Topic awaiting preservation: The popes' a dope (Page 4 of 4)

quote:

---

How do you come to the conclusion without knowing who the new pope is

---

And how do you come to conclusions about how much a person may know about the new pope?

quote:

---

poi said:

He is a hard conservative, declared repeatedly that birth control is evil, said the RC is the only form of Christianity ( thus insulting all other forms like Orthodox, Protestants, ... ), wrote that homosexuality is a "tendency" toward an "intrinsic moral evil" and both an "objective disorder" and a "moral disorder", is against marriage of the priests. That's more than enough to qualify as a dope in my eyes.

---

So if someone has different beliefs then yours, they're a dope?

Nope. IMHO, if someone's set of mind comes from Middle Age ( in the sense : is retrograde and has no grasp on the reality of our time ), he/she is a dope. I force no one to agree with me. This is just my own humble opinion.



(Edited by poi on 04-19-2005 21:25)

So if someone has different beliefs then yours, they're a dope? I guess you're one of the enlightened members.

That's not what I said.

Although I not always get the point of some systems of beliefs ( which we already discussed in other threads ), I respect other's beliefs and right to believe. Nonetheless I can't understand/bare retrograde opinions.

How can anyone consider, and claim, homosexuality is a flaw ? As for birth control, I and actually most people in France ( and obviously the feminist movements ), consider it as a fundamental right of the women, giving them full control of their own body.

We have to be realists and live in our time, not in the Middle Age or Stone Age.



(Edited by poi on 04-20-2005 00:43)

Rather interesting...

--------------------------------------------------------
"Abortion clinics are like expressways to heaven."

He was known as "God's Rotweiler" and the pope's "Enforcer". Interesting images for a religion exhalting the 'Prince of Peace".

It is the first time in a thousand years a Deutch pope has been chosen. From the sound of the man, his attitudes are a millenium out of step with modern times.

I predict a dismal time for catholic adherants.

I predict as well, a return of the inquisition.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

"Eggs", if the '3 score and 10' bit is to be believed , is past his 'best before date' by more than a few days. And the unwavering position of the church on anything remotely progressive, which he clearly endorses, is even more outdated.

As with any institution that refuses to evolve it will, sooner or later, collapse. With the election of Eggs, the church has taken another 'One step over the line sweet jesus.' Strike up the band!

(Edited by NoJive on 04-20-2005 04:21)

I disagree in this case.

I think the catholic church would disintegrate very quickly if they attempted to 'keep up with the times'.

From the religious point of view, it is absurd to think that policy allegedly designed by god should progress with the human perspective.

The church stands for a lot of things that would be meaningless if it were to embrace a modern liberal point of view.

The only shame is the strong hold that the church has over so large a part of the world's population.

What's even scarier, perhaps, is the thought of what the sheep would flock to if not this....we know they would still flock to something...and we know it would not be rational thought and general goodwill toward the world...

FWIW

Nojive...in the past, I think (therefore I am), the cards have appointed someone they don't expect to live long for specific purpose. If he has the temerity to live past the point in time which the cards had in mind, history has shown he has been 'hastened' towards his great reward (oblivion).

Even in relatively modern times (last century).

DL, without going back through countless empty posts by jade or gid, something in the lizard brain suggests one of them (at least) may have hinted that their myth does progress with humanity.

I agree with your analysis though and in that light the current Incarnation of Perpetual Ignorance is a fine choice.

As to what the sheep will flock to to be sheered: apparently in South America, where catholicism was adopted more as a method of survival than conversion, many are abandoning
catholicismin favour of....Evangelism!

Benny Hinn must have found out the peons have a few coins he might suck out of them.

BTW Pope the Rat or Benedict the Arnold was a member of the Hitler Jugend.

The mind-set suits catholicism to a "T"...for terminate.

The inquisition looms, fortunatley that despicable religion no longer has the power to abuse any but it's own adherants.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

This Pope is a disaster.

quote:

---

He has since said that although he was opposed to the Nazi regime, any open resistance would have been futile

---

That is a big load of bullshit. It is a cop out. It is covering the true reason - either he was too afraid, OR rebellion against the father? At that age, and with his father being openly anti-nazi, having to move frequently...a young man, uprooted again and again...in a time of war, where patriotism, etc, was preached on every corner...
Wouldn't surprise me if he actually joined freely, just to piss his old man off.

