This is an archive of the old Stones Cry Out site. For the current site, click here.
« Grand Slam | Main | The Post-Modern Question and The Transcendent Answer »
April 21, 2005
Another Conservative Pope: Enjoying the NY Times’ Misery
I flew to Chicago last night on business and on the way read every article on Pope Benedict in yesterday’s New York Times. I’ll have to admit that I enjoyed immensely the obvious displeasure the Times showed in the selection of another conservative Pontiff. While showing more restraint than they show with conservative evangelicals, the Times nonetheless demonstrated its discomfort with another Pope from the “conservative wing” of the church with “hard line” theological positions.
“In a Celebrating Crowd,” the Times sub-head reads, “Some Show Concern Over His Doctrine.” I watched the announcement on television and it was difficult to see much concern in the roar and adulation of the huge crowd. If a liberal Pope had been chosen, I’m sure the Times would not have been looking for concerned conservatives in the crowd.
For evangelicals, it is hard to imagine a choice that would be more pleasing, for it appears likely that the positive alignment between conservative Protestants and a Roman Catholic church with a conservative shepherd will continue.
The homily Pope Benedict gave the morning of the first day of the conclave should be enough to give those of us in the evangelical great hope that we will continue as co-belligerents against the forces of secularism.
The soon-to-be-Pope said:
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and 'swept along by every wind of teaching,' looks like the only attitude acceptable to today's standards.We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one's own ego and one's own desires."
Then Cardinal Ratzinger was the central voice in the 2000 Vatican document "Dominus Jesus, which reads:
"This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that 'one religion is as good as another.' "
He was roundly criticized for saying that Jesus was the only way to God. As evangelicals, that part of his message is music to our ears.
Posted by Jim at April 21, 2005 05:56 PM
Trackback Pings
Comments
I also am thrilled! I chortle with glee while the homosexuals and pro-death abortion fans twist in the wind! God's word is and always will be firm, unchangeable, and just who do these people think they are, expecting God to change at their every whim??
Posted by: Joe Comer at April 23, 2005 09:08 AM
Dear bigoted Joe,
Unlike some in your crowd, the homosexuals have never tried to impose their will on others at the expense of those others. They just want equal rights and then to be left alone. But people like you won't allow that. And you clearly enjoy and encourage their suffering. To what extent do you enjoy it? When a homosexual is fired from his or her job because a straight boss is uncomfortable with what is imagined occurs in private life? When a homosexual is beaten just for being gay? Do you "chortle" at that too? And just how much does your version of the Bible devote to God fulminating against gays? Mine really emphasizes other behavior a lot more, but people like you exercise selective attention to justify (and recently legislate) prejudice against homosexuals for some inexplicable reason. What happened to Christian values of compassion and caring for society's weakest members? There are a lot of poor people suffering in our country these days, and a lot of people dying around the world due to our action (e.g. Iraq) and our inaction (e.g. Sudan). Why aren't more evangelicals vocal about these issues?
You are the kind of person that makes seculars distrust the motives of Christians arguing for a greater role in determining public policy.
Posted by: Bill at April 24, 2005 11:35 AM
I agree with you Joe. The truth is eteranl and is unchangable. Some people do not like this fact and will attack it and those who support it.
Posted by: James at June 23, 2005 03:03 AM