BaptistLife.Com Forums.

I'm about to blog on the matter. NPR announced this omorning Pope Francis was greenlighting Oscar Romero in the beatification process. Thus Helms, a key person in the shadows of the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC is 2 for 3 in the negative of the Christiam martyrs of the 20 Century in Westminster Abbey: King, Romero and Bonhoeffer. And had he lived Helms would most likely be in line with Rick Santorum, Frank Graham and other tea party rubes endorsing Eric Metaxas distorted bio of Bonhoeffer over the Gospel Charles Marsh has written.

I doubt that Pope Francis even knows who Jesse Helms was, and I doubt even more seriously that there was even a hair's breadth of effect on the sainthood process. If you're contending that the Pope's choices for beatification are wrapped up in attempts to get revenge against Jessie Helms, well, no wonder no one takes you seriously.

From Stephen's blog:

"...to dimwitted go alongs and massagers like Ed Young."

"And were Helms with us today he would be distoring the legacy of Dietrich Bonhoeffer like the Tea Party apologist Eric Metaxas."

Would you like to substantiate those claims? Yes, I know that such questions never get a response from Stephen, only re-direction and subterfuge, but at least I'm asking.

Ed: Interesting Sandy, you say no one pays attention to Fox, but you quote from his blog.

Ed: Interesting Sandy, you say no one takes Fox seriously, but you take time to link to his blog.

Which one is it, Ed? I didn't say "no one pays attention to Fox," I said he needs to strengthen his credibility if he expects anyone to take him seriously. Big difference there. He makes completely unrelated and bogus statements, and then posts a reference to his blog without a citation. Seems to me the purpose of his post isn't to contribute to, or participate in a discussion here, but to draw readers to his blog, something he's hinted at in references to the hit count on some of the threads here where he's the only one posting. Seems that's a bit outside the parameters for posts here, though I understand the need for flexibility.

Perhaps I should start dropping names to get attention to my posts, and include links to, but not comments from, my blog, to promote its readership.

Pope Francis has many issues, but Jesse Helms ain't one of them. His Holiness is a product of a liberal Jesuit education and liberation theology. The Jesuits of the 1950s jettisoned Thomistic philosophy and embraced the heretical teachings of Kant, Von Balthasar et al. Add that to the liberation theology tainted with Marxist errors and there you have it.He has little time on his docket for reigning in pederast Bishops and heretical Priests, but He never seems to miss an opportunity to address social issues. His encyclical on the environment is a rambling disaster of a little bit of traditional teachings encased in a whole lot of UN one world garbage. Add to this the upcoming round 2 of the Synod on the Family in October, and we may see a major fracture develop in the Catholic Church.
I maintain that it is no accident that at this moment in history Obama is President and Francis is Pope, and Islam is on the march.

People who, like dmorgan, use the mediæval Catholic term 'sodomites' to refer to homosexuals always make me wonder. Dmorgan, are you a KJBO supporter? Why do you use this patently ridiculous term, which misconstrues both the nature of nonheterosexually oriented people and the basic sin of Sodom by mistranslating a Hebrew term that refers to neither?