|
13 Mar 13 - 06:56 PM (#3489981) Subject: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Lavengro Can't believe it's four hours after he appeared on the balcony and there appear to be no Mudcat comments! Is everyone okay? :) |
|
13 Mar 13 - 06:58 PM (#3489982) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Lavengro Okay, now the page has updated and I was wrong! Sorry Midchuck. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 07:01 PM (#3489987) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Don Firth Apparently mudcat's been off-line for a few hours. I haven't been able to get on until just now. Pope Francis, at least in part, seems to be quite promising from what they've said about him on the news today (CNN). Don Firth |
|
13 Mar 13 - 07:07 PM (#3489991) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,mg He made a good first impression..seemed nice. Not sure Francis is for Francis of Assisi..could be Francis Xavier as some have pointed out. Seems conservative on most issues but has a simple lifestyle. I do hope he continues that. I am eternally grateful the one from New York did not get it. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 07:17 PM (#3489997) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: John on the Sunset Coast I'm not a Catholic, and I'm not familiar with the machinations in the choosing of a Pope. However, it seems to me that by choosing a 76-year old Cardinal, who has incessantly battled the abortion, gay rights etc. laws of Argentina, the Catholic Church is not in the mood for liberalization any time soon. I note that on some news broadcasts the new Pontiff is being referred to as Francis I. I thought that such numeration was not normally assigned until there is a namesake successor. PS--can someone delete my post titled Pope Francis which was being composed as these others came up. Thank you. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 07:22 PM (#3490000) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: gnu Indeed, the announcement "we has pictum" (forgive my poor Latin spelling) was a shocker after only 5 votes. But... while you say he is conservative in such things, the fact that he has broken tradition and chosen this particular name signals hope for change. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 07:23 PM (#3490003) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T From the initial info., he seems like a good choice. Taking one from out of Europe and North America may better enable him to deal with and distance the church from the Child abuse topic, His focus on the poor will go over well in all areas, especially growth areas (Latin America, Africa etc), Having someone outside Europe may help the organization come to grips with inhouse management issues in Rome, Jusuits played a good part in history in Latin America, He may help bring some disinterested Latin Americans back to the church (a big growth sector), He may not tend to "shoot from the hip" on issues like the past pope, I am especially interested in his record with the past Argentian governments - and the influence it had. His experience may be closer to "the Polish pope"? Maybe his first state visit wil be to the Islas Malvinas:) On the downside, he does not seem progressive on gay, womens and contraception issues - but I suspect few candidates would be much different on these issues. But, he is no "Mother Teresa" - but that may not be a bad thing, according to some information supplied by some Mudcat posters. Associated press |
|
13 Mar 13 - 08:03 PM (#3490018) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: michaelr Re: Mother Teresa - I seem to recall a post calling her wicked. Ed T, can you point me to that "information supplied by some Mudcat posters"? |
|
13 Mar 13 - 08:05 PM (#3490022) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Bobert No wonder those calls from the Vatican quit poppin' up on my caller ID... B;~) |
|
13 Mar 13 - 08:09 PM (#3490025) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: gnu I think it's a wait and see. Fact is, there is hope he chose his name for a reason... we'll see. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 09:06 PM (#3490040) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw I am the "some mudcat posters" in question. I said what I said about the wicked Mother Teresa on 11 March at 8.15pm on the Catholic religion response to 'today' thread. The imaginative cardinals have picked an old man yet again. He is extremely suspicious of homosexuality, he opposes gay marriage, he opposes contraception and he opposes abortion. It is very touching to read that his choice of name may signal a new beginning. Talk about clutching at straws. Another grim deal for Catholics the world over. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 09:08 PM (#3490042) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: bobad It seems old Frankie boy has some skeletons in his closet: " The extent of the church's complicity in the dark deeds was excellently set out by Horacio Verbitsky, one of Argentina's most notable journalists, in his book El Silencio (Silence). He recounts how the Argentinian navy with the connivance of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, now the Jesuit archbishop of Buenos Aires, hid from a visiting delegation of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission the dictatorship's political prisoners. Bergoglio was hiding them in nothing less than his holiday home in an island called El Silencio in the River Plate. The most shaming thing for the church is that in such circumstances Bergoglio's name was allowed to go forward in the ballot to chose the successor of John Paul II. What scandal would not have ensued if the first pope ever to be elected from the continent of America had been revealed as an accessory to murder and false imprisonment" The Guardian |
