BrendanLoy.com: Homepage | Photoblog | Weatherblog | Photos | Old blog archives

« Previous post | Next post »
Pope Benedict XVI, liberal reformer? (Part II)
Posted by on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 at 9:30 pm

Emily says Pope Benedict XVI’s replacement in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Church’s new doctrinal enforcer, “manages to reconcile Catholicism with Westernization while remaining true to fundamental Catholic doctrine.” Sounds good to me.




4 Comments on “Pope Benedict XVI, liberal reformer? (Part II)”

  1. David Says:

    I don’t know enough about him to give a read on those comments, but he is the highest ranking American ever in the Church.

  2. David Says:

    I don’t know enough about him to give a read on those comments, but he is the highest ranking American ever in the Church.

  3. Nug Says:

    Here’s an example of the way the man operates: back in 1997, San Francisco passed a law that all companies who contract with San Francisco must provide domestic partner benefits. San Francisco funded Catholic Charities and a Saint Anthony soup kitchen as part of its social welfare program. Thus, under the law, the church was obligated to pay for domestic partner benefits. After initially fighting for an exemtpion, which he did not get, Levada then pushed for a “redefinition” of the beneficiaries of the law. The law ended up broader than initially intended, but Levada succeeded in that he did not want to give money to a targeted group of people that was antithetical to Catholic teaching. Say what you want about him, but he sidestepped a pretty big issue without straying from the Church doctrine. Everyone is happy. Except for maybe P.R.

  4. Nug Says:

    Here’s an example of the way the man operates: back in 1997, San Francisco passed a law that all companies who contract with San Francisco must provide domestic partner benefits. San Francisco funded Catholic Charities and a Saint Anthony soup kitchen as part of its social welfare program. Thus, under the law, the church was obligated to pay for domestic partner benefits. After initially fighting for an exemtpion, which he did not get, Levada then pushed for a “redefinition” of the beneficiaries of the law. The law ended up broader than initially intended, but Levada succeeded in that he did not want to give money to a targeted group of people that was antithetical to Catholic teaching. Say what you want about him, but he sidestepped a pretty big issue without straying from the Church doctrine. Everyone is happy. Except for maybe P.R.


This is an archived post. Comments are closed.

To leave a comment on a newer post, please visit the homepage.


[powered by WordPress.]