The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Is the Pope Toying with Heresy?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Are Catholic truths immutable? Or can they change with the changing times?

This is the deeper question behind the issues that convulsed the three-week synod on the family of the 250 Catholic bishops in Rome that ended Saturday.

A year ago, German Cardinal Walter Kasper called on the church to change — to welcome homosexual couples, and to permit cohabiting and divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion.
Retorted traditionalists: This is heresy.

Had the pope followed his friend Cardinal Kasper and ordered Catholic teaching and diocesan practice changed, he could have provoked a schism inside the Church.

Such a change in doctrine would have called into question papal infallibility. Defined at the Vatican Council of 1869-70, that doctrine declares that when the pope teaches ex cathedra, on matters of faith and morals, he is protected from error by the Holy Ghost. Doctrinal truths, taught by popes in communion with the bishops, down through the ages, cannot change.

But if Catholic truths about the indissolubility of marriage and intrinsic immorality of homosexual unions can be changed, then, either the Church has been in grave error in the past, or the Church is toying with heresy today.

Saturday, The Washington Post described the synod as a “brawl over Francis’ vision of inclusion.”

Reporter Anthony Faiola compared the synod deliberations to a Tea Party rebellion in John Boehner’s House caucus, and the pope to a change agent like Barack Obama who finds himself blocked and frustrated by conservatives.

Saturday’s document from the synod ignored the call for a new Church stance toward homosexual unions. And it did not approve of giving Communion to divorced and remarried Catholics, whom the Church considers to be living in adultery.

Yet, in Sunday’s sermon the pope seemed angered by both the defiance of the resisting bishops and the conclusions the synod reached. To Pope Francis, the traditionalists appear to be placing the strictures of moral law above the Gospel command of mercy.

“None of the disciples stopped, as Jesus did” said Francis of the blind man. “If Bartimaeus was blind, they were deaf. His problem was not their problem.

“This can be a danger to us. … A faith that does not know how to grow roots into the lives of people remains arid and, rather than oases, creates other deserts.”

The pope seems to be saying that the dissenting bishops, no matter their command of moral law, are lacking in charity, the greatest of the three theological virtues.

Where does the bishops’ synod on the family leave the Church?

In confusion, and at risk of going the way of the Protestant churches that continue to hemorrhage congregants.

Recall. With its acceptance of birth control at the Lambeth conference of 1930, the Church of England started down this road, as did its sister, the Episcopal Church. The process led to the decline of both.

From birth control, to divorce and remarriage, women priests, gay clergy, homosexual bishops, same-sex marriage, the Episcopal Church first broke apart, and now appears to be going gentle into that good night.

Indeed the Church of England began in schism, when Henry VIII broke with Rome after Pope Clement VII refused to approve his divorce from Catherine of Aragon and his marriage to Anne Boleyn. According to Cardinal Kasper, Clement should have cut Henry some slack.

In this battle between traditionalists in the synod and the bishops who favor acceptance of some or all of Kasper’s recommendations, the pope seems to stand squarely on the side of the reformers.

Yet, it was the Protestant Reformation that destroyed the unity of Catholicism, five centuries ago, as it divided nations and led to conflicts of religion and nationalism, such as the Thirty Years War.

How the Catholic Church can avoid greater confusion among the faithful — after the pope’s virtual blessing of the Kasper recommendations, and the synod’s rejection of them — escapes me.

What does the pope do now?

If he ignores the synod’s dissent and moves the Church toward the Kasper position, he could cause a traditionalist break, a schism. Third World bishops might well refuse to change.

If he does nothing, he will disappoint Western bishops, priests and secularists who have seen in his papacy hope for an historic change in Catholic teaching and practice.

If he permits the bishops to follow their consciences in their dioceses, he will advance the disintegration of the Church.

The inevitable result of any of these courses that the pope chooses will be, it seems, to deepen the confusion of the faithful.

As for Pope Francis himself, he, too, must choose.

