If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Now that a new Pope has been selected, the Holy Church can now move on from its dark past of shame and begin a new era of......what? Aw goddammitsomuch   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 199
    More: Obvious, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, kidnappings, Jesuits, involvement  
•       •       •

22693 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Mar 2013 at 12:23 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



199 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-14 06:26:58 AM
Why do the popes always have to look like super villains?
 
2013-03-14 06:37:28 AM

splohn: Let the smearing continue.  Anti-Catholic bigotry is popular again I see.


So's your mother.
 
2013-03-14 06:56:09 AM

BarkingUnicorn: erik-k: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Has anyone noticed that this article is basically about throwing a bunch of unsubstantiated sh*t at the Pope in case any of it sticks? Nothing was ever proved, but we get to basically tar and feather this guy anyway, because as TFA says:

"Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work."

In other words, you can be accused of being an accomplice to kidnapping simply by not saying anything. Incredible.

Anybody care to bet whether he'd be alive if he had endorsed their work to a bunch of psychopathic CIA-trained gangsters? Having a hard time getting too outraged here.

This.  The junta was killing nuns and torturing priests in 1976.  The military would have rolled right over the Jesuits.


Meh. I expect a certain willingness to die for what one believes is right. It takes no courage to remain silent for one's safety. Courage to follow one's convictions is a quality that we should demand in religious leaders.
 
2013-03-14 06:59:37 AM

qualtrough: Call me old fashioned, but is it too much to expect that God's infallible representative on earth would take a principled Jesus-like stand against killing and repression rather than doing nothing, or worse, even participating in it??


you don't read much, do you :)
 
2013-03-14 06:59:37 AM

The Rev. Numbers: "Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work."

He didn't do that, hombre.  Know how I know?You're not dead.


Lolwut
 
2013-03-14 07:02:42 AM

Bontesla: BarkingUnicorn: erik-k: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Has anyone noticed that this article is basically about throwing a bunch of unsubstantiated sh*t at the Pope in case any of it sticks? Nothing was ever proved, but we get to basically tar and feather this guy anyway, because as TFA says:

"Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work."

In other words, you can be accused of being an accomplice to kidnapping simply by not saying anything. Incredible.

Anybody care to bet whether he'd be alive if he had endorsed their work to a bunch of psychopathic CIA-trained gangsters? Having a hard time getting too outraged here.

This.  The junta was killing nuns and torturing priests in 1976.  The military would have rolled right over the Jesuits.

Meh. I expect a certain willingness to die for what one believes is right. It takes no courage to remain silent for one's safety. Courage to follow one's convictions is a quality that we should demand in religious leaders.


There's a beautiful speech on this in the novel, Sharks and Little Fishes, where a clergyman is giving the reasons he's not speaking out more against the Nazis and the young navy officer tells him "I believe less than one per cent of the clergy, protestant or catholic, are in prison. What would you think of an infantry regiment where only one man in a hundred was willing to risk his life? You call yourself a Protestant, man of God- then protest!"
 
2013-03-14 07:05:13 AM

Yaxe: TFA: Per the, "Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work. Jalics refused to discuss it after moving into seclusion in a German monastery." Bergoglio discussed the incident with Sergio Rubin, his authorized biographer.

This is idiotic. First off, 'effectively handed them over' is not the same as sold them out. Simply because the Cardinal was smart enough to keep his mouth shut does not make him a villain in any regard (except for the James Bond-ish way). Secondly, the two priests didn't die. And thirdly, What was the Cardinal supposed to do? Actively work against the ruling military junta? This is stupid media bullshiat at its finest.


and fourth:the claims he was responsible are teneous at best but it IS clear he saved ther priests lives:
Both men were freed after Bergoglio took extraordinary, behind-the-scenes action to save them - including persuading dictator Jorge Videla's family priest to call in sick so that he could say Mass in the junta leader's home, where he privately appealed for mercy. His intervention likely saved their lives, but Bergoglio never shared the details until Rubin interviewed him for the 2010 biography.
 
2013-03-14 07:09:52 AM
Yawn. Wouldn't be surprised if there were several potential articles written, one for whichever cardinal was elected so there would be a story ready-made on the new pope.
 