Recently, Germany is showing more and more signs of facism. A return to the roots, so to speak. The CDU is showing a lot of signs of rolling back a lot of things, if they get voted in in the next elections. And seeing how the SPD is running the country, there is no doubt that the CDU will win, IMHO.

A Neo-Nazi party actually is sitting in the Government of Dresden now. Neo-Nazi groups have joined their networks together, and are actively helping one another all over Germany.

And now a Deutsche (Ehtheist, that is how it is spelled) as Pope, that was in the Hitler Jugend, AND participated in the war. What a great "sign" to all those Neo-Nazi's (and potential Neo-Nazi's) out there.

Wonderful.

Pardon me while I go puke up.

DL: I think that's what I was trying to say but as my 'best before' closes in, clarity at times.... mercy?? =)

It's been quite interesting hearing the analysis from all quarters.

The fact a woman can/will never be boss is reason enough to never sign up..or leave. I mean just think what "Martha" could do with the interior of that joint. =)


WS

quote:

---

Pardon me while I go puke up.

---

If you do this run quickly. If you don't scientific evidence strongly suggests its going to come 'down' on you. =)

(Edited by NoJive on 04-20-2005 08:29)

I can agree with much of DL's post. The Church doesn't conform to the world view. THe Church evangelizes to have the world conform to its view. The church cannot change its doctrine on women in the priesthood. The pope doesn't have the power to do this. I was watching all kinds of analyst and news persons talk about what the church needs to change or soften its position on last and this week. It will not happen. The rock on which the institution stands will not be shaken in its position. Some faithfull will leave, some will stay. The RC church will still have a faithfull flock in the many many years to come.
Possibly two thousand more years. IT has faced harder schisms and wars and dissenters within who want change in its history and still it survies.

quote:

---

I can agree with much of DL's post.

---

- Jade

I never thought I'd see the day, when that happened!

Has hell frozen over?

Careful WS, it is a ploy to set you off your guard.

Thanks for the spelling correction too.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Careful WS, it is a ploy to set you off your guard.

Thanks for the spelling correction too.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

The church cannot change its doctrine on women in the priesthood.

---

This, to me, is one of the biggest issues as far as church doctrine gone wrong.

Can you please explain to me what this is based on, and how it can be considered a legitimate view despite the lack of scriptural support?

To me, this is an issue based soley on social propaganda of the time (giving - for the sake of argument - the benefit of the doubt concerning the basis of the christian faith...).

Given that, it is one of the doctrines that *shuold* by all rights change.

Again, to clarify: please explain what this doctrine is based upon, and how it can be considered legitimate in any way.

And the absense from sex for clergy did not come until like 12th century or something. Some pope just decided it to be so over night.

There are differing levels of "certainty" that the Catholic leadership place on doctrines of the church.

Women being excluded from the priesthood is arguably right at the top "de fide" which means that comes straight from God through the Magisterium. When you hear of doctrines being "ex cathedra" or "from the chair" it means that the Pope is uttering them with infallibility. I'm not sure if this doctrine is truly that level or not but let's say that it were. When jade says that the Pope has no power to change it, she means that if he were to do so, one of the pillars of the church would crumble to the ground, namely, that the Magisterium are the legitimate successors to the apostles and ultimately Christ himself as far as authority in matters of faith and morals. So you will not see women priests anytime soon without a major upheaval in the RC church.

Ruski brings up the celibacy issue. Well, that one is not "de fide" so it most certainly can change. The current Pope could rescind that one today if he saw fit to do so.

DL-44, I don't really know if this is the answer for the RC church on women priests or not. But what I can offer you is why many of the churches from which my congregation stems do not allow women leaders either. Here is some of the scriptural support they would cite:

quote:

---

As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. --1 Corinthians 14:34-35

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. --1 Timothy 2:12-12

---

I no longer believe that women are to be excluded from preaching or leadership in the Christian church. There are other passages that demonstrate, at least to my satisfaction, that these prohibitions were localized to specific regions and situations and not a blanket prohibition for all churches in all cultures.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Interesting.

will skip to the second part of the post for the moment -

1) Don't Paul and Jesus both iterate many times throughout the new testement that men and women stand on equal ground? I have no source to cite just now, but I will see what I can find - I know that I have read a *great* deal of scriptural quotes emphasizing the equality of men and women in the eyes of god, and many reports of many female leaders of Pauline churches.