He can emulate Cardinal Wolsey — or Thomas More.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Copyright 2015 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Catholic Church, Pope Francis 
Hide 34 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Patrick,
    I doubt if there is any such thing as Catholic truth or Doctrinal truths. There is only truth and it is facts about something and not imagined, invented or guessed .
    You claim ” the Protestant churches that continue to hemorrhage congregants” because of the acceptance of birth control at the Lambeth conference of 1930.
    The Catholic Church continues to haemorrhage congregants because it has not accepted birth control.
    I would suggest that the Catholic Church is only surviving in the Philippines, South America and Africa because girls are not allowed to be educated and the Catholic church holds so much power over politicians.
    Educate the women and birth control follows naturally.
    Trying to keep religious beliefs of the 17th century alive in the 21st century strikes me as pointless.

  2. If he ignores the synod’s dissent and moves the Church toward the Kasper position, he could cause a traditionalist break, a schism. Third World bishops might well refuse to change.

    If he does nothing, he will disappoint Western bishops, priests and secularists who have seen in his papacy hope for an historic change in Catholic teaching and practice.

    So basically what Pat is saying is that the Third World is at the moment the defender of Christian tradition and ergo, Christendom.

    That’s ominous.

  3. @Silver Miner

    Strange that women are educated in the Philippines, yet the RCC is just as strong as it ever was. It’s not in Latin America, but the problem is liberation theology and evangelicals making in roads, particularly Pentecostals. Stand for nothing and you’ll fall.

  4. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:

    Why not really be inclusive and allow pagan polytheists into the church?

    Why not allow Satan worshipers too?

  5. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:

    Give it up.

    The catholic church is dead.

    The seeds of its destruction lies in radical universalism that promotes diversity and in requiring priests to be celibate, which means closet-homos took over.

    • Replies: @Amateur Brain Surgeon
  6. Johann says:

    The Francis Church is an heretical church, no doubt about it. Francis has manufactured an image of an all caring and all loving patriarch but in reality he is a vicious aggressive ideologue. Francis failed to mention anything about the Planned Parenthood practice of killing infants just before birth and then selling their parts to the highest bidder, he also ignored the action of the US Supreme Court which redefined traditional marriage and made their definition the new law of the land. He also had nothing to say about the destructive actions of the ‘American military which had just bombed a doctors without borders hospital in Afghanistan while he as lionizing the American government and the Obama/Biden regime. However when he goes after traditional Catholics who still lead the lives that the Faith of their Fathers taught them he is extremely insulting and vicious; he has used his public statements to call Catholics who do not agree with his Peronista view of the world every name in the book. Cardinals who do not follow his order to fundamentally change the Church are demoted and sent away from Vatican positions. So Francis like his counterpart in Canterbury thinks that if he accommodates the modernist heresies found in the American Empire and the EU Empire he will win thousands of new members to the Church. He should look at the “bare ruined choirs’ in the Church of England and most of the main line American churches to see the future of the Church which he is creating. The Church is struggling now to hold on to the faithful few but Bergoglio wants to kick those very people in the teeth. Sede vacante.

  7. D. K. says:
    @Johann

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/11/08/pope-francis-demotes-conservative-us-cardinal-raymond-burke/18710769/

    Cardinal Burke was a classmate of my brother, in Rome, and I saw them ordained together, in the largest ordination in the history of the Church, forty years ago, at the hands of Pope Paul VI, in St. Peter’s Square. My brother attended a reunion, several weeks ago, which included a class photo with Pope Francis. He and my brother, who has been a priest in El Salvador for over thirty years, exchanged a few words in Spanish, after the Pope noticed that my brother was wearing a hat from the beatification of Archbishop Romero, who was assassinated, while saying Mass, in 1980.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  8. any organization, entity, person, govt, country that doesn’t change with the times becomes obsolete. at the very least give the appearance of change.

    this pope is just giving an appearance. smart fucker right there.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    , @Minnesota Mary
  9. AndrewR says:

    >caring about a 2,000 year old Jewish pederasty ring

  10. AndrewR says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    How dare you suggest that the Church not maintain the customs of bronze age Jews!

  11. The pope seems to be saying that the dissenting bishops, no matter their command of moral law, are lacking in charity, the greatest of the three theological virtues.

    I agree with the pope. But it’s none of my business. I’m not Catholic.