|
13 Mar 13 - 09:42 PM (#3490057) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Jeez, so those feckless old men chose a bloke for pope who was implicated in supporting a vicious right-wing dictatorship, notorious for years for making dissidents "disappear" and for hiding political prisoners from human rights watchers. How reminiscent of Pius XI and Pius XII who, respectively, did dirty deals with Mussolini, who needed to keep the Church quiet about fascism, and who facilitated the escape of Nazi war criminals to South America (irony? You tell me!). Not to speak of literally watching out of Vatican windows as a thousand Jews were abducted and taken to death camps. And last time they selected a guy who was doomed to be smeared all though his papacy by dint of his membership of Hitler Youth. Clever buggers, these cardinals, eh? Do you think they thought we wouldn't notice? Anyone for one person, one vote? |
|
13 Mar 13 - 09:53 PM (#3490061) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Rapparee Could also be Francis Solanus. Or any of these: Francis Blanco Francis Borgia Francis Caracciolo Francis Chieu Van Do Francis Coll Francis Dormore Francis Fasani Francis Ferdinand de Capillas Francis Galvez Francis Gil de Frederich Francis Isidore Gagelin Francis Jaccard Francis Jerome Francis Johnson Francis Man Francis Mary Paul Libermann Francis Page Francis Palau y Quer Francis Patrizzi Francis Pontillo Francis Possenti Francis Regis Clet Francis Rogaczewski Francis Seelos Francis Trung Von Tran Francis Webb Francis Xavier Francis Xavier Bianchi Francis Xavier Can Nguyen Francis Xavier Mau Francis Xavier Seelos Francis de Capillas Francis de Geronimo Francis de Hieronymo Francis de Montmorency Laval Francis de Sales Francis di Girolamo Francis of Assisi Francis of Girolamo Francis of Nagasaki Francis of Paola Francis of Saint Michael |
|
13 Mar 13 - 10:21 PM (#3490071) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Bill D The new pope's history is not so simple. If he had totally opposed the Argentine govt. in the 70s, I suspect he wouldn't be here today.
|
|
13 Mar 13 - 10:31 PM (#3490074) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: John on the Sunset Coast Bill D--- The link doesn't work. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 10:35 PM (#3490076) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw If he didn't oppose a stinking military regime that made people "disappear", then he's hardly a man of principle, is he. One might have thought that that was a basic qualification for the job. |
|
13 Mar 13 - 10:36 PM (#3490077) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: MarkS Frances Albert Sinatra |
|
14 Mar 13 - 02:15 AM (#3490107) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer I watched the 15-minute video of the pope's introduction and first address. It was entirely in Italian, except that he gave the papal blessing in Latin. It was appropriate that he speak in Latin, since he is first the bishop of Rome and secondly the leader of the Catholic Church. My Italian isn't very good, but it did seem that his accent was quite good for an Argentinian. He made the people laugh three times during his presentation, and there was a real sweetness to the tone of the event - not a tone of authority. It would be nice to have a pope whose reign would be characterized by sweetness. That's how it should be, I think. No, you're not going to get a pope who's gung-ho in his support of contraception, homosexuals, and abortion. The best I can hope for is somebody who's tolerant and compassionate, even though he may have ideological differences from what I'd like to see. No doubt, this pope will be very strict in handling the child molestation problem. There is no longer any room for tolerance of any sort of sexual misconduct by priests. There should never have been any tolerance of such conduct. -Joe- |
|
14 Mar 13 - 04:22 AM (#3490117) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Peter Laban 'My Italian isn't very good, but it did seem that his accent was quite good for an Argentinian.' Given his father was Italian, it shouldn't maybe not be be a complete surprise. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 05:01 AM (#3490123) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: fat B****rd Bacon? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 05:21 AM (#3490130) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Twenty two miles East of Dover? Don T. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 05:27 AM (#3490134) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Sorry about that! Couldn't resist! He seems more amiable than most, but I don't think he'll change much of what needs changing. Maybe it's just my experience, but I never found Jesuits partiularly amenable to reasoned argument, nor did they have the slightest tolerance for awkward questions. Don T. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 05:37 AM (#3490142) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Musket I take it Mudcat was down in order to ensure our debate didn't unduly influence the Cardinals. I wonder if this one is as infallible as the last one? zzzzzzz Ok, that was yesterday's news. Today, the newspapers are more concerned with a panda at a zoo that can't get a hard on. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 05:41 AM (#3490143) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T I suspect there are different ways to oppose a dangerous dictatorship (and continuing to remain alive and active, that is) - including activities behind the scene. That would differ from supporting and enabling such an administration. I will wait and examine what evidence comes forward as to his related actions at the time, before rushing to judgement. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 06:07 AM (#3490153) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Mr Happy Basic qualifications for the job? Current CRB Checkable work history References None of these needed for job of pope, rc priest or nun |