2) The section of Timothy that quote is from is one of the things that has been shown (with general scholarly agreement) to be a forged passage. It is both stylistically and theologically inconsistent with the rest of the piece, and with the rest of Paul's verified writings.

Now, when you talk about Magisterium, are these things from the pope...or some other source - I'm not sure I fully follow here. Is it that a pope once delcared women couldn't be priests, and so that cannot be contradicted?

I understand that the pope is seen as totally infallible when he speaks of theological issues (and only on theological issues...how convenient...). So basically nothing any pope has ever decalred can be negated? Or, really, it's just a matter of finding the right loophole. I am quite certain that there *must* be plenty of cases where a papal edict has been later contradicted.

Though I suppose, if there is one thing catholics as a whole are good at, it is twisting the truth to fit an argument rather than facing it...



So what would happen if the pope *did* alter such a declaration? Would we see pure chaos? Would he burned at the stake?

1. I'm not immediately familiar with verses where Jesus specifically mentions men and women being equal. But the most notable that comes to my mind from Paul would have to be:

quote:

---

27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. --Galatians 3:27-29

---

2. I'll have to look into the point you make on this passage. I would like to check with my sources about this section of Timothy. As you know, there are conservative and liberal scholars and everything in between. I'll get back to you on this one

Ah yes, the Magisterium would be the Pope along with all of the bishops and that group being the teaching authority of the church. I am pretty sure you've got it right about some where back there a pope or some decree was made that prohibited women from the priesthood. I would have to do some digging to find it. Perhaps jade will chime in with that for us.

Nothing the pope has declared ex cathedra can be negated. That's the key, it has to be an edict that was uttered infallibly. If at any time the church has accepted a doctrine as "de fide", then by definition it is from God and therefore unchangeable (without toppling that pillar I mentioned before that is)

What would happen if that pillar toppled? I honestly believe they would find a way to explain why it didn't topple at all and smooth it over all the while following church law to the letter. That is just my gut feel on how it would be handled and I seriously wonder if I'll live to see such a day where the RC church would have to face that situation.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Lets remember the faith arose in a part of the world where, to this day, women are considered chattels. I suspect this may have quite a bit to do with this antiquated notion. As is so much of the bible and it's intepretations, a very retrograde idea.

I believe there are a number of xian cults which allow women priests and so far rhe end of the world has not arrived due to the practice.

I heard on the radio the other day that poopes used to often be married and that at least one of them had something like 14 kids through his various concubines. At least that one had some sense of reality.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

That's exactly the quote I had in mind Bugimus (among others), but I have very little grasp on what sayings came from which books at this point.

I will try to dig up some sources regarding the passage in timothy.

Your summary of how the church would handle such a fallacy is exactly what I meant in my last statement as well.


I would certainly like to hear something specific about the gender inequality in the church - Jade, any references on the subject?

Etheist - while you are correct in general, it is important that there were purportedly many female leaders in the Pauline churches in his time (something else I will have to try to find more info on), and Paul himself, as shown in the quote above, promoted gender equality.



(Edited by DL-44 on 04-21-2005 15:17)

Hmm, I seem to recall from the misty, musty depths of memory reading something about female priests/clerics in the early days.

I recall reading many decades ago. a book written in the early 50's in which the author (both book name and author now escape me) revealed his theory that the reviling of women in xianity became popular with the adoption of the Garden Of Eden Myth.

You know, it was women got us kicked out.

Prior to that in many societies women were essential. While the men were busy preparing for war, warring or recovering from war, the women were running he estates, businesses, families etc.

Barring any evidence to the contrary modern refusal by churches to recognize women as full equals is nothing less than brutal stupidity.

Some Mormom sects still practice the 'chattel' approach to women.

Here in BC we have a place called Bountiful where children as young as 10 or 12 are forcibly married to men as old as 50 or 60. Young girls are in fact traded across the border with similiar-minded sects in the states. This is nothing less than human slavery and child sexual abuse.

In order to insure there are lots of young girls for the trade and to service the elders (all male) young boys are often expelled from the community to make their own way in the world without education or knowledge of what the real world is like.

So far, governments on both sides of the border have expressed horror...and done nothing to stop it.

The mormom Church in salt lake has declared these sects are not part of the church, though they clearly reflect church doctrines. This is a cowardly way of avoiding any responsibility.