2013-03-14 07:18:16 AM

Yaxe: TFA: Per the, "Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work. Jalics refused to discuss it after moving into seclusion in a German monastery." Bergoglio discussed the incident with Sergio Rubin, his authorized biographer.

This is idiotic. First off, 'effectively handed them over' is not the same as sold them out. Simply because the Cardinal was smart enough to keep his mouth shut does not make him a villain in any regard.

"

All that is required for evil to flourish is for good men to remain silent"

Besides, anyone who's surprised about the Catholic hierarchy being comfortable with dictators was NOT paying attention in the 20th century.
 
2013-03-14 07:19:36 AM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Has anyone noticed that this article is basically about throwing a bunch of unsubstantiated sh*t at the Pope in case any of it sticks? Nothing was ever proved, but we get to basically tar and feather this guy anyway, because as TFA says:

"Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work."

In other words, you can be accused of being an accomplice to kidnapping simply by not saying anything. Incredible.


In the right circumstances, you can be legally AND morally accomplice to kidnapping for "simply saying nothing".

You should read more.
 
2013-03-14 07:23:04 AM

Bontesla: BarkingUnicorn: erik-k: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Has anyone noticed that this article is basically about throwing a bunch of unsubstantiated sh*t at the Pope in case any of it sticks? Nothing was ever proved, but we get to basically tar and feather this guy anyway, because as TFA says:

"Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work."

In other words, you can be accused of being an accomplice to kidnapping simply by not saying anything. Incredible.

Anybody care to bet whether he'd be alive if he had endorsed their work to a bunch of psychopathic CIA-trained gangsters? Having a hard time getting too outraged here.

This.  The junta was killing nuns and torturing priests in 1976.  The military would have rolled right over the Jesuits.

Meh. I expect a certain willingness to die for what one believes is right. It takes no courage to remain silent for one's safety. Courage to follow one's convictions is a quality that we should demand in religious leaders.


especially if you believe in an afterlife, and that one of the best way to to get to heaven is to die a martyr.
he is either a coward or an unbeliever
 
2013-03-14 07:25:19 AM

Fluorescent Testicle: Fano: Apparently the story of Juan Peron and his obscure wife is a mystery tale worthy of Paul Harvey.

It wasn't Peron, either. Apparently it was a military junta, and I can't seem to find whether or not they had a leader.


Jorge Rafael Videla; he was in the junta with Emilio Massera and  Orlando Ramón Agosti, but was the one who was de facto President of Argentina.
 
2013-03-14 07:36:06 AM
Firstly, he's accused of this. And the accusation as has been touched on multiple times amounts to 'he got two men caught by a dictatorship... by not expressly commanding A DICTATOR to release them and/or actively supporting everything the aforementioned CAPTURED BY DICTATOR priests said. So ya. Based on the fact they aren't dead, and that this is an accusation... i'll have to say I'm somewhat more prone to be on Francis' side at this time.

Surely there are more facts to this than presented, but just the way it reads is like slander. Accused of "SENDING (by inaction that would result in harm likely befalling him) two priests INTO THE HANDS OF DEATH SQUADS (who didn't kill the priests) WHICH RESULTED IN THEM GETTING JAILED (which they were released from)" is really, really, really bad form.

HOWEVER... It looks to me like the 'saved them through plea' might itself be the other side of the coin. Is that not, correct me if I'm wrong, is that not from the Former Cardinal's autobiography? Is that really an unbiased source of information? Do we have more than his assertion that that is how everything played out? There may have been other reasons. It's just all... such shoddiness.

That said; still more in line with Francis than the other, until such time that further evidence or additional facts surface.
 
2013-03-14 07:41:47 AM
Whar red shoes, whar?
 
2013-03-14 07:47:48 AM

Fluorescent Testicle: Triumph: First Jesuit pope ever. That probably won't garner much discussion.

I thought Jesuits weren't supposed to be homophobic bigots.


No, they're supposed to be, but they use SCIENCE to back it up.

Or something.
 
2013-03-14 07:51:40 AM

phlegmmo: JohnAnnArbor: phlegmmo: obligatory
[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x268]

Headline has it right.

Yeah, but not originally.  And now my post makes me look like an idiot.


