Cardinals are poised to take the Catholic Church leftward.

People just don't get it. Thankfully, in this pre-pope-vote article, the Voice of Moon explains that the Cardinals will select one of their fellow leftists. They may elect a very slightly conservative leftist but a leftist nonetheless, like Ratzinger, for Pope.

Note that the Voice of Moon takes a shot at Honduran Cardinal Rodriguez. You see, the good Cardinal had the audacity to state the obvious to any who would look a while back - that Moon's cult is a "pernicious plague."

What would this nation have become without "America's Newspaper" to keep her properly informed on the realities of this old world?
___

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050417-113456-4608r.htm

The liberal conclave

The College of Cardinals meets today to pick the 265th pope of the Roman Catholic Church. Because John Paul II was the first non-Italian pope in 455 years, speculation is high that church fathers may break new ground again -- perhaps by picking a non-European, an African or the first Latin American to be pope. The media constantly states that the only certainty is that this supposedly conservative college will pick a conservative pope. This prediction is unlikely because the cardinals are actually very liberal.

John Paul II appointed more than 95 percent of the cardinals. Paradoxically, however, most of the prominent cardinals hold leftist positions that depart from the traditional Catholic moral teachings he defended. In 1978, when John Paul II became pope, radicals and conservatives were fighting over what the church would become when the dust settled from the revolutionary Second Vatican Council of 1962-65. Today, there are no pre-Vatican II traditionalists left in the hierarchy. .....

Likewise, Honduran Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga supports Third World debt relief and the "equalizing" redistribution of global wealth. .....

Two relatively conservative cardinals considered to be papal possibilities are Nigerian Francis Arinze and German Joseph Ratzinger. But as Cardinal Ratzinger has explained, this is a matter of perspective. One of the most liberal theologians at Vatican Council II, he insists he has not shifted positions over the years but that the world has moved so far to the left that even a committed progressive such as himself is considered conservative. Overall, John Paul II's cardinals are poised to take the Catholic Church leftward.
________

http://www.rickross.com/reference/unif/Unif27.html
Honduran Roman Catholic Archbishop Oscar Rodriguez called the Unification Church a "pernicious plague" that should be treated as a business, not a church. "They own hotels, casinos, newspapers, and are more successful economically than many legitimate businesses."

______

Does anyone really wonder why our nation is being lead astray, who is behind it, who paid for it, who guided it, who's goal's are being reached by our move toward theofascism?

Moon calls it the "natural subjugation of the American government and population."



an outline of what happened to our nation and why can be found here:
http://cellwhitman.blogspot.com/

be considered a "liberal." :P

Think about what that means things USED to be like.

...when they couldn't handle the late 60s and 70s.

JPII and Ratzinger remained Church liberals - they are not going to touch Vatican II. Ratzinger helped draft a good chunk of it.

Ratzinger's disgust was with social liberalism.

Keep in mind that if the 19th Century Church leadership saw Vatican II, they would immediately ask (a) what the heck is going on and (b) who can we excommunicate for it?

guys would take the church back to pre-Vatican II days--in other words bring back mass in Latin, kneeling to take the communion etc.

It doesn't mean that these Cardinals are "liberal" in the same sense that we may call ourselves "liberal" (i.e. wanting to make changes to propel the church into the future).

If the meaning of liberal is merely--doesn't want to change everything to be like it was 50 plus years ago--well then I guess a lot more people could CALL themselves liberal.

Overall, John Paul II's cardinals are poised to take the Catholic Church leftward. ??

haha

Did you expect that he was going to be Karl Marx? I mean, come on. It's the CATHOLIC CHURCH. Did anybody thing the new guy would come out today and say, "Hey, screw all these years of tradition. Woman can be priests, priests can be married, Jesus was a socialist, yada, yada, yada."

If you don't like the guy, don't belong to his club.

geez. I could care less who they elect and I left the "club" 40 years ago. My point is don't try and make out he is "liberal" on anything.

Like the term hasn't taken enough redefinition by these theofascist bastards already. Now we're suppose to believe anyone who disagrees with new leftist Pope is really a full blown commie.

This wasn't intended as a Pope bashing post.

It's a framing bashing post.

The Voice of Moon has been doing this for 20 years.

Everyone seems to get that we have had our pants reframed off. Well, this is just another effort at moving the bar. imo.

and then maybe define the terms....

"Hey, screw all these years of tradition. Woman can be priests, priests can be married, Jesus was a socialist, yada, yada, yada."

Not what I would expect. I was wrong to say they are not "liberal" on anything. Of course they have "liberal" views on several issues. JPII was a bigtime supporter of Unions, against the death penalty. There are many priest who stand tall on these issues.

When I look to Catholicism to be become more "liberal" I am talking tolerance and to turn away from their moves in support of theocracy. They are not a tolerant religion and theocracy, imo, is the biggest danger to liberalism and freedom in the world today. Openly using communion as a political weapon is a theocratic action. It's beyond a slippery slope, it's a full fledged slip'n slide. Especially when you have a right wing echo machine that will use it like they use Christ, as a political tool.

I am not saying they don't have the right to make their own rules but imo issues with parishioners, if they are a problem to the hierarchy should be handled in private between the member, their priest, and if they feel the need, the Bishop and Pope. It's not like anyone doesn't know that the they oppose abortion rights and are intolerant to gays.

Seems like it could have been handled differently had they desired.

George Bush goes to the Vatican and asks them to help pressure his political opponents. We go from John Kennedy exclaiming how he will not take orders from the Pope to Bush asking for his political help.

The church should have told Bush to take a flying leap. But no, appeared they did what he asked.

Do you think that a Catholic liberal democrat can ever be elected President again? We may have another Catholic president but he will be a theocratic fascist freak like the Republicans are training down on the farm.

The "church" is not poised to be more "liberal" - it is poised to stay the course and buttress the current path.