|
14 Mar 13 - 06:18 AM (#3490156) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T There is a panda at a zoo that can't get a hard on? Would that be, unassisted ? Given the age profile, there may also be a few in mudcat. But, that is old news:) |
|
14 Mar 13 - 06:47 AM (#3490163) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Roger the Skiffler Francis Rossi? Rockin' all round the Vatican! RtS |
|
14 Mar 13 - 09:49 AM (#3490227) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Rapparee Francis Heaulme? Kendall Francois? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 09:53 AM (#3490231) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Nigel Parsons From: Rapparee - PM Date: 13 Mar 13 - 09:53 PM Could also be Francis Solanus. Or any of these: Francis Blanco Francis Borgia Francis Caracciolo Francis Chieu Van Do Francis Coll Francis Dormore Francis Fasani Francis Ferdinand de Capillas "Francis Solanus"? Does that mean he only has one bum? Or that people thing the sun shines out of it? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 10:13 AM (#3490242) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Pete Jennings 22 miles East of Dover, Don? I make that somewhere in the English Channel!! 22 miles SOUTH EAST of Dover is a different story...LOL! |
|
14 Mar 13 - 11:04 AM (#3490256) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: The Sandman wasnt there a Francis who was nice to birds , hitler was nice to children |
|
14 Mar 13 - 11:05 AM (#3490257) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: The Sandman AS LONG AS THEY WERE NOT JEWISH |
|
14 Mar 13 - 11:13 AM (#3490260) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Bill D Some interesting stories at the English version of The Buenos Aires Herald including this from Cardinal Dolan: "The new pope told the 114 cardinals who elected him that he had chosen the name Francis in honour of St. Francis of Assisi, who is known in Catholicism as "the little poor one" because he renounced earthly goods. There had been some speculation that since Bergoglio is a member of the Jesuit religious order, he may have chosen the name in honour of St. Francis Xavier, one of the first Jesuits. "He quickly clarified that," Dolan said." |
|
14 Mar 13 - 12:11 PM (#3490291) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Jim Knowledge I `ad our local Jesuit priest in my cab last night. `e was looking very pleased with `imself, just as if `e`d done a conversion job on those atheists `oo run the betting shop. I said, "Evening Pat, you`re looking chipper. You got yourself a new rosary then?" `e said, " Nutting like that Jim. To be sure we`ve got a new Pope" I said, " I know, I just saw it on the telly. `e must be a tough old bird." `e said, "What makes you say that then, Jim?" I said, "I would`ave thought thirty minutes at Gas Mark 5 would`ave been enough but `e was cooking for over an `our!!!" Whaddam I Like?? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 12:30 PM (#3490300) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Big Al Whittle could be Francis from the Mr Ed films....? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 12:42 PM (#3490308) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T ""could be Francis from the Mr Ed films....?"" I had nothing to do with it:) |
|
14 Mar 13 - 01:03 PM (#3490315) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: eddie1 We've already had two "John Paul"s as Pope. The new one, although he is using "Francis" as his official name is actually called "Jorge" or "George" in English. This being so, what odds could I get. betting on the next one being "Pope Ringo"? Eddie |
|
14 Mar 13 - 01:08 PM (#3490319) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,mg Is it really Francis? Someone pointed out that he said Francisco in some sort of announcement..should we not call him that? I don't know what he really said but shouldn't he be able to use one of his own languages, which I presume are Italian and Spanish? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 01:19 PM (#3490322) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,sciencegeek At least this new pope has a track record for advocating for the poor and social justice ( within conservative limits) and at 76 years of age is probably going to "retire" before he hits 90. That will leave the path open for more progressive Cardinals to make the next series of changes that the church needs to make to be relevent. Or else face another scism... how does the "Reformed Catholic Church" sound??? We already have the Orthodox churches left over from the breakup of the Roman Empire. So much for the actual adherance to "catholic"... as in univeral & all embracing. sigh... |
|