"Bra-VO."
[www.movievillains.com image 225x313]


It is the admin's primary responsibility to approve and manage headlines.  It's their secondary duty to f*ck with Farkers at every possible convenience.  ;)
 
2013-03-14 07:51:48 AM

poorcku: qualtrough: Call me old fashioned, but is it too much to expect that God's infallible representative on earth would take a principled Jesus-like stand against killing and repression rather than doing nothing, or worse, even participating in it??

you don't read much, do you :)


Yes, I do. In fact, I read about six different articles about this issue today. His claims to have helped were issued well after the fact, and there is a strong possibility that he may indeed have assisted the military. In any case, I like to think that Jesus would have taken a strong, principled, and public stand AT THE TIME, regardless of the consequences, and I expect that his Daddy's representative on earth would do the same. Sorry if I hold popes to a higher standard than normal folk.
 
2013-03-14 07:53:48 AM

Iczer: At this point I think we should be making lists of who in the Catholic Church  hasn't done something horribly bad previously...


1. Find blank sheet of paper
2. Hold it in front of you
3. Profit!
 
2013-03-14 08:05:44 AM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: gadian: Weaver95: DECADES of kiddie rape

Centuries.

Proof? My understanding is that the kiddie- fiddler priest problem in the Catholic Church is mostly postwar and coincidental with the rise of homosexual influence within the seminaries and subsequently the priesthood (which is why almost none of the Church's sex scandals involve the abuse of young girls). Naturally, if you have any proof to the contrary I'd be interested to hear it.


The what of what? This would make a nice tag if I already didn't have you farkied as "Breivik was right in his ideology"
 
2013-03-14 08:24:27 AM

Fano: Surpheon: Therion: Hey, Hitler youth to Pinochet stooge is making progress, right?

I thought Pinochet was Chile?

Apparently the story of Juan Peron and his obscure wife is a mystery tale worthy of Paul Harvey.


Pinouché.
 
2013-03-14 08:29:46 AM

splohn: Let the smearing continue.  Anti-Catholic bigotry is popular again I see.


They have only themselves to blame
 
2013-03-14 08:31:41 AM

qualtrough: Sorry if I hold popes to a higher standard than normal folk.


Oh, but for someone who doesn't know what ex cathedra means but then have the audacity to use it is a sentence or to say that the pope is God's representative on Earth, you surely have high standards.
 
2013-03-14 08:32:45 AM

Crewmannumber6: They have only themselves to blame


what the f**** have I done, you intolerant bastard.
 
2013-03-14 08:40:17 AM

The5thElement: GrogSmash: If this is all they can dig up on this guy, I'm actually encouraged.

From the sounds of the article, he merely kept his mouth shut to the ruling party about his 'subversive' activities, and when the two got grabbed, went out of his way to get them released.

^^^^This.

/atheist
//former catholic
///good on the church for selecting a latino pope
////slashies


Latino? He may be "from" Argentina but both of his parents are Italian immigrants.
 
2013-03-14 09:11:31 AM

poorcku: Crewmannumber6: They have only themselves to blame

what the f**** have I done, you intolerant bastard.


Not you, the bureaucracy that governs you.

This is the one that hits closest to home for me
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_asylum
 
2013-03-14 09:13:49 AM

Cornelius Dribble: Huffington Post has updated their story. Depending on whom you talk to, Francis either conspired with the junta in the kidnapping of the two priests, or he intervened with the junta to save their lives.

On the basis that Francis was once a Jesuit, my guess is that he did both.


Francisco saved their lives, and we have always been at war with Eurasia.

The sheep must be kept docile.
 
2013-03-14 09:43:25 AM

kiwimoogle84: It's always something.

/I am jack's complete lack of surprise


you either die a hero or live long long enough to see yourself become the villain.

/i am jack's colon
//i get cancer, i kill jack.
 
2013-03-14 09:44:43 AM

Yaxe: TFA: Per the, "Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work. Jalics refused to discuss it after moving into seclusion in a German monastery." Bergoglio discussed the incident with Sergio Rubin, his authorized biographer.

This is idiotic. First off, 'effectively handed them over' is not the same as sold them out. Simply because the Cardinal was smart enough to keep his mouth shut does not make him a villain in any regard (except for the James Bond-ish way). Secondly, the two priests didn't die. And thirdly, What was the Cardinal supposed to do? Actively work against the ruling military junta? This is stupid media bullshiat at its finest.


