BS: Pope Francis

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: olddude
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 04:17 PM

as far as gays and the pope, the times will dictate the change. I see it moving forward myself. An old Catholic priest of great faith who said to my gay CATHOLIC DAUGHTER ... King David had 500 wives, he also sent his friend off to battle to be killed so he could take his wife. the bible may not be the best source to consult on sexual matters. Let nothing anyone says keep you from your faith.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:15 PM

yes,but david did get a visit from nathan the prophet taking him to task for his adultery and the death of uriah!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:16 PM

Mother Theresa was completely right to have her views without judgement as you are with yours in favor.

There is a very big difference between Mother Teresa and me. Mother Teresa had the ears of the whole Catholic world (as well as a good deal of the world beyond Catholicism). I don't. It's very noble of you to place us on equal footing, but it don't wash. I might just point out that having the ears of millions of people carries a degree of responsibility, which in her case she did not exercise. When Mother Teresa spoke out against abortion, she was doing the Vatican's dirty work. Evidence? They could have shut her up, but they didn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Ed T
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:40 PM

King David had 500 wives?

He must'a had a good job to afford 'em and very good Mojo:)

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: gnu
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 06:42 PM

Fer fuck sakes. This therad is worse than the one I just took a strip off of. Ye anti-Cat'lics are stunned as me arse.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 07:08 PM

Honestly - no, really honestly - I haven't seen any anti-Catholics in this thread. Tell yer summat, mate. I was born and bred and educated Catholic. Sufficient for me to know that (whether I like it or not, and, in my case, it's not) the Catholic church has a massive influence in this world and a massive number of (mostly poor and ignorant) adherents. No matter how much I wish it was not that way, it is that way. So there is no point being anti-Catholic, and I am not anti-Catholic. I want to see a damn sight better deal for the hundreds of millions of Catholics in this world, and the rock-solid certainty is that this latest old-man-in-a-frock, "elected" only by a hundred other old-men-in-frocks, is not going to provide that better deal.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: RichM
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 08:34 PM

I am an ex-catholic. Ironically, it came about because I was diligent in studying my religion. Even won a Provincial prize for Catholic Religion when I was in high school. Another prize I won was a Bible---which I read from cover to cover (...oh alright, I did skip some of the begats)...

My point is, the warts on the Church, and Christianity showed up as I delved into the history of the Catholic Church and Christianity in general.

I couldn't let the anomalies slide...I had to question everything, in my search for complete understanding. My current position is well summed up in this quote from Seth Macfarlane:

Religion is notorious for conceiving an idea and
then trying to make it true, either by propaganda
or sometimes by force.

...while science makes a discovery and then
immediately sets about tryiing to disprove it, just
to make sure it's correct before everybody makes
idiots of themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: olddude
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 08:57 PM

Steve
you could be right but I do hope you are wrong and the new guy is different. So far we seen little progress but maybe just maybe this time ... fingers crossed

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:12 PM

Scots behave in myriad ways Ian, as do other nationalities; what particular Scottish behaviour do you take exception to?

Homosexual couples are defined by their choice to engage in sex with people of the same gender, this is a type of behaviour which although unconventional and repugnant to most heterosexuals, is "tolerated" in our locality.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:33 PM

Steve
you could be right but I do hope you are wrong and the new guy is different. So far we seen little progress but maybe just maybe this time ... fingers crossed

Well, I agree. I hope I am wrong (I may not be a Catholic any more but my extended family certainly is!) Catholics are on the ropes, virtue of a few rogues. That is bad. Catholics deserve a good deal. As do Muslims, Jews and atheists. We all deserve a better deal.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 05:24 AM

To a modern, scientifically trained mind, much religious teaching appears to be nonsense (except, perhaps, in an allegorical sense); questioning those teachings is not bigotry!

The Catholic church is a powerful intitution which has enormous influence over the 'hearts and minds' of millions of people; demanding that such an institution questions some of its own teachings, which may be causing harm and suffering, and roots out such abhorrent practices as child abuse by priests is not bigotry!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 06:24 AM

I don't hate any aspect of being Scottish. Although I have grave reservations regarding the insignificant part calling itself Akenaton.

Same as the twaddle above saying that atheism is the same as theism or that atheism is a value stance.   No. I don't believe in anything other than what I observe or what is either explained or shown why it can't be explained yet. If that gives me a label of atheist then it is a label of scorn put about by the more superstitious in society. A non stamp collector doesn't hold a view on stamp collecting. If stamp collectors managed to convince government that gay people don't have rights and it says so in their constitution I would then have a legitimate view to put forward about them and their effect on freedoms of others. Same with religion. Fuck all to do with me. Enjoy your activities but don't be surprised by the reaction when you try to influence people with more intelligence and less superstition.

