I'm not a Catholic, but it's nice to have the Pope defending not only the unborn, but we old geezers. Not many people praising or defending the elderly these days. Thank you, Pope Francis.

There we go. That's the good stuff. I'm starting to spend a lot more time on Father Z's site. What I would love is for Francis to speak in a way that doesn't need somebody to explain that when he says "black," he really means "white."

He is peace and gentleness against the MACHINE, GOD is LOVE; that's all he is saying; the Machine's confusion is enabling Pope Francis to reach those in darkness. Pray.

"He that is kind is free, though he is a slave; he that is evil is a slave, though he be a king."

- St. Augustine

The day after he tells Catholics to stop harshing everyone's mellow with all the complaining about abortion and homosexuality, Pope Jar Jar trots out this little CYA statement. And it looks like he's fooling even more people than Obama did in his first 6 months. Well, he's got this on file now, so he can tick off the "abortion" box and turn back to what he's really interested in: swamping the Catholic Church with the 1960s-era sewage that destroyed the Episcopal Church.

To those who fear Pope Francis is being too liberal, or those who think he's not liberal enough, I'd say you're both wrong. His style is different than that of either Benedict or JPII, but what he actually says adheres exactly to Church teaching. Don't take my word for it, read the Catechism of the Catholic Church (it's available on line). Start with the chapter entitled: "The Dignity of the Human Person, Article 1. Man: The Image of God". Keep reading as far as you'd like, and see if you can find a delta between the Pope's words (that is, what he actually said, not what some spinmeister journalist wants you to think he said) and Church doctrine. Good luck.

I've come to the position that with Francis, a lot of reporters/commentators are (a) actively trolling (pro or con), or (b) not necessarily actively trolling but filtering what he's saying through their own opinions (pro or con), or (c) not RTWT or anywhere near, primarily just taking the reports at face value (pro or con). I'd add (and this is particularly but not solely applicable to the mainstream press) (d) not nearly as knowledgeable about the subject as they think they are.