While this is an extreme instance of abuse of women by churches, it is not a matter of degree, but whether.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Yes. Bugs is correct in explaining the teaching the position the Church has on the ordination of women into the priesthood.

I have always agreed with the view the church's teaching on this issue. Out of maybe ignorance when I was younger, I thought only for the reason in regard to God's design of the domestic family church. I believed God created each gender for different roles. The male in its many physical attributes was the stronger while women the weaker for Gods plan. Though I believe both equal in intelligence the roles God determined thru divine wisdom in the spirit of the church. I felt if a woman were to be a priest, how could she care for her flock in the Catholic way? Would she leave her children sick to minister to a sick person in the hospital, or give last rites. Would she leave her babies to minister to prisons, to minister in war time? Would she leave her family to do missionary work like the twelve apostles did? I felt the female/mother/woman is the heart of the family, the breast feeders, nurturing mothers, who keep order in the household. And if the roles were reversed, could or should the women leave home and fight the wars. In defense of family, could the woman defend in case of attacks. So if I believed that God created men/women for their own creative roles, I had to believe he chose men to be apostles for his plan.

The ordination of men as priest only also has deep theological roots as well as scriptural. We think everyone agrees that the Catholic Church will one day ordain women. Surely it?s just this pope who is holding things back? The next Pope is bound to change the rule. Our times have favored a female priesthood and never more so at the time when Christ ordained his first priests, nearly 2,000 years ago. Think about it. Virtually all the pagan religions of his day had priestesses, so it would have been normal and natural for him to choose women for this task. He had a number of excellent potential candidates, from his own mother, who accompanied him at his first miracle and stood with him as he suffered on the cross, to Mary Magdalene or the women of Bethany. But instead, he chose only men, and he remained immovable on this, continuing right to the end by training and sending them all and leaving a Church which turned out to be safely founded on a rock. From those twelve men a direct line of apostolic succession has given the Catholic Church the bishops and priests it has today.

The Catechism of the RC states:
Only a baptized man receives sacred ordination. Jesus chose men to form twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose successors to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college until Christ?s return. The Church recognizes it to be bound by this choice made by the Jesus Christ, himself. For this reason the ordination of women cannot be possible. Christians believe God to be the essence of divine omnipotence. He doesn?t make mistakes. When he was incarnated as a human being, he did so at a precise time in our human history, which was planned from all eternity. He could of chose to come during the height of the feminist movement. From the beginning, God had chosen that there would be a Jewish people, among whom his divine Son would be born. We get our priestly traditions from Jewish priestly traditions and it formed part of our background and culture which would help all and others to see and know God. Every detail about the Incarnation was known in the mind of God. He was born into the fullness of time. So this being said, Christ Jesus would have chosen Mary Magdeline, the Virgin Mary or Martha for that matter as one of the twelve. We know God is pure spirit . Neither male nor female. So why should he design to come as a human man instead of woman?

In choosing His apostles, Christ was not awarding them the priesthood as a reward for good behavior: courage, intelligence, or skill. Peter, the rock on which the Church was to be founded denied him, another Thomas doubted his resurrection, and one even Judas betrayed him. The priesthood is not a badge of good-conduct , but just as bread and wine are the essential ?matter? of the Eucharist, so are men the ?matter? to the priesthood.

