Some interesting photos of the anti-pope here

http://beforeitsnews.com/story/321/611/A_Gallery_of_Strange_Masonic_Bedfellows.html

 :roll-laugh1:

It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a ‘better than' and a ‘worse than'. Nothing is good or bad in itself.”

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/popersquos-child-porn-normal-claim-sparks-outrage-among-victims--15035449.html#ixzz18t5YNuKE

The claim that it was maintained "within the realm of Catholic theology" that "there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself" is a bizarre statement for the Pope to make.    

But hey, media nαzιs are out to get him! At least there's  Jєωιѕн businessman defending the Church with a letter to the editorial!

That's better.

But why does he say it was maintained in Catholic theology?

Who maintained it, and why were they permitted to maintain it?

Stevus:

We are supposed to pretend that the Pope is justifying child porn as normal? What a joke of a headline.

Most are not convinced or certain that the pope is justifying child porn and calling it normal.  Most Catholics, I would say, don't know to take it.  However, the (deliberate?) imprecision of his language can lead people to that conclusion.  Here is a pope who speaks a number of languages, is a scholar in his own right, and written a number of books, who can't seem to communicate exactly what he did mean in plain Italian or German.  Should this not give one pause?

I dont think Em has read the whole topic. It is Stevus who inferred that that anyone attacking the anti-pope was nαzι friendly.  :smoke-pot:

That's better.

But why does he say it was maintained in Catholic theology?

Who maintained it, and why were they permitted to maintain it?

For those who were not involved with the Conciliar Church and the Novus Ordo as I was, situational ethics was all the rage in adult catechisms, retreats, etc. beginning sometime in the 1970s and lasting well into the 1990s.  The fad began to wane in the early 1990s but was still holding on when I escaped the Novus Ordo.

I don't know its current status.

He says it was "maintained in Catholic theology" because he can't differentiate between Catholic theology and heresy.  If Conciliar theologians are discussing it, he thinks its Catholic.  And remember that Benedict believes that theology can evolve and that what was true at one time may not be true today and vice-versa.

On the other hand...

The article seems to be another false condemnation of a false pope.  Benedict is clearly not defending as "normal" the evils being discussed.  He is trying to explain what he sees are the historical circuмstances that led to the crisis that he is having to deal with.  He is not defending them.

By making the false charge, those who accept the papal claims of Benedict attribute perfectly valid condemnations as unfounded as well and merely more persecutions that the Church has had to deal with since her founding.  Anytime one sees or reads something that seems, at first glance, to show Benedict in an evil light, one should pause for a day, slowly re-read the docuмent from the point of view of a Conciliar Catholic believing that the Vicar of Christ is speaking, and see if the evidence is truly damning or simply one more bit of crazy talk that doesn't actually prove anything.