sk

Here are my suggestions on your approach:
6 V8 w" o# n& V/ N/ b1.        Your letter portraits a Pope with negative attitude towards changes. Is that fair to the Pope of that time? What did he really do?
' N9 I4 I- N6 N' |/ B7 Y2.        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?
$ {$ g& y$ z4 e1 r! ]( p3.        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:
* g4 u; T( i, u3 w
& f- u6 S( v0 [& O! R# D! h5 S2.        Science advance, and so...

/ l$ ^2 M4 i' A5 R  {/ X# d  K- X6 c. `% o1 X. V
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.- t) G. {% Q, E7 Y5 C) y( z
9 {! h" b/ t8 \$ s& X9 g
[ Last edited by sk on 2006-11-19 at 03:30 PM ]