I stopped reading when I got to that part. I'll need something more substantial in order to properly hate the new pope.
 
2013-03-14 10:04:06 AM

Mad_Radhu: splohn: Let the smearing continue.  Anti-Catholic bigotry is popular again I see.

Ratzinger was a disgrace in how he actively shielded pedophile priests before he was pope. Deep down in my gut, I know there was a scandal that caused him to step down, not health issues.

Pope Francis on the other hand, leaves me cautiously optimistic. I mostly like the cut of his gib, especially in regards to his concern for the sick and the poor. His stance on gays isn't something I agree with, but at the same time I'm not sure how you can be a Cardinal and not have to toe the party line from Rome to a certain extent, despite what you may personally believe. Maybe things will be a little different now that he has the infallibility.

I'm reserving judgement, but my first gut feeling is that Francis is genuinely a good human being, so he could be a real force for good, unlike Ratzinger who just screamed scumbag from day one.


Basically, this.

I'm willing to give the guy a chance. He's a Jesuit, so he's somewhat open to reason. I know that's not going to placate the Dawkinites of the world (nothing but the Vatican being burned to the ground would), but they're not interested in any improvement whatsoever anyways.
 
2013-03-14 10:39:02 AM

Hallows_Eve: katerbug72: katerbug72: I think he looks like this Ed Wynn.
[www.latimes.com

Reminds me of Yogi Berra, actually. Even started out kinda sounding like him, in that "wherever I came from, here I am" way.

/New pope has only got one lung, pass it on
// Papa One Lung Frank
///POLF to his pals
//// Slashies


Wow, yep. Quite a resemblance there.
 
2013-03-14 10:53:07 AM

splohn: Let the smearing continue.  Anti-Catholic bigotry is popular again I see.


Posting facts is bigotry?

You delicate flower.
 
2013-03-14 11:01:37 AM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: gadian: Weaver95: DECADES of kiddie rape

Centuries.

Proof? My understanding is that the kiddie- fiddler priest problem in the Catholic Church is mostly postwar and coincidental with the rise of homosexual influence within the seminaries and subsequently the priesthood (which is why almost none of the Church's sex scandals involve the abuse of young girls). Naturally, if you have any proof to the contrary I'd be interested to hear it.


Since 18% of the KNOWN child victims were female, your theory is at least 18% crap.
 
2013-03-14 11:03:23 AM

Keshire: Yaxe: TFA: Per the, "Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work. Jalics refused to discuss it after moving into seclusion in a German monastery." Bergoglio discussed the incident with Sergio Rubin, his authorized biographer.

This is idiotic. First off, 'effectively handed them over' is not the same as sold them out. Simply because the Cardinal was smart enough to keep his mouth shut does not make him a villain in any regard (except for the James Bond-ish way). Secondly, the two priests didn't die. And thirdly, What was the Cardinal supposed to do? Actively work against the ruling military junta? This is stupid media bullshiat at its finest.

I stopped reading when I got to that part. I'll need something more substantial in order to properly hate the new pope.


How about if he maintains diplomatic immunity for child molesters and their enablers?

Would that do it?
 
2013-03-14 11:34:12 AM

Yaxe: And thirdly, What was the Cardinal supposed to do? Actively work against the ruling military junta? This is stupid media bullshiat at its finest.


I'm not sure I hold him much at fault for what happened, as telling them to quit putting themselves in danger or they'd be on their own is pretty much self sufficient for his involvement.  However, that being said, yes.  The general premise is yes, good people are obligated to resist and publicly denounce horrible things, regardless of the consequences to themselves.  Forgetting that is why so many people have problems with the catholic (small c/universal) church right now; we do a crap job of publicly denouncing evil our own does, let alone evil done by authorities that have power over us and the ability to punish us for our choices.
 
2013-03-14 11:36:42 AM

Surpheon: Therion: Hey, Hitler youth to Pinochet stooge is making progress, right?

I thought Pinochet was Chile?


That was after he became a real boy and just put on a sweater
 
2013-03-14 11:40:18 AM

poorcku: qualtrough: Sorry if I hold popes to a higher standard than normal folk.

