--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > GL responds to Cornel: > Just returned to read your post. Once again you > seen to have a penchant for mis-stating all and > sundry. The issue of Fr. D'Souza was not his > existence or his role in the Indian Constituent > Assembly. But it was his 'supposed quote' of caste > practices in the Catholic Church; and especially in > the Goa context which by the way is the context of > this thread. (Just in case you have missed it). > Mario clarifies: Gilbert, I have no idea why you are continuing to talk about a "supposed quote" of caste practices in the Catholic Church by Fr. D'Souza, mischaracterizing what was posted on Goanet after this has been clarified over and over again. Let me try again.
The article in the America magazine of Feb 14, 2005, DID NOT QUOTE Fr. Jerome directly, Gilbert. NO ONE HAS QUOTED FR. JEROME directly. I had posted on Goanet what THE ARTICLE said, i.e. the author of the article, Fr. John Francis Izzo, S.J. Here ONCE AGAIN is what THE ARTICLE said ABOUT FR. JEROME, Gilbert. I'm not sure why you are finding this so hard to grasp: "When India's founding Constituent Assembly debated naking concessions for Outcaste-Christians, Jerome D'Souza, S. J. representing the Christians, rejected them, claiming there is no caste in Christianity." Let me repeat, AGAIN. This what THE ARTICLE said about what Fr. Jerome said, Gilbert. It is not a direct quote from Fr. Jerome, Gilbert. Fr. Jerome was wrong, Gilbert, because of the forum he was in and what they were asking him about. They were not asking him about Christianity in the abstract, or Christianity in general. They were specifically asking him about "Outcaste-Christians" in India, Gilbert. Claiming there was no caste in Christianity in India in 1947, was wrong, Gilbert. Even you should know this. I hope you can now focus on the essentials of the debate, without making us correct the record over and over again.