14 Mar 13 - 01:42 PM (#3490334) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Mrrzy The funny thing to me is that, as many of you know, my younger son has been called Jesus all the way through high school for looking exactly like pix of the long-blond-hair-and-beard Jesus of Renaissance art... and his middle name is Francis! So now I think he should be called Pope instead... Also, pedantic me, this pontiff isn't Pope Francis the First, he is the first Pope Francis. He won't be Francis "+ Roman Numeral One" till there is a second Francis, to be Francis II. Just like you aren't Senior till you have a Junior. "Do whatever steps you want if You have cleared them with the pontiff Everybody say his own Kyrie eleison Doin' the Vatican Rag!" |
|
14 Mar 13 - 02:01 PM (#3490347) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow "I never found Jesuits partiularly amenable to reasoned argument" Is it conceivable that they might have felt that you weren't particularly amenable to reasoned argument? I've never met a Jesuit who was reluctant to carry on a reasoned argument. It almost defines them. I hoped we'd have a pope choosing Francis for a name. I hope he stays true to it. I see that Chavez's successor in Venezuela suggests that Chavez up in heaven had a lot to do with the selection... |
|
14 Mar 13 - 04:08 PM (#3490402) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Big Al Whittle Francis was the donkey, Larry Hagman the soldier, the horse was Mr Ed.... |
|
14 Mar 13 - 04:37 PM (#3490411) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Bill D *pedant alert* Francis was actually a mule.. *end pedant alert* |
|
14 Mar 13 - 05:57 PM (#3490442) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter I love this guy! According to NPR, right after he blessed the crowd, he brushed off the papal limousine and took the bus back to his hotel. On the way to the Pope Residence or whatever he carried his own bags. That's what I call taking the job seriously. I mean, who wouldn't take the limo, if you were Pope? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 06:07 PM (#3490446) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: bobad It would have been cooler if he rode on an ass. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 06:14 PM (#3490447) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: catspaw49 Francis Ford Popola |
|
14 Mar 13 - 07:50 PM (#3490463) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Lanfranc yclept Francis Good name, otherwise same old same old, with the emphasis on the 'old'! Will he distribute the obscene wealth of the Catholic church to the poor of the world? Will he be instrumental in reversing his church's teaching on contraception, thereby helping to save the world from overpopulation? Will he purge the priesthood of perverts and paedophiles? Will he admit that the myths on which Christianity and Marianism are based are just that? Not a chance!! Alan |
|
14 Mar 13 - 07:59 PM (#3490467) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Bill D 'Spaw! That was a bit...*giggle*...naughty... *chortle* You ought to be |
|
14 Mar 13 - 08:22 PM (#3490482) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow I'm not sure how you set about realising the wealth tied up in a bunch of cathedrals and church vestments, for example, no matter how splendid they might look. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 08:25 PM (#3490483) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T ""I see that Chavez's successor in Venezuela suggests that Chavez up in heaven had a lot to do with the selection..."" Not the first politician to make a "wacky claim". Today, I heard a RC Bishop claim on Radio that it was not the cardinals who actually selected this Pope, but it was God who directly directed them, in one way or another, to make God's choice of the best Pope. What's seems like a "wacky claim" to one person seems to be much like reality to another person :) |
|
14 Mar 13 - 08:33 PM (#3490485) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: bobad "If God tells the cardinals whom to vote for then why isn't the Papal vote unanimous?" - The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science |
|
14 Mar 13 - 08:57 PM (#3490491) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow That'd be down to free will. A bit naive of the Dawkinites to assume all the cardinals would do what God wanted them to do. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 09:09 PM (#3490496) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T Or, God may not want the vote to look like the decision was too absolute, to avoid the appearance of an absolute power source on Earth? |
|
14 Mar 13 - 09:15 PM (#3490501) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw "I never found Jesuits partiularly amenable to reasoned argument" Is it conceivable that they might have felt that you weren't particularly amenable to reasoned argument? The issue here is the word "reasoned". If the existence of God has to be a given in any discussion, then that argument can't be "reasoned". For an argument to be truly reasoned, both sides have to drop their bags at the door on the way in. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 09:26 PM (#3490503) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: bobad "That'd be down to free will. A bit naive of the Dawkinites to assume all the cardinals would do what God wanted them to do." Are you even aware of the consequences of disobeying God? Eternal damnation doesn't even begin to describe it. |
|