Oh, but for someone who doesn't know what ex cathedra means but then have the audacity to use it is a sentence or to say that the pope is God's representative on Earth, you surely have high standards.


The issue of how I characterized his role in the Catholic Church and whether or not that is 100% with how the Church cares to describe it pales in comparison to the really important issue here, which is how can the church appoint someone to this position who remained silent at a time that called out for action (at best), and may even have been complicit in gross immorality (at worst)? You need to prepare yourself, because in the days and weeks to come more details are going to come out, such as the following:


In 1977, the De le Cuadra family, which lost five members, including a pregnant woman, to state security forces, appealed to the Jesuit leadership in Rome for desperately-needed protection. According to the Associated Press, the Jesuits in turn urged Bergoglio to help the family. Bergoglio assigned an underling to the case, who returned with a note from a colonel stating that the slain woman, who like many other 'Dirty War' victims was kept alive just long enough so that she could give birth, had her baby given to a family "too important" to remove it from. The colonel's letter is written proof that Bergoglio knew about the regime's practice of stealing babies from its victims, yet the archbishop testified in 2010 that he had no knowledge of stolen babies until after the military regime fell.


Source: http://morallowground.com/2013/03/13/the-sins-of-pope-francis-jorge-be rgoglios-shameful-role-in-argentinas-us-backed-dirty-war/
 
2013-03-14 11:43:15 AM

poorcku: qualtrough: Sorry if I hold popes to a higher standard than normal folk.

Oh, but for someone who doesn't know what ex cathedra means but then have the audacity to use it is a sentence or to say that the pope is God's representative on Earth, you surely have high standards.


BTW, I didn't use 'ex cathedra' in a sentence.
 
2013-03-14 11:43:28 AM

WaitWhatWhy: cloud_van_dame: First Jesuit pope ever. That probably won't garner much discussion.

That's the factoid I find most interesting. Why no Jesuits before? Why one now?

Well, they've only been around for about 550470 years, so that cuts them out of the running for 3/4 of the the time the Church has existed. The do have some strict conservative members, but most of them break pretty liberal (relatively speaking, at least). Also, they tend to be much more likely to openly question Church Dogma due to the fact that each and every one is highly educated. The order actually got suppressed for about ten years in the late 18th century.


FTFY
 
2013-03-14 11:44:28 AM

Mr Guy: Yaxe: And thirdly, What was the Cardinal supposed to do? Actively work against the ruling military junta? This is stupid media bullshiat at its finest.

I'm not sure I hold him much at fault for what happened, as telling them to quit putting themselves in danger or they'd be on their own is pretty much self sufficient for his involvement.  However, that being said, yes.  The general premise is yes, good people are obligated to resist and publicly denounce horrible things, regardless of the consequences to themselves.  Forgetting that is why so many people have problems with the catholic (small c/universal) church right now; we do a crap job of publicly denouncing evil our own does, let alone evil done by authorities that have power over us and the ability to punish us for our choices.


If we look at both Jesus (Render unto Caesar what is Caesars) and St.Augustine (Christians must serve both the wicked and the good), the actual moral dictate of Christianity is "serve the government despite it's wickedness". Obviously  the best form of that government should be a king or tyrant (Aquinas), but ultimately, the Christian moral doctrine is aimed toward surviving, not dying like martyrs a la St. Paul. This is important, firstly because the new Pope actually appealed directly to the dictators to get those priests back alive, but secondly, this is also why we don't read about him as a beatified dead guy murdered when the military Junta took power in 1976 - it's (supposedly) part of Catholic dogma to avoid playing politics (obviously, loosely followed).

So, is the new Pope some evil guy who stood by and did nothing while his friends suffered? No.
 
2013-03-14 11:55:16 AM
Who you gonna believe?
Government prosecutors? Or, the clergy?

/spins People's Cube
 
2013-03-14 12:22:13 PM

Yaxe: If we look at both Jesus (Render unto Caesar what is Caesars) and St.Augustine (Christians must serve both the wicked and the good), the actual moral dictate of Christianity is "serve the government despite it's wickedness".

 Obviously  the best form of that government should be a king or tyrant (Aquinas), but ultimately, the Christian moral doctrine is aimed toward surviving, not dying like martyrs a la St. Paul.