Compassion and moral compasses are survival traits of altruism as exhibited by creatures who haven't heard of God and would be annoyed to hear that we reckon he is in our image.

Religion is useful though. Perhaps that alone is why it is scrutinised by rational people. If that is victimising, then get your house in order and society will have less to be concerned over.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 07:31 AM

Attacking the beliefs of individual people is simply not on. Challenging belief in appropriate contexts may well be. As an atheist (though atheism isn't a belief), I expect to be challenged if I display my atheism. When I'm challenged I'm not going to issue a fatwa against the challenger, have him excommunicated or wave heresy laws at him. Attacking organised religion is essential and it must be fearless. Organised religions have massive responsibilities to their captive adherents, but are notorious for falling down on those responsibilities. I would say that the biggest failure of organised religions is that they all lie to their people. The fundamental lie they tell is that the whole story on which the religion is predicated is the truth. Fundamental tenets, which fail the evidence test at every turn, are not to be questioned. That is terrible and it is dehumanising. It perverts and obstructs the amazing power of intellect that we are endowed with (by God, if you really must - which makes the intellectual stunting even more insulting, if you think about it: a God who gives us amazing brains that the bishops and imams then forbid us to use). Education is learning to acquire knowledge using our critical faculty. Seeking evidence and rejecting received wisdom is the default. Religion is anti-education. A whole bogus body of learning, called theology, has sprung up round religion. Within the bounds, you are allowed to feel that you can question and doubt and frown. But mind that razor wire round the edges.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 08:18 AM

Does the Catholic church still claim 'infallibility'? If it does, it most definitely and demonstrably isn't - and needs to be challenged at every opportunity.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 09:37 AM

As I understand it, ex cathedra refers to very few proclamations indeed. The Church itself is in a state of confusion over what might constitute ex cathedra edicts. As far as I can make out, the last instance was in 1950 when the Pope declared that the dogma of the assumption of Our Lady had been declared ex cathedra (how bloody ridiculous can you get...). I suspect that papal infallibility is such an uncomfortable issue, even among ardent Catholics, even among popes (John XXIII more or less ridiculed the notion), that it's a red herring, more or less.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 02:23 PM

When I'm challenged I'm not going to issue a fatwa against the challenger, have him excommunicated or wave heresy laws at him.

Very reassuring, but there have of course been many occasions within my lifetime when equivalent things have been done in the name of atheism. "Attacking organised religion" has too often been a brutal and literally murderous activity.

Misusing power to persecute people who are seen as opponents is a long-standing chacteristic of human society, with or without religion, and very bit as common within a totally sectarian context as in one where religion of one sort or another is involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 04:35 PM

Well you may have a point, but, atheist though I am, I have always defended religion against accusations of atrocities "done in the name of religion". I don't care for religion but I'm going to base my arguments on reality, thank you. Almost every holy war or conflict ostensibly grounded in religious hostility has actually been far more to do with politics and downright naked imperialism. And I think the same applies to accusations about atheism waging wars on religion. Wars are about jostling for power and domination on the one hand and freedom-fighting on the other. God may be a convenient wagon to hitch your war-horses to in order to sucker people into your q

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 04:40 PM

Cor, I got cut off mid-flow there. Here's what my whole post looks like:

Well you may have a point, but, atheist though I am, I have always defended religion against accusations of atrocities "done in the name of religion". I don't care for religion but I'm going to base my arguments on reality, thank you. Almost every holy war or conflict ostensibly grounded in religious hostility has actually been far more to do with politics and downright naked imperialism. And I think the same applies to accusations about atheism waging wars on religion. Wars are about jostling for power and domination on the one hand and freedom-fighting on the other. God may be a convenient wagon to hitch your war-horses to in order to sucker people into your quest for dominion, but it's a rickety owld thing that usually ends up in a ditch before you reach your battlefield. Same applies to atheism. Why wouldn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 06:11 PM

I'd agree.   So called conflict between religions are generally founded on other differences.

Northern Ireland isn't about religious differences between Catholics and Protestants. Israel/Palestine isn't anything to do with the fact that one side is comprised of Jew and the other and the other of Muslims or Christians. The same goes for the Balkans. And in all these cases there are people in both hostile groups who have no religion or are in fact hostile to religion. "Are you a Catholic atheist or a Protestant atheist?"