    I always thought that Catholics revered or at least respected their pope. I had heard that they regarded the Pope as infallible regarding religious matters. Now I hear many Catholic voices raised against the pope. Is the pope toying with heresy? Is not the pope better qualified to answer this question than Pat Buchanan?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Hibernian
    , @tbraton
  12. @Silver Miner

    My wife is Filipina, Silver Miner, and you are way off base with the notion that girls aren’t allowed to be educated in the Phils. They are often, and it seems increasingly, more well educated and trained than many of the men, for whatever reasons.

    I’ll agree with you that large numbers of adherents to any religion, including Catholicism, are more likely to follow the religion uncritically when the religion is very dominant in their country’s culture and simply taken for granted.

    But to be fair, you could acknowledge that many people continue to adhere to Catholicism, or to Christianity, even after putting serious thought into it as adults. You may not agree with them, but you can’t write them all off as mindless believers by default.

  13. @Johann

    Johann, I couldn’t have said it better myself. Jorge Bergoglio is a destructive influence and a deceiver.

  14. @D. K.

    Sad that your brother gave up a chance at the normal full life which befits an adult man, to become a priest. But hey, even if he has no wife and children and did nothing to perpetuate his family and his people into the future, at least he has a hat from some other strange wife-less child-less man’s “beatification.”

    As a Catholic, I’m increasingly embarrassed by this kind of childish church-worshipping (not GOD-worshipping), by the focus on stupid outdated hats and costumes, the exaltation of strange & incomplete men as spiritual leaders.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    , @D. K.
  15. Rehmat says: • Website

    Catholic church has been changing since it’s established in 325 in Rome under the guidance of a pagan Roman emperor to attract more sheep. It has changed so much that some Evangelic priest talk about Israel than their Lord Christ.

    The Vatican just celebrated the 50th anniversary of Nostra Aetate declaration, drawn up by the Second Vatican Council and promulgated by Pope Paul VI on October 28, 1965. The document forbids the good Christians to believe in several dozens of anti-Jewish parables mentioned in the New Testament. No wonder, the first Jesuit Pope Francis has declared that “there is a Jew inside every Christian”.

    http://rehmat1.com/2014/06/19/pope-francis-inside-every-christian-is-a-jew/

    • Replies: @D. K.
  16. D. K. says:
    @RadicalCenter

    I was referring to a souvenir baseball cap, not a religious hat. I myself am a long-lapsed Catholic, but to hear someone refer to himself as a Catholic, while at the same time lamenting how sad it is that someone became a Catholic priest, strikes me as a tad bizarre. Like my priestly brother, I am an old man who has never married, nor had children, so feel free to tell me what a disgrace I am to my race and family. (All three of my mother’s sisters were childless “old maids,” so my own family’s standards might have been a bit different from yours.) By the way, six of our other seven siblings (another of our brothers died, unmarried and childless, in his twenties) produced a total of nineteen children, although two of those died in adolescence of a rare genetic disease. Since the standard replacement rate is 2.1, the nine of us produced just more than the required 18.9. My five sisters themselves produced seventeen of the nineteen offspring– which is almost 62% above replacement!

  17. D. K. says:
    @Rehmat

    From Wikipedia.org:

    ***

    Catholic was first used to describe the Christian church in the early 2nd century.[19] The first known use of the phrase “the catholic church” (he katholike ekklesia) occurred in the letter from St Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about 110 AD.[note 3] In the Catechetical Discourses of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, the name “Catholic Church” is used to distinguish it from other groups that also call themselves the Church.[20][21]

    ***

    *****

    ***

    The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪˈsiːə/; Greek: Νίκαια [ˈni:kaɪja]) was a council of Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in Bithynia by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. This first ecumenical council was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.[5] It was presided by Hosius of Corduba, a bishop from the West.

    Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the nature of the Son of God and his relationship to God the Father,[3] the construction of the first part of the Creed of Nicaea, establishing uniform observance of the date of Easter,[6] and promulgation of early canon law.[4][7]

    ***

    Roman Catholics assert that the idea of Christ’s deity was ultimately confirmed by the Bishop of Rome, and that it was this confirmation that gave the council its influence and authority. In support of this, they cite the position of early fathers and their expression of the need for all churches to agree with Rome (see Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses III:3:2).

