flamingjimmy Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Many will infer and indeed state that the man was evil, and a hypocrite and all the base vile things they can think of. This is humanity at its nadir. Like a pack of vultures. Evil for loving someone? No no-one's going to say that. Evil for protecting paedophiles from the law, yeah that's kind of hard to argue with. Slightly lower on the morality scale than a few people being mean on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shogun Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 A man has needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Arthur Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 A man has needs. So true. PJP2 was a fine man apart from the bad bits, and as the world don't move to the beat of just one drum, what might be right for you, may not be right for some. A man is born, he's a man of means. Then along come two, they got nothing but their jeans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 A man has needs. But Popes are supposed to sublimate theirs, aren't they, as are all RC clergy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scousemouse Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 alchreasearch, if the film reduced you to tears, the book will even more, it is a lot more in depth. A book no to be missed, I couldn't put it down,. The thought of all this going on as my first baby was born in the 60's beggare belief.................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 The film Philomena is on BBC2 at 9pm on Friday, I urge everyone to watch it. Even if you're not into the story, the acting is just out of this world. http://www.whatsontv.co.uk/tv-guide/26-02-16/philomena Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Almeja Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Can't hold him responsible. Imagine a life of the cloth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andbreathe Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Can't hold him responsible. Imagine a life of the cloth? Anything you choose to do holds personal responsibility. Not sure why it comes as a surprise considering the churches past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Can't hold him responsible. Whyever not? All human activity rests on adults being liable for their own acts and omissions- not just in criminal law terms ('sui iuris'). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Quote from link There is no indication that the former pope, who died in 2005 and was made a saint by Pope Francis, had a sexual relationship with Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka or ever broke his vow of celibacy' just what are people trying to infer on this thread? I assume that he played hide the sausage. Angel1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now