As Pope Heads to Brazil, a Rival Theology Persists
SÃO PAULO, Brazil, May 2 — In the early 1980s, when Pope John Paul II wanted to clamp down on what he considered a dangerous, Marxist-inspired movement in the Roman Catholic Church, liberation theology, he turned to a trusted aide: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
Now Cardinal Ratzinger is Pope Benedict XVI, and when he arrives here on Wednesday for his first pastoral visit to Latin America he may be surprised at what he finds. Liberation theology, which he once called “a fundamental threat to the faith of the church,” persists as an active, even defiant force in Latin America, home to nearly half the world’s one billion Roman Catholics.
Over the past 25 years, even as the Vatican moved to silence the clerical theorists of liberation theology and the church fortified its conservative hierarchy, the social and economic ills the movement highlighted have worsened. In recent years, the politics of the...
I'm sure you meant to say "ROMAN Catholics" instead of "Catholics". Remember, the word "catholic" means unuviersal. So let's be accurate in our semantics.
He has raised character assassination to an art form. Thus...he writes, "Pope John Paul II like Pope Benedict XVI, are no doubt more pro-Nazi than pro-Communist...".
1-JPII had friends killed by Nazi's and worked in one of their work camps (involuntarily). 2-JPII spent his years as a churchman making monkeys of the Commie's (Sorry Jim...no reflection on you and monkeys) 3-Bene XVI, went awol from the German army.
What more supercillous thing can Jim write that would render his credibity more like swiss-cheese? How about Mother Teresa was from Alpha Centauri?
"And what I had in mind had nothing to do with imminent (sic) domain but the supposed ‘right’ of a lazy slug to help himself to the hard-earned goods of his neighbor because of this communist “universal destination of goods” concept."
Lance, Dan is interpreting those paragraphs of the Catechism of the CC according to what he wants them to mean, not according to what they mean.
One who calls himself a Protestant yet is leaning toward Rome is not really a Protestant so wouldn’t qualify as a “general Protestant” or any other kind. But I’m pretty sure that’s the kind of prot you have in mind when you think of general prots – one who is almost ready to bow down and slaver on the pope’s slippers.
And what I had in mind had nothing to do with imminent domain but the supposed ‘right’ of a lazy slug to help himself to the hard-earned goods of his neighbor because of this communist “universal destination of goods” concept. THAT is what the objective reader will see but if he doesn’t we will be sure to point it out.
"I think you'll find that general Protestant thinking on these matters coincides with that of the RCC"
So what? I don't care a fig about what "general Protestant thinking" is, since much of it today is sub- or anti-Biblical, & thus well along the road to Rome. Truth is not obtained by polls, esp. of seminary professors.
Surely if the papacy objected to Marxist economic theory, popes JP2 & Bene would have gone into detail there. Instead, they warn of its philosophical atheism, which given the practical atheism of Rome (Scripture takes a back seat to Aristotle & Aquinas), is ironic.
So Rome has only itself to blame if Jesuits & their S. American dupes find the barrier between Marxism & RCC social teaching so permeable.
It wasn't that long ago that your esteemed co-religious (Jim the Dim) asserted that JPII was responsible for allowing the Marxist inspired 'Liberation Theology' to flourish in South America. But in the article above we quote, "...In the early 1980s, when Pope John Paul II wanted to clamp down on what he considered a dangerous, Marxist-inspired movement in the Roman Catholic Church, liberation theology...". It would seem that: 1- Jim is still dim. 2- Jim is full of other things besides God's grace.
Another slant on the universal destination of goods, or at least land, perhaps:-
"In English common law theory, the Crown has radical title or the allodium of all land in England, meaning that it is the ultimate "owner" of all land. However the Crown can grant an abstract entity—called an estate in land—which is what is owned. "
"True allodial title is rare, with most property ownership in the common law world—primarily, the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand—described more properly as being in fee simple. In particular, land is said to be "held of the Crown" in England and Wales and the Commonwealth realms. In England, there is no allodial land, all land being held of the Crown; even in the United States most lands are not allodial, as evidenced by the existence of property taxes. Some of the Commonwealth realms recognise native title, a form of allodial title that does not originate from a Crown grant." (wikipedia)
"Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." 2 Cor. 3:6
The devil and GG, like father and son. I get it! You are good at that whole honest thing. Yeah, those baptists don't count in Texas, most of em are Southern Baptist, which means... 'so-called" Baptists. stinkin traitors.
Well...compared to fanatic fundies...the Devil is at least honesty about the evil he does. He doesn't put on aires about, "Doing God's will". Beside after living in Texas...hell will seem familiar. There are a lot of Baptists in Texas too!
13
There are a total of 32 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Dr. Alan Cairns | 8/3/2009
COMMENTS | 