    However, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox do not believe the Council viewed the Bishop of Rome as the jurisdictional head of Christendom, or someone having authority over other bishops attending the Council. In support of this, they cite Canon 6, where the Roman Bishop could be seen as simply one of several influential leaders, but not one who had jurisdiction over other bishops in other regions.[73]

    According to Protestant theologian Philip Schaff, “The Nicene fathers passed this canon not as introducing anything new, but merely as confirming an existing relation on the basis of church tradition; and that, with special reference to Alexandria, on account of the troubles existing there. Rome was named only for illustration; and Antioch and all the other eparchies or provinces were secured their admitted rights. The bishoprics of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch were placed substantially on equal footing.”[74]

    There is however, an alternate Roman Catholic interpretation of the above 6th canon proposed by Fr. James F. Loughlin. It involves five different arguments “drawn respectively from the grammatical structure of the sentence, from the logical sequence of ideas, from Catholic analogy, from comparison with the process of formation of the Byzantine Patriarchate, and from the authority of the ancients”[75] in favor of an alternative understanding of the canon. According to this interpretation, the canon shows the role the Bishop of Rome had when he, by his authority, confirmed the jurisdiction of the other patriarchs—an interpretation which is in line with the Roman Catholic understanding of the Pope.[75]

    ***

    *****

    In other words, the Catholic Church was already hundreds of years old by the time of the Council of Nicaea (which did not take place in Rome itself). According to tradition, of course, the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ Himself, early in the first century A.D., in the Roman province of Judaea, with the disciple Simon, a.k.a. Peter, designated as its first head (and thus, the first pope).

    • Replies: @Rehmat
  18. dfordoom says: • Website
    @WorkingClass

    I agree with the pope. But it’s none of my business. I’m not Catholic.

    Francis is a pope for people who hate the Catholic Church.

  19. D. K. says:
    @RadicalCenter

    I just belatedly noticed that you are the same commenter who is married to a Filipina. I take it, however, that you are White!?! How does that marriage translate into perpetuating your own people into the future, pray tell?

  20. Hibernian says:
    @WorkingClass

    “Is not the pope better qualified to answer this question than Pat Buchanan?”

    Maybe we could answer that question by flipping a coin.

    There have been good, bad, and indifferent Popes. As long as the Holy Father only toys with heresy and does not proclaim it, ex cathedra, as Catholic doctrine, the infallibility doctrine stands, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church, as Our Lord promised us.

  21. Art says:

    Let the schism begin. Is the Church about its priests and bishops or is it about Jesus.

    Jesus presents to us the image of a kind God – Jesus gives us hope – He makes life sacred – He is about love – and He is about forgiveness. He is about ideals that produce an easier and better life

    What the bishops want is not about any of those things. What they want is a heavy handed power over people’s lives. The power they seek to deny Jesus from people’s lives is not theirs. They are do not God. They misrepresent Jesus.

    Even an abortion can be forgiven, even a divorce can be forgiven, even none ideal sex can be forgiven. It is not the Pope’s intent to promote these things. A wrong is a wrong is a wrong. His intent is too NOT push these people away from the benefits of a Christian life. A wrong in some part of a life, does not condemn the whole life – that is Jesus’ message.

    Kudos to Pope Frances – God speed!

    • Replies: @ken
  22. @Astuteobservor II

    Well, the Catholic Church has been around and growing for almost 2,000 years, and up until the Second Vatican Council she has been counter cultural. Once she began embracing the culture and the government her numbers started shrinking in vocations, parishes, and mass attendance in the Western cultures. The only real growth is in parts of the world that cling to the traditional Faith and teachings. But it’s not enough to offset the overall decline in numbers.

    I don’t expect the Church to pull out of this decline because Jesus, the Prophet, said, “When the Son of Man returns, will He find any Faith?” He wouldn’t have asked that question if he expected to find a lot of people with faith within His Church.

    Christ also said that His Father would have to shorten the days to the end or even the elect would be lost.

    So I am expecting a much smaller but holier Church in the end times.

  23. @Johann

    Yes, Sede Vacante.