And the same is true generally where a regime has persecuted religion as such - typically because it is seen as a focus for political opposition.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 08:20 PM

We are in complete agreement I think. Cheers.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 08:13 AM

Two people who've been arguing expressing agreement about something - I think that's almost a first on the Mudcat...

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Stringsinger
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 10:23 AM

The jury is still out on this Pope.

Pope and the death squads

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Stringsinger
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 10:38 AM

"Almost every holy war or conflict ostensibly grounded in religious hostility has actually been far more to do with politics and downright naked imperialism. And I think the same applies to accusations about atheism waging wars on religion. Wars are about jostling for power and domination on the one hand and freedom-fighting on the other. God may be a convenient wagon to hitch your war-horses to in order to sucker people into your quest for dominion, but it's a rickety owld thing that usually ends up in a ditch before you reach your battlefield. Same applies to atheism. Why wouldn't it?"

Steve, you are overlooking the fact that political figures who indulge in "imperialism"
are often "true believers" which puts their domination on a religious footing. God may be a convenient wagon but aside from Karl Rove, many of these committed warlords and "dominionists " owe their destructive fanaticism to their religious beliefs. This ultimately is why war prevails in our world. Religion often rationalizes the degradation of the "other". Preachers in the pulpit today fanatically believe that Christian domination is the only moral way for the U.S. to conduct its laws. This is not a manipulation in the political sense as we've come to know it but a fervent sick belief system that keeps mankind in a loggerhead of conflict.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 02:08 PM

There may be some 'true believers' in positions of political power. But far more frequently, I suggest it's a matter of using fanatics and fanaticism when it's convenient, and dropping it when that's convenient.

A readiness to do battle or repress 'the others' , outside or inside a society, involves a decision as to who are 'the others', and who are 'our kind', but religion is only one of the markers used. "Race' or colour or age or sex or class can do just as well. Sometimes just what football team people support, or how they choose to dress. Or what kind of music they like.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Stringsinger
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 07:37 PM

Of course there are other areas of repression other than religion, however there are quite a few "true believers" now in the U.S. military which is making a concerted effort to Christianize all branches of service.

I don't think you should count the fundamentalist Christians out when it comes to evangelizing. They want to rewrite the Constitution.

BTW, race, selection of music or mode of dress can be attributed to fundamental religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 08:11 PM

Well I don't deny the dangers of fundamentalism (one of which is that is sometimes wraps itself in warm fuzzy imagery), and there is certainly a debate to be had with regard to the extent to which certain rabid leaders have invoked the almighty in furtherance of their cause (interesting, actually, how the people who do that are nearly always on the "wrong" side...). But it's a bit of a stretch to extrapolate from that to the notion that whole wars are fought "in the name of religion". God must seem quite a long way off when you're cowering in a stinking trench, crawling with lice and terrified of the next big bang, or when you've just blown a few dozen civilians to kingdom come with your smart bomb. The blokes who call wars with their fine speeches and rhetoric and   invocations of God are not the blokes who end up getting shot at in battle on the whole, though their inevitable sticky ends are not always unwelcome.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 10:55 PM

I'd doubt whether religious belief as such is what motivates even Al Qaeda, as against resentment about essentially political issues.

The point is, even in a world where religious difference were absent, the same kinds of conflicts we see would still arise. The slogans and the rationale would be different.

In a way it's akin to the situation with the Cold War. The antagonism between Russia and the US and others was assumed to be about ideology - if the Russians stopped believing in "Communism" we'd all be friends. It hasn't worked out that way. It was always more about power and stuff like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Stringsinger
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 11:48 AM

Of course Al Quaeda and the American military are infused with religious beliefs.
Most wars can be reduced to religious conflict and yes they are exacerbated by malicious politicians and outsiders but they still wouldn't be there if there wasn't the division of religious belief, at least not through the channel of religion. People might find something else to fight about.

Religion states unequivocally that a loyalty to one necessitates that other religions are not acceptable. For example, if a Catholic were not so sure of his/her religion then it would be O.K. for him/her to be Jewish, Protestant, Muslim or fill in the blanks. Show me the evidence that religious people think all religions are equal?

If that were the case, then who would need them?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 12:18 PM

."Most wars can be reduced to religious conflict"

That just isn't the case, The Great War, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Falklands.... Even with conflicts where the antagonists have different religions, it generally isn't religion as such that's at issue.