In another theological aspect, which is at the heart of Christian faith and I have posted this before is that in a Catholic wedding you will hear the beautiful scriptural, and profound statement that the relationship of a bridegroom and his bride is like that of Christ and his Church. Notice the order of things. Christ and his Church came first. They were an idea in the mind of God from the very beginning. And we, as human beings, when we unite together and marry, are an image of the ultimate Bridegroom and Bride. We also speak of her as being our Holy Mother Church. She is indeed a Bride who has become a mother ? and we are all her children, the fruit of that union she has with Christ. Perhaps because we are so used to this belief, most of us do not think about it very deeply. Christ began his public ministry at a wedding. We mostly miss the point because are intrigued by the story of water turning into wine, . But the wedding is a central part of the event. It was a genuine wedding. We don?t know the names of the young couple getting married, but they had invited Jesus and Mary, and it was evidently a happy and important occasion with food and drink and plenty of guests. But it was more. The whole story is of great theological significance. When Mary told Jesus that the wine was running out, He answered, ?My time is not yet come.? Whenever Christ mentions his ?time,? he means his passion and death according to Catholic interpretation of Scripture. Mary told the waiting servants, ?Do whatever he tells you.? That word ?do? also will be heard again, when Christ?s time indeed has come. At Cana, they "do" as he tells them, and water is turned into wine. At the Last Supper, once again there is a commandment to ?do,? and this commandment also has been obeyed down the centuries, with another transformation wine into Christ?s own blood. The wedding message from Cana is central to Calvary. This male/female imagery going right through our redemption history. It is at the heart of Christ?s being born among us as a man. When he founded his Church, it was with the love of a bridegroom for a bride, and when he gave us the Eucharist, it was as a nuptial feast. This bride/bridegroom imagery was completed on Calvary. We are speaking here of holy things at the very heart of our faith. Even Paul speaks of this as being ?a great mystery.? It gives a meaning and a great dignity to the human reality of male & female. It is in this way that we can see not only the importance of a male priesthood, but also the importance and beauty that the Church attaches to purity, to fidelity in marriage, and to the fruitfulness of married love. Also Catholic great women have played a central role in the life of the Church. I could go on an on but am limited by time. The Church must think of other issues that will arise out of sex & gender in our society like homosexuality, transvestites, the idea of ?same-sex marriage,? the legitimization of sado-masochism as an ?alternative lifestyle,? and so on and so on. The Church?s purpose is to relay that God has a meaning and purpose in the way he created us. We must offer spiritual reason and sanity for a confused people who seek truth. So not any time soon will we have a female pope.

I refer to this site here is a famous apologist, Patrick Madrid site on the issue better than I could:

http://www.catholic.com/library/Women_and_the_Priesthood.asp

(Edited by jade on 04-21-2005 21:14)

Thank you for the explanation Jade.

Do you have anything more concrete as far as there being an actual edict, proclamation, or something of that nature? Or is it simply a matter of standing tradition?

The institution of the church stands on the collaboration of tradition/scriputre/magisterium to decree its teachings on the priesthood. There are derees and edicts regarding the priesthood through out the centuries. I will see what I can find offically and get back to you.

As I recall one of the things the Pope will say when discussing these types of doctrines is " the church has always held". I would guess that this one falls into that category where it is assumed this was in place from virtually day one of the new kingdom.

And, yes, thanks very much for that explanation, jade.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Like most of us, I didn't know who the next pope would be, but I know there is one particularly qualified and distinguished man who will *not* be selected. Archbishop Hans Grapje was raised in a Catholic school in The Hague, Netherlands. As a young man, he aspired to become a priest, but was drafted into the army during WWII. He spent two years flying aboard B17s as a co-pilot until, in 1943, his aircraft was shot down and he lost his left arm. Still conscripted, Hans spent the remainder of the war as a chaplain, giving spiritual advice and consolation to dying soldiers, allied and enemy alike.
He was renowned for his ecumenical tenderness and compassion. After the war, Grapje became a priest and served as a missionary throughout Africa. In spite of his handicap, he was noted for piloting his own bush plane into the deepest, most primitive villages to spread the church's message and charity to the impoverished.



In 1997, then Archbishop Grapje was serving at an outpost in Zimbabwe, when an explosion in one of the country's vast silver mines caused a catastrophic cave-in. The archbishop, in spite of his seniority, went down into several of the shafts to administer last rights to those who would never escape. He was in one of these shafts when it partially caved in, trapping him and several rescuers. Although he was rescued three days later, he suffered several painful injuries, including one that cost him his right eye. Additionally, the silver content in the shaft's air supply had poisoned him, causing his skin to take an indigo hue - a condition known as conjunctiva - that persists to this day.

Although the Cardinal has devoted, and indeed risked, his life in the service of God for nearly 70 years, as a scholar, a mentor, and the epitome of a holy man, church politics preclude his ascension to the Papacy.

Church leaders have made it clear they don't want a one-eyed, one armed, flying, purple, Papal leader.



"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

At this point I just want to say this.

The scandal of pedophilia that the Roman Catholic Church is hopefully dealing with by now was perpetrated by individuals in that organizatio. Yes it was extremely wrong and those who are guilty of the crime should burn in Hell (sorry Ehtheist I know you don't believe in Hell but please bare with me by ignoring your scathing and blinding prejeduice against all christians and religions for this moment) (thank you). However it is unfair to say that all roman catholic priests are guilty of the crime perpetrated by some. That is like saying all Germans are Nazis, this is not true.