    Jorge Bergoglio is an anti-pope. Think about it. No true pope of the Catholic Church would even entertain the notion of mooting the propositions that Francis defended at the Synod. Francis does not belong to the Catholic Church; he belongs to the Vatican II Church and the Novus Ordo Missae. This is not unprecedented. There have been plenty of anti-popes before, but probably not since the days of Athanasius and the Arian heresy has the whole of Christendom plunged so pitifully into error.

    We need to get rid of the Novus Ordo and restore the Traditional Latin Mass. We need to repudiate the Second Vatican Council and anathematize its documents, along with every so-called pope from John XXIII to Francis, inclusive. And we need a complete restoration of Scholastic philosophy and a whole new appreciation of metaphysics to serve as the basis from which to salvage the good parts of Western civilization and rebuild a workable order.

    This is what it means to be a “conservative” today. It means to be a perennialist-traditionalist who rightly sees the entire modern world as the enemy. This is what the true popes of the past did, like Pope St. Pius X when he issue his thundering encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, or Pope Pius the IX with his Syllabus of Errors. They were as far away from Francis as the light is from the darkness.

    Pat Buchanan has been inching incrementally closer to Sedevacantism for several years now and I hope he will shortly come to see the light, and use his considerable reputation to popularize the notion to those who otherwise would probably never hear of it.

  24. Corvinus says:

    “I would suggest that the Catholic Church is only surviving in the Philippines, South America and Africa because girls are not allowed to be educated and the Catholic church holds so much power over politicians. Educate the women and birth control follows naturally. Trying to keep religious beliefs of the 17th century alive in the 21st century strikes me as pointless.”

    From my vantage point, astute analysis.

    The fact of the matter is that religion historically has served as a social control for the devout. Primed by materialism, the rapid advances in technology, and the Age of Enlightenment, we as a society are at a historic crossroads. Societies adapt. Civilizations adapt. So, too, will the major religions in some fashion, lest they become increasingly irrelevant among the masses.

    “Yet, it was the Protestant Reformation that destroyed the unity of Catholicism, five centuries ago, as it divided nations and led to conflicts of religion and nationalism, such as the Thirty Years War.”

    This “unity of Catholicism” is a false narrative—there always had been division and discord among the various faiths regarding the interpretation of the Bible and over doctrinal issues.

    “How the Catholic Church can avoid greater confusion among the faithful — after the pope’s virtual blessing of the Kasper recommendations, and the synod’s rejection of them — escapes me.”



    This potential historic shift is no different than any other pivotal moment in Church history.

    “If he ignores the synod’s dissent and moves the Church toward the Kasper position, he could cause a traditionalist break, a schism. Third World bishops might well refuse to change.”

    To me, there is an interesting parallel here within the GOP. The “establishment” is somehow surprised that their tried and true strategies to rally support for their base, crafted by “expert consultants”, no longer applies in light of a changing and angry electorate. Karl Rove’s defiance on Fox News during the 2012 Election exposed his refusal to admit the old ways of doing things inevitably are coming to an end. That is the way of history in light of monumental paradigm shifts due to decades of cultural and social changes. As an example, slavery was biblically justified in the 1600 and 1700’s—by the mid-1800’s, this “peculiar institution” underwent brutal philosophical attacks by the Church. Therein lies the choice—adapt or face impending irrelevancy.

    “So basically what Pat is saying is that the Third World is at the moment the defender of Christian tradition and ergo, Christendom. That’s ominous.”

    Praytell, who made this “Third World”?

  25. ken says:
    @Art

    Uh, no. Jesus was about conversion, not merely forgiveness.

  26. tbraton says:
    @WorkingClass

    “I agree with the pope. But it’s none of my business. I’m not Catholic.”

    I’m not Catholic (although my ex-wife was). In fact, I’m not even religious. So my opinion will probably not matter to those who have the greatest stake in this matter, Pat Buchanan and other Catholics. But my impression is this new Pope is much too political, and his politics tend to veer too sharply to the left. The one issue which he decided to stick his face into that got my craw was his stance on man-made global warming. That is an issue that is extremely divisive among scientists and politicians. I have no idea what expertise Pope Francis brings to the table that could possibly shed any light on the issue. And what exactly does man-made global warming have to do with the moral issues of the Catholic Church? If I were religiously inclined and a Catholic, I believe I would prefer a leader of the Church who focused exclusively on moral issues and held himself out exclusively as a moral leader.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
  27. Rehmat says:
    @D. K.

