me that Mother Teresa was the same way. Tell me, Steve, on what occasions did Mother Teresa speak out against abortion? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Oct 15 - 02:35 PM "I am the master of this college. What I don't know is not knowledge" ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Oct 15 - 01:34 PM She seemed to believe in the god of money, the god of capitalism, and she wasn't too fussy about her worship methods. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Mrrzy Date: 01 Oct 15 - 11:25 AM Mother Teresa, from her posthumously published letters, didn't believe in the god for whom she professed to be working. Just sayin'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 01 Oct 15 - 08:16 AM I am amazed that her beatification came just six years after her death. Its a good thing proto-Saints have to be dead to be beatified - otherwise apparently we'd be facing a "Saint Davis of Kentucky". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Oct 15 - 06:48 AM The abuses are undeniable. It's just that you don't want to see. As I said, the whistleblowers were mostly people who had worked in the homes. Do some honest delving. No amount of my telling you will convince you. If that's how you want to turn away from stark reality, then you're even more religious than I thought you were. You're trying to turn this into a Hitchens versus Teresa war. Well it isn't. It's the scrap between truth and denial. Last time Lady Di come round to your house with armies of cameramen on a visit planned months in advance, did you forget to pick your dirty undies up off the floor and clear away the sinkful of washing up? Sheesh! Now as for Ms Davis and her moral code, I'd have thought that her first moral duty in the post she held was to carry out the law of the land that had been arrived at via democratic means. Her refusal to issue those licences was illegal and vexatious, yet she was in a post that required her to issue them. As for the other element of sneakiness that appears to be creeping into this thread, the usual conflation of sex 'n' morals (particularly the "morality" of what consenting adults do in private, or whether they want to be married), let's just see whose moral code we are discussing here. Would it by any chance be an imposed and arbitrary moral code, arrived at by celibate men with little or no experience of sexual partnerships and who have lived a life untypical of the vast majority of their flock? Well I'll tell you what I think of moral codes. Real ones are not designed to keep people under control. Real ones start with the premise that what you do should not do harm either to yourself or to others. That you always aim to do what's good, not just for you but for everyone else. Then amplify that by never getting in the way do other people who are sticking to that tenet. Your moral codes that seek to instruct people how they should conduct their private lives are simply immoral. The Catholic Church's moral code relating to gay marriages, contraception and homosexuality is highly immoral, and insiders who care should be fighting it like mad. Not enough of you are seen to be doing so Secretly using condoms in contravention of the code is lily-livered. Let's hear you shouting it from the rooftops! Mother Teresa's moral codes were also highly immoral. It doesn't matter whether you yourself disapprove of abortion or homosexuality. Mother Teresa did not see room for compromise. She called mothers who had abortions murderers. She said that gay people who contracted Aids were getting their just desserts. Just saying those things is highly immoral in itself. I'm not having it that she was a simple Albanian nun who was of her time. You can absolve any wrongdoer in history with that horribly flawed approach. She was a scheming, capitalist fundamentalist who made millions by misrepresenting her work to the world. Simple Albanian nun my arse. And stop offending Albanians. That's just immoral. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Megan L Date: 01 Oct 15 - 05:12 AM My mother who came from an area where people still worshipped in the covenanter tradition used to tell me to use a lang stick when measuring the lives of others. This came from the big rulers used on blackboards. They were a yard long often marked in inches,as you moved to other classroom rulers the marks got closer together quarter, eighth,twelfth, sixteenth and thirty seconds of an inch. The bigger the stick the more forgiving the measurement. Her words were a Scottish paraphrase of the text judge not lest ye be judged for as you judge others so shall ye be judged. The bible also says that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. The slippy stane |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: akenaton Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:36 AM Sorry about that mixed up layout, but I'm sure you get the jist. The Church has no power to force people to do anything, all they can do is persuade. All the force is used by "here today gone tomorrow" politicians in thrall to a despicable media. People no longer possess free will, they are led like sheep by people who are determined to destroy traditional society and above all the Church that you so obviously love. I find your stance on the issue almost unbelievable, given that you have such an understanding of theology. