I find the backlash
against big churches interesting.
Not exact matches
I really dislike the «
big box»
churches and mega-
churches, the seem to so fundamentally go
against what the whole idea is about.
The Holocaust is simply the
biggest club available for liberal Catholics to use
against traditional Catholic teaching — especially on issues relating to sexuality, including abortion, contraception, celibacy, and the role of women in the
Church».
Mantel's memoir, like the novels, is thick with smoldering grievances:
against teachers («I don't know if there is a case on record of a child of seven murdering a schoolteacher, but I think there ought to be»); adults generally («In Hadfield, as everywhere in history of the world, violence without justification or apology was meted out by
big people to small»); and above all,
against the Catholic
Church, which stood in judgment on her mother when Mantel was a child.
But for the past 8 decades they have welcomed the Hypocritical
big businessmen, who profess faith yet stand vehemently
against taxation designed to aid the poor, a cornerstone of almost all faiths, and have consistently forced people to LINK
Church and State by means of creating policies with subliminal purposes.
The
big difference between this kind of vision and the kind of vision you speak
against (quite rightly IMO) is that it is not one you are trying to impose on the
church, nor is it seeking an essential change, but it is still a change you are urging, and the urging changes it from reporting to visionary.
A Christian solicitor said job discrimination
against disabled people is a
big issue that the
Church... More
If I'm understanding you correctly then the repubs would do better if they allowed birth control and went
against the
church in regards to providing contraceptives because that would reduce the # of abortions thereby giving the republicans a
bigger voting base.
Last Jan. 6, for example, he rushed back from
church and arrived at The Pavilion just 40 minutes before the tip - off of «Nova's
Big East home opener
against Pitt.
As for the Pope's visit, that prompted the
biggest ever protest
against the Pope and the policies of the Holy See, the «state» of which he is head, and a poll commissioned by the Roman Catholic
Church last month found that more people disagreed than agreed that the Pope's visit was «good for Britain».
If Goldacre really wants to stick his neck out, why doesn't he try arguing
against a rich, powerful, bullying Climate - Change establishment which includes all three British main political parties, the National Academy of Sciences, the Royal Society, the Prince of Wales, the Prime Minister, the President of the USA, the EU, the UN, most schools and universities, the BBC, most of the print media, the Australian Government, the New Zealand Government, CNBC, ABC, the New York Times, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, most of the rest of the City, the wind farm industry, all the
Big Oil companies, any number of rich charitable foundations, the
Church of England and so on?