    @DK – Anyone who quotes Israeli Wikipedia to support his point – has always made me laugh.

    • Replies: @D. K.
  28. @tbraton

    Apparently the pope believes that man made global warming is real. If he is right then not doing anything about it is a moral issue. Americans are deeply divided on the issue but the Roman Church is not just an American Church. Could stewardship in general be regarded as a moral issue? Is same sex marriage a political issue or a moral issue? Abortion? I don’t see how the pope can avoid being political.

    So it’s not surprising to me that some will oppose him for political reasons. What surprised me is that Catholic laity are arguing with him about doctrine. I’m not surprised any more of course. I live and learn.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  29. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:

    Pat

    There is no way to be nice about it:It is time for you to leave the Catholic Church!!!!

    Pat, I am as Irish as they come…massively socially and culturally Conservative…not an Athiest…In fact, I hate the New Athiests(read Noam Chomsky’s devastating critique of the New Athiests). But the homo old queen Pope wants a majority Hispanic Church. It’s not our Church Anymore.

    For reasons of racial solidarity Pat:join The Conservative Orthodox Christian Church.

    The Catholic Church could have easily organized a rebellion against legalized homo-filth marriage through every Catholic Church in the US…but it never happened.

    The Vatican is a filthy-stinking-reeking-gay-steam-bathouse. It’s over Pat.

    I am Irish(Westmeath and Kilarney in the South) ex-Catholic-and I hate the New Athiests(another homo religion as far as I can tell).

  30. tbraton says:
    @WorkingClass

    “Apparently the pope believes that man made global warming is real.”

    So, just because Pope Francis “believes” that man-made global warming is real, that elevates the issue to a religious issue which the Catholic Church must address? I don’t buy that. I remember when the Church thought it knew much better than one of the world’s greatest scientists, Galileo, and decreed that the Sun revolved around the Earth, and not the other way around. And exactly what scientific knowledge does the good Pope possess to justify his belief? He studied humanities while preparing for the priesthood and afterward taught literature and psychology. There is also a big difference between AGW and homosexuality. After all, the Church has long been in the business of marrying men and women and has for a very long time been opposed to homosexuality. So that issue seems to be ingrained as part of the Church’s historic mission. On the other hand, I don’t seem to recall the Church being in the business of selling Priuses or Teslas. For some reason, since you admit that you are not Catholic, I think you would most unhappy if the Pope were to announce that global warming was an issue beyond the purview of the Church and did not involve any Church doctrine and was a matter for the scientists to hash out. But since he has come out against AGW, you are willing to give him a warm embrace.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
  31. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:

    Russian Conservative Orthodox Church specifically….

  32. @tbraton

    “For some reason, since you admit that you are not Catholic, I think you would most unhappy if the Pope were to announce that global warming was an issue beyond the purview of the Church and did not involve any Church doctrine and was a matter for the scientists to hash out. But since he has come out against AGW, you are willing to give him a warm embrace.”

    I don’t give a fuck about AGW. That’s your hobby horse. You are a piss poor mind reader.

  33. D. K. says:
    @Rehmat

    I cited Wikipedia.org for the sake of ease, Rehmat, because you are only worth so much effort. As a born-and-bred Roman Catholic, albeit now long-lapsed, with a fairly significant Catholic education– five-plus years at a Catholic grade school, a few more years of catechism classes, two years at a Catholic college, as an underclassman, complete with required courses in Religion– and with an older brother who is a Vatican-trained priest, ordained by Pope Paul VI himself, forty years ago, I really do not need to be educated on the history of Christianity, generally, or the Roman Catholic Church, specifically, by some half-witted Third World Muslim, now living the life of Reilly in the First World.

  34. @Priss Factor

    Good point about the rules for continence and celibacy because those institutions which allow for marriage – schools, boy scouts, etc – never have a problem with sodomites

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS