Saturday, April 10, 2010

The Times uncovers another case. Do you think they could've focused any closer on the pope's signature? We get the message.

2 comments:

Crude said...

Here's what gets me about this particular case: They can't be suggesting that Ratzinger was hiding or protecting this priest, because really - wasn't this a case of a priest who was already charged and convicted in a public court?

For myself, these accusations against Ratzinger are just solidifying my support of him. They're overblown and ridiculous, and smell of a 'get him at any costs!' move. Especially given what standards he's introduced since becoming Pope.

John Farrell said...

Yes. Apparently Hitchens and Dawkins are now considering having the pope arrested once he lands in the UK later this year.