"Show me the evidence that religious people think all religions are equal? " I can't see shy that would be relevant. Fights aren't generally about questions of equality.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: olddude
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 01:56 PM

It has nothing to do with religious belief's. They may use them to try and justify actions but religion is not nor ever has been the cause. It is about greed, resources, land, ownership of another countries assets. Was Stalin a religious person?

big stretch here but again plays into the hate of all faiths.

Interesting note, free will is a great thing. Science is exactly why I came to believe. My knowledge of Mathematics, chaos theory .. for everything to happen as it is points me to a higher power. The only explanation for me. Such order out of such random chaotic events is too small to be explained otherwise. But again that is just me

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Stringsinger
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 04:36 PM

"That just isn't the case, The Great War, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Falklands.... Even with conflicts where the antagonists have different religions, it generally isn't religion as such that's at issue."

First of all the idea that there is a Great War is risible. There was nothing great about World War II. War is never "Great". The message that's not received here is that both the Korean War and the Vietnam War were championed by Christian anti-Communist groups and much of the fighting was done by those who had religious indoctrination that allowed them to participate and justify the killing of people who believed differently from them. Vietnam or Korea offered no legitimate threat to the U.S. To say otherwise is bogus. The evidence is that this is still being done in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Islamic countries because the Crusades are still going on and the American Military is indoctrinating more recruits toward its Christianity.

World War II might be a slightly different case but remember that Hitler, who was raised a Catholic, used the inherent religious discrimination against Judaism, which is a religious precept. Hitler allowed Catholicism and Lutheranism to flourish during his abominable reign. The "Kirches" were active and involved in subjugating Jews and this points to the role of religion here.

As to the Falklands, the Brits have a Protestant base which may have influenced their incursion into a Catholic country.

There is a religious aspect to these many wars. It is the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: olddude
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 04:57 PM

Frank
only to attempt to justify unjust actions is religion used my dear friend. Hitler used the Jewish condemnation to blame the economy of Germany. They were easy targets to blame. That is usually the case, find the weakest, find something a population can blame, use it for political gain. Nothing really to do with faith or religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 05:51 PM

I am very sad about the junta thing but I think it will be for the good in the long run. THese poor people who suffered through it need to have a voice to say what went on and this might give them someone to focus on, rightly or wrongly..or an international forum....more truths will come out and it will ultimately be for the best...

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 06:19 PM

Pope Francis is the best hope we progressive Catholics have had since the unfortunate election of John Paul II in 1978, and his subsequent dismantling of the hopes engendered by Vatican II. He seems like a decent, reasonable person who has a concern for the poor and a disdain for pretentiousness and power. I'm a little nervous because he's certainly conservative, but he does not seem to be a repressive sort of conservative or one who confuses church unity with uniformity. I hope will tolerate us on the left, and show us at least some respect. There's no reason why there has to be uniformity in the Catholic Church - it will be a much healthier organization if it fosters a wide spectrum of thinking.

The Pope's actions in the 1970s do raise a question, but that was a long, long time ago. Can his actions then predict what he'll do now as pope? I don't think so. I think our society expends too much energy on placing blame and demanding retribution for past offenses. We have too many current problems that need fixing.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Wolfhound person
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 06:35 PM

It does look as if a door might be opening slightly, Joe. I really hope there's a shaft of light behind it, and that it won't get slammed on his fingers by the bureaucrats.

Paws

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: gnu
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 06:50 PM

Wolfhound person... yes. That's the deal. His choice of name and his first address indicated... nay... brought a light into the eyes and a smile to the lips of zCat'lics worldwide and to any others that care what the Cat'lic Church does in the future. Hundreds of years behind was a quote from another thread but every small step forward is welcome and graciously accepted... to do or say otherwise is counterproductive. Ya can't move an elephant witha small stick and shooting it just don't work at all. Still, a lot of people shoot at the elephant... although I have no idea why they waste thier ammo, silly sods!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 09:27 PM

If a door was indeed opening, Wolfhound person, it was surely slammed shut with the new pope's shameful decision to invite Robert Mugabe (banned from all European state except, apparently, Vatican City) to his inauguration. But then I suppose popes have always been the natural bedfellows of tyrants.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 09:48 PM

The Great War - I was referring to a little disagreement that took place between 1914 and 1918 (for most countries involved) which certainly didn't have too much to do with religious differences, and with the consequences of which we are still living through today.
............

The impression from Pope Francis that I get is that he's got his priorities about right.