14 Mar 13 - 09:45 PM (#3490507) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Frees ill, in theological terms, is not as simple as that, bodad. And I can't imagine a Jesuit being reluctant to carry on a discussion about whether God exists, Steve. That is Rather akin to saying that Richard Dawkins is unwilling to discuss the same topic. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 06:10 AM (#3490623) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Rog Peek Will he order the release of all records apertaining to abuse by the clergy, and the cover up thereof? Should we shoot for bacon? Rog |
|
15 Mar 13 - 08:05 AM (#3490657) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: TheSnail Steve Shaw For an argument to be truly reasoned, both sides have to drop their bags at the door on the way in. Quite right. If you simply declare your position to be "true", all reason is lost. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 08:39 AM (#3490666) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Well I'm glad you agree. As for Jesuits and Dawkins and what they might be willing to discuss, I think you find that Dawkins will take anyone on about any topic in this field without prejudice. Watch any of the dozens of his online videos and you'll see him listening. I think you'll find that Jesuits, in contrast, will argue only from inside their own ringfence. Tell your average Jesuit that the discussion must be predicated on the non-existence of God and the justifiable debunking of all their "theology", until such times as they can produce evidence, and they'll shut the door on you and most likely pray for you. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 12:06 PM (#3490727) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow You seem to have come up against some pretty unusual Jesuits, Steve. I certainly wouldn't count them as "your average Jesuit"! That just isn't how any I've met operate. They'd be delighted to start a discussion from a position of no prior assumptions. Probably prefer it. Of course there might have been a misunderstanding about what your existing views were. If you give the impression you believe in God that'd be a different starting point for a discussion than when it's understood you don't. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 12:35 PM (#3490745) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link you dont have to read many of steves posts to know what steves position is - bless him! |
|
15 Mar 13 - 12:56 PM (#3490756) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Steve never leaves his bags at the door, he carts them in, opens them up and discovers they are empty. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 01:09 PM (#3490761) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Get rid of the celibacy rule and start promoting conventional marriage. Weed out the sexual predators. If not, society will turn away....and I dont mean the media driven "liberal" society which is making so much noise, but the great silent socially conservative majority, who are getting angry and fed up with being shit on. Still dont understand your stance Joe, you profess to love your church and your beliefs, yet seem happy to see secularism flourish. These people are determined to destroy all you believe in, why dont you start fighting their agenda? |
|
15 Mar 13 - 02:43 PM (#3490797) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Get rid of the celibacy rule and start promoting conventional marriage. Weed out the sexual predators. If not, society will turn away.... Ah yes, you're either a sex predator or you're conventionally married. And you talk about my baggage. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 03:01 PM (#3490805) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw So let's see where we are so far. The new Pope loves people. He catches the bus. He talks to people going to work. He does his own washing up. He lives in a little flat. Bless. Now the reality. He is reactionary and authoritarian, elected by unrepresentative old men who are also reactionary and authoritarian. Not elected by the Catholics of the world, and no woman had the slightest say in his election. Yet the main tenets of his papacy, and of all previous papacies, enshrine the fact that women are second-class. They must not be priests. They must not marry priests. They must not use contraception. They must not have abortions. They must remain ignorant and they must regard poverty as a virtue. Don't tell me, please, from the US-centric point of view, that this is not accurate. Most Catholics live in Africa and Latin America where the Church has an iron grip. US citizens can, and do, fight back against this barbarism: there are 30 million lapsed Catholics in the US. It isn't so easy in the third world. Ask the tens of millions of women infected with HIV, or dying after back-street abortions, or living with disease and misery and poverty, courtesy of the Catholic church's ban on condoms and abortion, whether it's easy to demur. Nothing is going to change. His undoubted complicity in the fascist regimes of the 70s and 80s (which has got the Church's spin doctors in apoplectic panic) is almost a red herring, horrid though it is. Finding a cardinal who's squeaky-clean, sexually, financially or politically, would be harder than finding rocking-horse shit. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 03:08 PM (#3490807) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw You seem to have come up against some pretty unusual Jesuits, Steve. I certainly wouldn't count them as "your average Jesuit"! That just isn't how any I've met operate. They'd be delighted to start a discussion from a position of no prior assumptions. I didn't say no prior assumptions. A proper conversation must start with the prior assumption that God does not exist. Saying there must be "no prior assumptions", in a world in which the default position is that God exists is no way to start a fair fight. