sk

Here are my suggestions on your approach:- h: r; ]' ~% h# U, H  ^
1.        Your letter portraits a Pope with negative attitude towards changes. Is that fair to the Pope of that time? What did he really do?
6 _% c( X& j& J/ p7 V& \2.        Science advance, and social injustice are facts. But are they really related to church? Or people just blamed everything to church like HK people blame everything to HK gov’t?
1 `/ f, V6 R9 F- }, D3.        Could he modify the church belief to fit in the changing world- like Mr. Tang of China in the ’80?

sk

Originally posted by 155220 at 2006-11-19 08:24 AM:( I9 R/ M5 B# I( `# Z7 t7 `
+ K; a3 V  u' {7 S- x/ a
2.        Science advance, and so...

8 N: O& J- n6 x( n. I
# l0 J0 ^# b, a0 R8 ]; ?. z
Your reasoning is ok. I just think "To execute one as a warning to a hundred" is a very negative reaction and there are other ways that Pope can view the situation. That's why I suggested point #1, and #3 in post #3.6 V2 j3 t  M" b) q# z9 F( x

; e6 `: ^; }1 Z& c+ f; W[ Last edited by sk on 2006-11-19 at 03:30 PM ]