Possible rift in US and Vatican communication

  • Thread starter Thread starter commenter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Possible” and “Lifesitenews” to me, are two primary disqualifiers. Having perused LSN’s plaintive bleating in the past, I view them as hysterical, hyperbolic, somewhat paranoiac and of limited credibility.

Doesn’t matter the good which they intend to do.
 
Every time I go on Catholic Culture website looking for the liturgical calendar and daily saint collect, I see some ad for a Phil Lawler column that invariably is whining about the Pope. Never read one yet.
 
Last edited:
I would like to say that LSN produces good pro-life content, but their ‘trad’ / ecclesial politics stuff is equal to Breitbart or Infowars
 
po18guy said:
“Possible” and “Lifesitenews” to me, are two primary disqualifiers. Having perused LSN’s plaintive bleating in the past, I view them as hysterical, hyperbolic, somewhat paranoiac and of limited credibility.

Doesn’t matter the good which they intend to do.
Click to expand...
Possible, is my choice of wording. I want more facts.
LSN … I’m not thrilled about. But sometimes they print things that on further research turn out to be true.

But this isn’t LSN anyway, it’s a Catholic Culture feature that got reprint. Catholic Culture is credible.
 
I’m not sure how credible any site is when you’re referring to a commentator who seems to be Johnny One-note about a person or issue.
 
commenter said:
Possible, is my choice of wording. I want more facts.
LSN … I’m not thrilled about. But sometimes they print things that on further research turn out to be true.
But this isn’t LSN anyway, it’s a Catholic Culture feature that got reprint. Catholic Culture is credible.
Click to expand...
If Holy Father Pope Francis did indeed say no, it’s up to the Americabpn Bishops to live their vow of obedience , and provide that example to their flocks.
theCardinalbird said:
Well this is weird, it appears other news sources say he did say that
Click to expand...
There is nothing in this article about USA and this issue
 
Last edited:
I can’t speak for all of the lifesite articles, but some are very good and very accurate. Just because someone sees and reports a lot of problems with the pontiff (several are very real and very concerning by the way) doesn’t mean they are automatically unreliable.
 
How can we who refuses to judge pass on judgment on those he refuses to judge?

That’s why nothing will happen.
 
Phil Lawler is a highly credible writer, with a strong academic background, and solidly Catholic view. For many years he has provided intelligent commentary on prolife and other topics, in union with the Catholic Church, as is Catholic Culture itself.

Don’t mix up Lawler, and Catholic Culture, with the websites that were established for the sole purpose of criticizing the hierarchy. Those sites are not in Union with the Church. They may be right on some things, but lack reliability of Lawler and C C.
 
Phil Lawler to me is an opinionated columnist who doesn’t like the Pope and complains constantly about him.

I don’t care if the guy has won 10 Pulitzer Prizes, he bores me, and his columns are the proverbial spinach.
 
Maximilian75 said:
I would like to say that LSN produces good pro-life content, but their ‘trad’ / ecclesial politics stuff is equal to Breitbart or Infowars
Click to expand...
Their prolife, and what you call Traditional stuff, are not unrelated. St JP 2 in his Gospel of Life, described how the Relativism of the modern age and de emphasis on dogma, helped pave the way for massive support for abortion.
 
Well when the Pope constantly gives us something to complain about…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top