As for the stuff about the junta back in the seventies, it must be a pretty difficult thing dealing with a regime like that and avoiding making things worse. Maybe he made some mistakes, maybe he played the best hand he could with the cards he held.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 05:00 AM

I agree with your assessment Mr McGrath, there are many things the church can do to make itself more relevant to the problems facing us, without breaking up the foundations of society and family life
Addressing poverty is a good start. The church can be a power for good if it is reformed in the image of the philosopher Jesus.

The family structure has served humanity well for thousands of years, the church is correct to defend it against attack, or current fashion.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Lighter
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 07:24 AM

Re the Dirty War:


http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/pope-francis-and-argentinas-dirty-war-accusers-say-he-knew-of-torture-defenders-say-he-


"Some leading Argentine human rights activists agree that Bergoglio, now 76, doesn't deserve to be lumped together with other church figures who were closely aligned with the dictatorship.

"'Perhaps he didn't have the courage of other priests, but he never collaborated with the dictatorship,' Adolfo Perez Esquivel, who won the 1980 Nobel Peace Prize for documenting the junta's atrocities, said.

"'Bergoglio was no accomplice of the dictatorship. He can't be accused of that,' Perez Esquivel told Radio de la Red in Buenos Aires."

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Penny S.
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 08:35 AM

It does seem to me that those of us who have been fortunate enough not to have to live with vile juntas running things have no business criticising those who haven't.

Not happy about Mugabe, though - but how does he get to the Vatican if he is banned in Italy?

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 10:19 AM

It wasn't a matter of invitations. All governments are informed, and send whom they choose. There are no invitations as such. the UK sent the Duke of Gloucester and Kenneth Clarke, Germany sent Angela Merkel. Cuba sent its vice-president, as did the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Stringsinger
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 12:01 PM

"The Great War - I was referring to a little disagreement that took place between 1914 and 1918 (for most countries involved) which certainly didn't have too much to do with religious differences, and with the consequences of which we are still living through today."

The war was still a part of the prevailing Christian righteousness of American leaders at the time. However the this war was not ostensibly a prevailing religious one. Still, under the pretext of morality and religion, Eugene Debs and Bertrand Russell were jailed under the sedition laws of the time. And the war impacted the "Easter Uprising" in Ireland which wanted Home Rule. We still live with the Christian ethic of war today which is unduly controlling the U.S. military now.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Rog Peek
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 12:21 PM

I understand the Pope was photographed shaking hands with Mugabe. Did he not recognise him? One might hope that he follows this with a word or two of condemnation.

Rog

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 12:25 PM

Err.. yes. The church can promote and defend family values. But until it recognises gay families it will be as irrelevant as Akenbigotedaken.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Stringsinger
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 12:59 PM

It has a historical pattern of thriving under dictatorships. How much the present Pope collaborated with the junta isn't known, but those that live under these conditions can learn to exempt themselves or fight against them as the two disappeared priests did in Argentina.
As far as I know, the current Pope did not speak out against these atrocities.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Joe Offer
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 07:08 PM

It does seem that Mugabe may be taking advantage of Vatican invitations to lend legitimacy to his reign. He also showed up at the beatification of John Paul II in 2011. Perhaps the Vatican should be more discriminating in it's invitation list - but perhaps not. If it makes a point of inviting every nation, then it avoids making a political statement by its list. Did it invite Palestine? That, to me, would be a more telling issue.
Still, since Jesus ate with sinners, maybe it's not appropriate for a church to vet the invitation list.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 07:42 PM

I doubt if they'd have turned a representative from the Paletinian Authority away.

After all, when the UN voted to give Palestine Observer Status at the UN the Vatican issued a press statement saying "The Holy See welcomes with favor the decision of the General Assembly by which Palestine has become a Non-member Observer State of the United Nations."

After all, the word Catholic means "universal".

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: RichM
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 07:50 PM

Despite some assertions here about minimizing or discounting what the Church did a mere thirty or forty years ago, I would remind all that the Catholic Church glories in its pride in an unbroken two thousand year old record of continuity.

I'm sorry to state the obvious--but such an organization cannot brush aside controversy that is so comparatively recent.

I can only hope---no I don't have the temerity to call it pray---for humans to continue to evolve psychologically past the social virus called religion.

Atheism, freedom and truth await.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Mar 13 - 07:57 PM

I doubt his Popeness made the 'decision' to allow/invite Mugabe. Whether he recognized him in the midst of 500 handshakes is an interesting question.