G
agreedconsidering that it is the Rolling Stones which is very very liberal, they seems to want to emphasize swipes against the 2 previous Popes that didn’t fit their agenda or ideas. However, the author fails to note that Pope Benedict was very unprecedented in stepping aside and causing the election in the first place. When one wants to see the world in a certain way, everything will be judged by that. Even still, it is amazing that they did put him on the cover and are paying attention and just maybe the article will plant the seeds in someone to come back to the Catholic Church or desire to do so.
The hermeneutic of discontinuity.What did you all find wrong with it in specific?
Well, it’s a blatantly uninformed, trashy article. Imagining a conversation with the author, it seems he/she would be the kind of person who would constantly ascribe hateful stereotypes to any Catholic who upholds the teaching of the Church.What did you all find wrong with it in specific?
I think they are right; the Pope is starting a conversation.Gillam
what are you thoughts of the article?
I think you mean that even magazines like Rolling Stones and the types of people that would read it are paying attention at least to this Pope and hopefully to the Catholic Church as a whole and maybe take steps towards it. I remember reading “Salt and Light” which an atheist reporter spent 3 days with then Cardinal Ratzinger, he came away converted to faith. I think it is kinda sad that the article took such swipes at the two previous Popes and tried to paint a picture in their view point that this Pope is doing something real different. The difference maybe in style and a more pastoral approach but not in doctrinal changes the author probably would really want to see. Maybe Pope Francis is really fleshing out the new evangelization started under JP II, which is to reach out to all, even liberals at Rolling Stone magazine. Maybe trying to start conversations with those we usually write off. Do I understand you correctly?I think they are right; the Pope is starting a conversation.
Just the anti-JPII and anti-B16 tone.What did you all find wrong with it in specific?
The writing, to start with. The author, apparently thinks commas, are a requirement, for a sentence.What did you all find wrong with it in specific?