If we are going to say that all roman catholic priests are pedophiles (which it seems like we are to me) than we might as well accuse all men and women of all the crimes ever commited throughout the course of time. After all if one human commits a crime that means all humans must be guilty. As far as the pope knowing or not. I don' t think he really knew for sure. He might have had an inkling or a growing suspicion but I don't think he knew completely. As far as Ehtheist applying laws, well, the Vatican has differant laws than other places. Just because one country says 'knows or ought to know' (not in actual legal speak and probably a state law) doesn't mean that the Vatican laws do. If he did know for sure than he should have done something as soon as he did.

It also seems to me that some of us are making the assumption that since Pope John Paul the Second was the leader of the organization he knows all that goes on in that organization at all times. As if he is some benevolent power instead of the normal human being he was. Question:
Does your boss know everything that goes on at work at all times 24 hrs. a day?
Does your boss know what you are doing in your personal time 24hrs. a day?
Does your boss want to know?
If you answered no to any of these questions you have just proved my point.

History is nothing but a fable that has been agreed upon.
-Napolean Bonaparte

Well thanks Sang...I think (therefore I am).

quote:

---

Yes it was extremely wrong and those who are guilty of the crime should burn in Hell

---

If they believe in it, they will, but only until they die.

quote:

---

However it is unfair to say that all roman catholic priests are guilty of the crime perpetrated by some

---

I agree and neither myself nor anyone else here, that I recall, has made that blanket statement.

Perhaps you needed to see it that way?

quote:

---

[As far as the pope knowing or not. I don' t think he really knew for sure. He might have had an inkling or a growing suspicion but I don't think he knew completely

---

Well, the only way he could not know is if he were completly insulated from world news.

Would you have us believe he is fed only 'good news' by his handlers?

The rest of your argument in this vein is dismissed by the above and I must say you sound very much as though you are trying to be an 'apologist' for the vatican. An ambition doomed.

The phrase "knew or ought to have known" is not particular to Canadian law. It is certainly used and applicable in the US, Britain, S A, Australia, New Zealand and like countries. That something having the same intent and meaning , may well exist in other countries laws would not surprise me at all.

The Vatican has always worked outside the laws of Italy and every other country.

This is why it is so thoroughly mistrusted and hated.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)
[Edit - quote tag fixed]

(Edited by WebShaman on 04-25-2005 06:15)

quote:

---

If we are going to say that all roman catholic priests are pedophiles (which it seems like we are to me)

---

You need to go back and read the individual posts more closely. NOone has said this.

quote:

---

It also seems to me that some of us are making the assumption that since Pope John Paul the Second was the leader of the organization he knows all that goes on in that organization at all times.

---

Noone has stated this, either.

So, what exactly is your point?

WebShaman | Asylum D & D | D & D Min Page

As I suggested, Sang is desperately trying to be an...apolgist?...No...m ecusist.

Or, perhaps sang is starting to feel the pangs of reality?

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

If we are going to say that all roman catholic priests are pedophiles (which it seems like we are to me)

---

You must be reading a different thread...because none of us has said this.

As for whether the pope knew or not - he may or may not have known while things were happening, but he certainly knew after the fact, and the only supportable position IMO would have been for him to instantly remove anyone involved from any form of church office. Instead he did the same thing the local bishops did - he shuffled people around a little bit.

He condemned it with words but not with actions.

Forgiveness? That's all well and good. But get the people involved out of the organization.

^ AMEN!!

Stepping back slightly, I think it is extremely important to point out, as I am quite sure that many people do not realize this, that throughout the history of the church, pope's have constantly pushed for various reforms in the church, and pope's - like any other political leaer - would often undo the actions of a former pope.

Pope's would often be voted in specfically because of their reformist agenda.

It has *always* been a matter - as in the secular world - of retaining the historic founding that supports the current view, and ommitting the history that contradicts it.

The idea of a consistent view since day one is purely silly, no matter what aspect of the religion we're talking about.

From reading this: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0005chap.asp

One comes away with the impression the RC church feels a need to try to get in on the 'fallacy of fastest growth'.

One also believes the author revealed more of church attitudes than he intended to.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)