The interview with Seewald was most interesting. It brings this whole mess into clearer focus.
Here is one of those papal sycophants, the type so common in Catholic circles today, who bow, scrape and flatter their way into the good graces of the Popes, and who are ready, willing and able to act as mere transmission outlets for papal thoughts. That is quite clear from this interview. And so I think we are entitled therefore to believe that what Seewald printed is what Benedict wanted us to hear. Seewald is also regularly published by Ignatius Press, the house that promotes the modernist rubbish of the von Balthasars, the deLubacs and all the rest of that sorry crew. And since Benedict himself is an admirer too of that sorry crew I think we may confidently assume that he did, in fact, open the door a little to the use of condoms and, if logic means anything at all, now has no problem with the sin of onanism.
Thanks for linking to this interview. It really does makes things clearer, and we can now see that the media has been essentially right about their reactions, even after we strip away all of their customary exaggerations.
It's curious that the only ones who don't seem to see what is going on here are the Catholics of a more traditional bent. Strange.
1 comment:
The interview with Seewald was most interesting. It brings this whole mess into clearer focus.
Here is one of those papal sycophants, the type so common in Catholic circles today, who bow, scrape and flatter their way into the good graces of the Popes, and who are ready, willing and able to act as mere transmission outlets for papal thoughts. That is quite clear from this interview. And so I think we are entitled therefore to believe that what Seewald printed is what Benedict wanted us to hear. Seewald is also regularly published by Ignatius Press, the house that promotes the modernist rubbish of the von Balthasars, the deLubacs and all the rest of that sorry crew. And since Benedict himself is an admirer too of that sorry crew I think we may confidently assume that he did, in fact, open the door a little to the use of condoms and, if logic means anything at all, now has no problem with the sin of onanism.
Thanks for linking to this interview. It really does makes things clearer, and we can now see that the media has been essentially right about their reactions, even after we strip away all of their customary exaggerations.
It's curious that the only ones who don't seem to see what is going on here are the Catholics of a more traditional bent. Strange.
Post a Comment