Fair enough, ita, no one's saying he felt bad about it- I suppose I should say, I'm not willing to wave it away in light of his current poor standing with me.

Do you think he's creating an "other" to hate, or that he's preaching the doctrine he believes is true.

I think saying Buddhists could replace Marxists as the church's enemy is creating an "other" to hate, whether he believes it's true or not.

I am not a Catholic, and I could go through the Catechism, if I could be arsed to do so, and tell you where I think Catholic doctrine is wrong. Would that make me a hater, or one who promotes hate? How is it different from what we're doing now (except of course, that we're only talking to each other--and don't have the attention of the world--yet).

I don't understand your point. I didn't say he was a hater because he pointed out what was wrong with other religions. I said that he points to lies and distortions as if they are wholly a result of secularism, and I'm pointing out that if that's all he learned from the Holocaust, it was a poor lesson indeed, since his words quoted upthread were distortions.

I can imagine a less-martial definition of enemy -- these are the forces that will encourage people away from Catholicism

I can also imagine a less-martial way of expressing the concept, just as you have.

I would have liked to see some one different, but I didn't expect anyone different. I am not religious, and so I have no religious stakes in this , but I would like to see the catholic church move faster on admitting mistakes. Turns out the city I live in now was a dumping ground for problem priests. One of my good friends has a brother that was abused by his priest. It took amazing courage and years of dedication and research for him to prove his story. Last night was a formal apology service. My friend's family is still hated by other member of the congregation that think D is lying. (by the way - he is getting a lot of healing by bringing this public) What I would like to see is the Catholic Church admit that it has made some serious errors that have harmed people and MOVE forward to try and improve the situation.

Is he young (for a papabile)?

Yep. Sixty, so he's got a few more shots at this.

Vortex, birth control pills can be prescribed for a medical reason without violating doctrine. If another form does not have a valid medical reason, e.g. the IUD, in theory a Catholic woman would never use it.

IVF and artificial insemination are also prohibited.

LJ, it's not because you're married. Georgetown Hospital is skilled at finding various ways to explain away BC pills as medically necessary so they can satisfy the requirements of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

could you have someone heading the Church who didn't believe it was the One True Faith?

not in catholisism or christianity in general, however ther are other religions that believe that there are many paths to god.

Georgetown Hospital is skilled at finding various ways to explain away BC pills as medically necessary so they can satisfy the requirements of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

It's all the hot-air vibes floating around from the politicians.

I can also imagine a less-martial way of expressing the concept, just as you have.

Clearly. But, hey -- was that quote originally in English?

Anyway, I'm just saying -- he really has enough clear-cut things that he says that I think are horrible that I can focus on those.

OH! Semi-relatedly: Apparently someone jumped in front of a train on the track opposite the train I was on yesterday morning. Some dotty old lady IMMEDIATELY started talking about how God can't forgive suicide. Dude. So not the point right this minute.

Do you think he's creating an "other" to hate, or that he's preaching the doctrine he believes is true.

There are plenty of ways to promote Catholicism without denigrating other religions. And based on what I've heard here, I'd say he's certainly denigrated Buddhism and Hinduism, at least once.

In 1986 Ratzinger issued a letter to the Catholic Bishops in which he wrote that homosexuality was a tendency towards an intrinsic moral evil. A few years later, in 1992, he rejected the notion of human rights for gays, stressing that their civil liberties could be "legitimately limited."

I'd also call this creating an "other" to downtread.

Georgetown Hospital is skilled at finding various ways to explain away BC pills as medically necessary so they can satisfy the requirements of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops

Thanks, Maria, though I'm still not sure I understand. Is it just sort of handwaved away? As far as I can remember, my doctor didn't try to get me to say I had irregular periods, or anything else that would make them serve a purpose beyond contraception. I would think that lying about why the pill is being prescribed would be worse than just prescribing it, but I suspect I'm missing something.

Not being used for contraceptive purposes, is that okay

I think in practice, this is what happens. But doctrinally it's not. JPII said that there should be no sex besides the sex meant to procreate (even in marriage) so if you're infertile, fuggeddaboudit!