13 Comments

  1. Just Sayin'

    I’m not interested in reading West’s fundy rant.

    Reply
  2. Gary

    So Jim West says “what the heck sense does it make to ‘bless’ a bird anyway??? What’s the exegetical or theological justification for it?”
    Oh oh. Better to bless a bird, than
    “then he shall offer his oblation of turtle-doves, or of young pigeons. 15And the priest shall bring it unto the altar, and wring off its head, and burn it on the altar; and the blood thereof shall be drained out on the side of the altar; 16and he shall take away its crop with the filth thereof, and cast it beside the altar on the east part, in the place of the ashes”.
    Yikes, I’ll take the Popes’s approach.

    Reply

  3. You know what your problem is… You think to much, then speak a lot of sarcastic crap. Do you claim to be a Christian? No, thank you I’m not interested in listening to your reply.. Oh wait you won’t even have a reply it will just be some smart ass comment wrapped in a lot of I’m so educated rhetoric. Pfff….

    Reply

    1. Excuse me Joel I was speaking of Jim West not you… But basically you are just a mirror image of him… Pfff….

      Reply

  4. I don’t understand what the issue is. Are we supposed to be offended because the Pope blessed a bird? Or are we supposed to be offended because the bird happens to be owned by someone upon whose lifestyle we are passing judgment?

    Reply

      1. In all seriousness, there was very little attention paid to to the man who owned the parrot. This is about the parrot and the parrot alone. It seems like the Pope felt sorry for the doves and when he saw the parrot, he wanted to make sure he does not leave there without his blessing.

        Reply

        1. i disagree somewhat. if you look at the headlines that has captivated us, the parrot is associated with the owner, even those the Pope did not know anything about the owner.

          Reply

Leave a Reply, Please!