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: akenaton Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:23 AM I'm not talking about government Joe, I'm talking about the stance of the Church. Government laws come and go according to fashion or political expediency. The Church defends moral values as the Church sees them.but it's up to individuals to live up to those standards and not the duty of the state to force people to follow moral standards. "but it's up to individuals to live up to those standards and not the duty of the state to force people to follow moral standards." Perhaps that should have read "immoral standards" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:56 AM Yes, Ake, many Catholic bishops have actively opposed gay marriage, and lobbied hard for government prohibitions against gay marriage - but the Pope hasn't done that. I think he has a different view of morality. He expresses the moral standard, which is opposition to gay marriage - but it's up to individuals to live up to those standards and not the duty of the state to force people to follow moral standards. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: akenaton Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:49 AM " But she should understand that other people have different moral codes that they must follow, and she should not interfere with them." Surely not?...The Church is in the business of defining morality as guidance to society. The Catholic Church opposes homosexual "marriage" and the Pope was perfectly correct to speak to the lady concerned and thank her for her brave stance. Does one expect the Church to validate "open" marriages, polygamous , or same sex ones, just because a tiny portion of society wishes to avail themselves of this form of relationship. The Church has championed the family, first and foremost as the best way of constructing a sustainable society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:43 AM Here's a brief excerpt from the eurekalert document - it's a quote from Hitchens quoting Mother Teresa:
That's not the same as condoning or encouraging or promoting the injustice that caused the suffering, but that appears to be the implication from Hitchens. There is no evidence that Mother Teresa condoned or approved such injustice, and it is ludicrous for Hitchens to condemn her for doing so. And as for the accusations of unsanitary conditions and improper medical practices in the facilities Mother Teresa operated - Princess Diana visited some of those facilities and promoted the work of Mother Teresa. No doubt, Diana was accompanied by many reporters and photographers from the legitimate press - why didn't Diana and her reporters uncover these abuses, if they existed? Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity have founded convents and facilities for the poor in the United States. I know only of their operations in San Francisco and Sacramento. They have a reputation for being spartan, but fastidiously clean. And the nuns are not lavish or wasteful in any way. They know how to stretch their financial resources. Then again, I don't particularly like them because they're far too conservative for me - but I can't find fault with them otherwise. In my experience, most people who work with the poor, are good folks - even if I don't agree with their ideology. I don't agree with the Hitchens propaganda for the simple reason that it just doesn't make sense - what reason would Mother Teresa have to be as wicked as Hitchens describes her to be? Why would being so wicked be to her advantage? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:07 AM Yeah, but that eurekalert.org link is just a regurgitation of the so-called "expose" from Hitchens. There really has been no such information in the legitimate press. As far as I can see, the primary sin that Steve Shaw has uncovered in Mother Teresa is that she was an aged Catholic who espoused the thinking of Catholics of her time. I get annoyed at such thinking, but I don't think it's particularly horrible. My saintly mother-in-law was born about the same time, and had similar annoying ideas - but she was an exemplary mother and grandmother despite her antiquated ideology. I don't know what interaction Mother Teresa had with the Duvaliers of Haiti, so I can't comment on that. I do know that she wanted to establish a convent in Haiti so she could work with the poor people there. To do that, she had to negotiate with the Duvaliers, and it's quite possible that they said nice things about her. In my own work with homelessness and criminal justice reform in my county, I've found that I have to negotiate withe people I may not always respect - and I have to be nice to them. To serve the poor, you have to get your hands dirty. It does appear that the Catholic Church is going back to the practice of declaring sainthood within a relatively short time after the saint's death. Saints are chosen because of the lessons they can teach people. They are far more relevant in their own time, than they are a hundred or two hundred years later. I think the Pope has canonized enough people to keep the conservatives happy for a while. He's canonized only on my list of favorites John XXIII. I'd like to see him canonize Dorothy Day, Thomas Merton, and Joseph Cardinal Bernadin of Chicago. It appears to be a fact that the Pope met with Kim Davis, the recalcitrant anti-homosexual county clerk from Kentucky. We don't know the circumstances of the meeting, or what was said - but it's clear that Ms. Kim has put her own "spin" on the encounter. If I were Pope, I'd meet with Ms. Davis, too. I'd tell her that it is a good and admirable thing for her to have a strict moral code. If she believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, then she should follow that belief very strictly, and she should not ever consider getting married to a woman. But she should understand that other people have different moral codes that they must follow, and she should not interfere with them. She should support them in living their lives the way they believe they are called to live. I'm guessing the Pope said something very wise to her, but I don't know that we'll ever know what he said to her. -Joe- |