sk

Here are my suggestions on your approach:
1 h' k. J: |4 K# L1.        Your letter portraits a Pope with negative attitude towards changes. Is that fair to the Pope of that time? What did he really do?
5 m1 i3 y9 a# F" b2.        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?9 S1 c0 d! _" B2 D# K$ I
3.        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:
6 X3 f) Y5 e( ~, E! k8 c. z
  j$ H8 X  ~3 {0 K, D, h- d* V2.        Science advance, and so...

" i) B6 r. q# ?3 n1 Y1 c, F' x
. r0 E2 |$ Y7 u9 @1 H. p# _( a6 {6 RYour 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.
& {; K- a9 n/ u0 Z7 l* d" P" d+ e6 Z7 o" o
[ Last edited by sk on 2006-11-19 at 03:30 PM ]