The church is bound by what is right, not what is legal.  It is their obligation to work with anyone, in the bounds of any legal system, so long as it is right to do so.  There's no mandate for self preservation.  There is only one calling for the Christian, doing what is right in all circumstances.  Becoming pope is not necessarily an endorsement of his previous decisions.  Likewise, it is valid to discuss whether or not the church was obligated to act, and his rationale for not doing so.  It's still a dodge to say that one person was abandoned, but others were saved.  Sin is factual, not a judgment call. We, as humans in a linear time frame of reference bound by a deterministic universe are not always able to correctly determine what sin is. Fortunately, sin is forgiven, but lessons should still be learned from it.  It seems likely to me that he knew his endorsement wasn't worth anything, and so "protecting" them meant telling them to stop putting themselves at risk.  That's a valid viewpoint.  I understand how others feel that he chose self preservation over doing what's right, and think that if he had, and they had harmed him, it may have provoked changes sooner.
 
2013-03-14 01:27:29 PM

qualtrough: The issue of how I characterized his role in the Catholic Church and whether or not that is 100% with how the Church cares to describe it pales in comparison to the really important issue here,


But it is the very point of the matter since it shows that whom we are dealing here with is not a person interested in having a normal, fact-based discussion. No, we are dealing with someone who either possesses superficial knowledge or worse, engages in a vitriolic attack based on some dubious anti-catholic sentiment. Thank you.
 
2013-03-14 03:04:28 PM
Cool!! The Papacy has just moved from the 14th Century to the 15th!

MEH.

They should let Berlusconi choose the Pope.
 
2013-03-14 03:14:25 PM

Gyrfalcon: GrogSmash: If this is all they can dig up on this guy, I'm actually encouraged.

From the sounds of the article, he merely kept his mouth shut to the ruling party about his 'subversive' activities, and when the two got grabbed, went out of his way to get them released.

Yes, clearly this:

Both men were freed after Bergoglio took extraordinary, behind-the-scenes action to save them - including persuading dictator Jorge Videla's family priest to call in sick so that he could say Mass in the junta leader's home, where he privately appealed for mercy. His intervention likely saved their lives, but Bergoglio never shared the details until Rubin interviewed him for the 2010 biography.

Is tantamount to kidnapping, raping, murdering and eating the victims all by himself. What a monster.


Let's see if I read that right. The source for his claim of this extraordinary story is his biographer's interview with him?

Oh yeah, that settles it. Incontrovertible fact, case closed.
 
2013-03-14 06:06:42 PM

Flaming Yawn: Cool!! The Papacy has just moved from the 14th Century to the 15th!

MEH.

They should let Berlusconi choose be the Pope.

 
2013-03-14 09:40:55 PM

Keshire: Yaxe: TFA: Per the, "Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work. Jalics refused to discuss it after moving into seclusion in a German monastery." Bergoglio discussed the incident with Sergio Rubin, his authorized biographer.

This is idiotic. First off, 'effectively handed them over' is not the same as sold them out. Simply because the Cardinal was smart enough to keep his mouth shut does not make him a villain in any regard (except for the James Bond-ish way). Secondly, the two priests didn't die. And thirdly, What was the Cardinal supposed to do? Actively work against the ruling military junta? This is stupid media bullshiat at its finest.

I stopped reading when I got to that part. I'll need something more substantial in order to properly hate the new pope.


No response, eh?

I can see why...it's not really a defensible position, is it?

Personally, I give the new Pope a month to learn the ropes.
If he hasn't rescinded diplomatic immunity for child molestors by then, it's business as usual.
 
2013-03-15 09:24:19 AM
3.bp.blogspot.com

Orange pope is best pope?
 
2013-03-15 10:19:45 AM
The only problem I see with him using Francis is that the only men I know in Houston who call themselves Francis, wear heels.
 
2013-03-15 04:16:28 PM

Qaiwolf: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 400x267]

Orange pope is best pope?


They didn't explain it on the TV miniseries IIRC, but Jesuit missionaries in Japan decided to wear those awesome orange silk cassocks so they'd look as good or better than Buddhist priests, because Japanese didn't take Catholic missionaries seriously, especially when they dressed humbly in black.
 
Displayed 49 of 199 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report