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 03:09 PM (#3490808) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer I think that once laws permitting same-sex marriage are enacted, the Catholic Church will drop the issue. They won't go conducting homosexual marriages in their own churches, though; and it would be foolhardy for gays to push for that. Once that can of worms is closed, better not to open it again. I don't think the Catholic Church is far from accepting married priests in the Latin rite. Most of the eastern rites have married priests already. You won't see married nuns and orders of religious men with married members, because celibacy and community living with brothers or sisters are part of who they are. But then I'm a married, male associate member of the Sisters of Mercy - so maybe I'm proof that I'm wrong about that. I think the prohibition against birth control will eventually be dropped, but I don't think you'll ever see abortion approved by the Catholic Church. Ake, you say I'm happy to see secularism flourish. I suspect you're right, but what do you mean by that? If people are "secularist" in their way of thinking, why would I want to see them pressured into belonging to a church they don't believe in? I, as a heterosexual, married person, do not in the least feel that my marriage is threatened by homosexuals who want to get married. And as a believing Catholic, I don't feel threatened by people who choose a more secular line of thinking. What I believe in above all else, is tolerance and fairness and brotherly love. "These people" really don't seem "determined to destroy all (I) believe in." -Joe- |
|
15 Mar 13 - 03:09 PM (#3490809) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Aaargh again on the italics front. :-( |
|
15 Mar 13 - 03:13 PM (#3490813) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw They won't go conducting homosexual marriages in their own churches, though; and it would be foolhardy for gays to push for that. Once that can of worms is closed, better not to open it again. So gay people will always be second class in the Catholic church then. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 03:15 PM (#3490815) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw I don't do it on purpose, you know, and I haven't had a drop. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 03:51 PM (#3490824) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Perhaps some Jesuit has been messing up your computer, Steve. They're a cunning bunch. A proper conversation must start with the prior assumption that God does not exist. Saying there must be "no prior assumptions", in a world in which the default position is that God exists is no way to start a fair fight. So your prior assumption is fine, unlike an a priori assumption you might disagree with... Any proper discussion has to start from a basis of finding out what you agree about and what you don't and then exploring the differences and the rationale for these. And that's the way Jesuits approach discussions. I should know, since that's where I learnt to try to approach discussions in that way, at school many years ago. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 04:04 PM (#3490827) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Rog Peek Pope getting the bus etc. sort of puts me in mind of Margaret Thatcher with a shopping basket! Hope not. Rog |
|
15 Mar 13 - 04:09 PM (#3490830) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,999 Will the new greeting for the pontiff be, "Yo, Frankie!" |
|
15 Mar 13 - 04:12 PM (#3490834) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer Steve Shaw says: A proper conversation must start with the prior assumption that God does not exist. Steve, could we level the playing field a bit? For the sake of fairness, I think we need to change one word in your proposition:
Then, and only then, would discussion be possible. As for your other question: So gay people will always be second class in the Catholic church then. For the foreseeable future, I regret that's probably the case. I and others do what we can to promote a change in attitude toward homosexuality, but it's an uphill climb. -Joe- |
|
15 Mar 13 - 04:17 PM (#3490837) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw No. I don't agree with that. So might a chocolate teapot in orbit round Mars exist. A sensible conversation will be able to support any assertions made. "God may exist" is an assertion for which no sensible evidence has, thus far, been put forward. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 04:22 PM (#3490839) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer Yeah, Steve, but if you want to have a rational and logical discussion, you can't posit at the beginning that your position is true and the other position false. The rules of logic don't allow it. -Joe- |
|
15 Mar 13 - 04:57 PM (#3490853) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow "Cogito ergo sum" was how Descartes set out his starting assumption. Descartes of course was educated in a Jesuit school... It showed. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 05:59 PM (#3490873) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Nice to see Akenaton proving you don't have to be religious to promote bigotry. Again And again And yet decent people buy into the word 'conventional' that he uses. But not in the twisted way he means. Being Gay is conventional you disgusting specimen. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 07:06 PM (#3490889) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T Since Easter is especially important to most Christians and Rcs, it is nice to know the Easter Bunny participated in events around the naming of a new pope. Below are the details (and, for the less-believing,aka the evidence): Easter Bunny was there |
