AmericanPapist Comments
I completely agree. I'm just waiting for Anna Quindlen and Andrew Sullivan to begin taking credit for this dramatic reversal.
Thinking too much about the media/church/non-savvy readers causes me to plummet into depression.
What percentage of baptized Catholics would you estimate could articulate the principle of double effect? .001? What percentage of that percentage would you estimate could explain why said principle does or does not apply in this instance?
I'll be very interested to see what Get Religion has to say on this topic, as well. (the media coverage of the rumored event)
Just to depart on a tangent, but it seems to me that some of the curial types have been rather yappy.
One wonders if there might be an attempt happening to make Papa look like the bad guy when the papal axe starts swinging.
What Nancy said.
(Did I already say that?)
Wasn't there buzz in the media a few years ago about some high Vatican physician indicating that condoms were going to be ruled okay to prevent AIDS? And didn't it later turn out that the media had got it wrong and that the person they referenced didn't actually say what they thought he said? I suspect this is probably much the same thing, though of course I could be wrong.
Something about this whole story just doesn't sound right. For the past few months, all indications suggest the Pope has been working overtime to reconcile the SSPX folk with Rome. Why would he do something like this now which would no doubt send them running in the other direction?
Do we have any reason to think Benedict even knows what the present draft of this document actually contains? Could this really be a sly attempt by some to undermine the Pope? A coup of sorts, perhaps?
Last time I checked the lesser of two evils was still evil.
We all know Ratzinger would never allow something like this to ever happen, neither would the Holy Spirit. I cant think of any sound moral reasoning for allowing it.
I'm going to wait for the actual Vatican document, if it does exist at all. I've learned long ago to take what the press says with an enormous grain of salt.
I see two possibilities here:
a. The scenario Nancy suggests is possible; or
b. Some people are trying to force Il Papa's hand, in which case, they are wasting their time. No one, but no one, will ever get Benedict XVI to compromise the Truth of our Faith. The man may be the gentlest person on earth, but as Paul said, he is no pushover.
Just to pick up a meme seen on a few other Catholic blogs on this - we all need to become "Missourians" on this topic.
"Show Me".
That is all. :^)
Does anyone know the source for 'Truth is not determined by a majority vote'? (And I don't mean the attribution on the back of the t-shirt, either;-)).
Commenting by HaloScan
