As another comment on the Papal article, those who are blaming the media for all of the mess (lio), that is just not true. The media is, of course, bound to money and ergo, satan. We all know that. But, if one is going to work with the media, like so many of our bishops and the Pope in this article, one must be much more clever (like serpents) said the Lord, than the media. Also, please note that we have a pope who admits be trained in the far less than perfect seminaries which now dot the surface of the earth. We now have, perhaps, the first pope who not only is the first Jesuit, first new world pope (a huge difference of perspective from Europe) but also one who did not have the benefit of the classical education of the old seminaries. Bl John Paul II and the Pope Emeritus are the generation of my parents. Pope Francis, being born in 1936, would have been in the seminary in 1956 at least and further on, when the seminary training rot set in. We have the first pope of our time. Also, he is not a scholar in the same tradition of the last two popes, which also makes a difference in his presentation. These are just facts.
May I also add that one may criticize ideas and not be criticizing a person. One who is critical of writings or speeches in not necessarily hostile. This is the idea of the generation who is so subjective in reasoning, that they cannot deal with objectivity. One can totally love a person and yet have areas of disagreement. To say that criticism of ideas is hostility to a person is simply not true.
And, to criticize ideas is not to call a person a sinner, unless that person is a heretic.