|
15 Mar 13 - 07:08 PM (#3490890) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: framus Francis Howerd - Ooooh, errrrrrrrrrrr Missus! |
|
15 Mar 13 - 07:27 PM (#3490895) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Hi Ian, so you you think male to male sex is a conventional arrangement?......You must live in a very strange part of the country, or mix in a very strange group of people. We all know that homosexuality exists, but is relatively rare; in these parts, conventional marriage is between a man and a woman. During my working life here, I have known perhaps five or six homosexual couples, all have moved here from other areas, They have been "tolerated" and quietly left to their own devices, they have not pushed their agenda or the "boundaries" and seem to prefer not to be the centre of controversy |
|
15 Mar 13 - 09:36 PM (#3490928) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude ya know what the Catholic hating shit is getting old here. very old. Nobody forces you to like or believe anything (which is pretty evident by these non stop hate threads) ME i believe in fixing things that are broken, Thats why I carry a 70 year old watch and drive a 15 year old car. Maybe this guy is the guy to fix what is broken, However ya won't wait and see cause well ya got your hate to keep ya going. How about filling in the blanks then all Catholic are ___ all blacks are ___ all Jews are ___ all Mexican's are ___ there would be people crawling out of the woodwork should someone say anything like that, but bash a person of faith .. that is perfectly ok right .. fuck it talking to the wall |
|
15 Mar 13 - 09:41 PM (#3490931) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Yeah, Steve, but if you want to have a rational and logical discussion, you can't posit at the beginning that your position is true and the other position false. The rules of logic don't allow it.. This is a tricky one for believers, I admit. Thing is, I haven't got a position. That's the whole point. I can't believe in the truth of nothing. That's just ludicrous. So I ask the Jesuit fellow, or any other fellow, to enter a conversation with the same blank canvas as mine. If I don't do this, then I'm immediately letting the Jesuit fellow/whoever commence the conversation on his ground. Me on the back foot before we have even started to exchange words. That simply can't be a sensible conversation. My position is that I haven't got a position, but I'm interested in yours, so tell me more. And have your evidence ready, because I don't do witness, hearsay, dodgy ancient texts, edicts and tradition, let alone the sayings of chairman pete. |
|
15 Mar 13 - 09:43 PM (#3490932) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Three strikes on the italics front and still not out. I welcome the indulgence.
-Joe Catholic- |
|
15 Mar 13 - 09:55 PM (#3490935) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Looks as if you might have it cracked, touch wood. Perhaps you've got involved in discussions that didn't work along those lines, but I don't think you'd find it hard getting "your average Jesuit" to happily accept that as a basis for a discussion. As I remarked, "I am thinking now. And therefore I know one thing, that I exist" is a pretty good starting point for a consideration of what else might exist. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 04:03 AM (#3490972) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Nice to see that members of society are tolerated. Presumably by themselves as they are part of the same society. Who'd be a Pope eh? He has nailed his flag to the mast of intolerance on such matters to the extent that his views on Gays, contraception and, being British dare I say geography, make him irrelevant to the non Catholic world to begin with. No matter, he strikes accord with at least one sad old atheist. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 06:05 AM (#3490994) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T Olddude, I can visualize you singing Guy Clark's "Stuff That Works" from parts of your last post:) |
|
16 Mar 13 - 08:24 AM (#3491045) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton To "tolerate" certain types of behaviour does not mean that you agree with the promotion of that behaviour Ian. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 09:55 AM (#3491081) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter > all Catholic are ___ CATHOLIC > all blacks are ___ BLACK > all Jews are ___ JEWISH > all Mexican's are ___ MEXICAN That's my position. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 10:11 AM (#3491087) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow That rather opens the way to "He's a Catholic/Black/Jew/Mexican - and you know what they are like" How about "All Catholics/Blacks/Jews/Mexicans are not the same" instead? |
|
16 Mar 13 - 10:27 AM (#3491093) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Musket What if I didn't agree with the behaviour of Scots? What if I said that British society tolerated Scots? What if people thought such a statement was valid? What if I said someone who pays more taxes should have more say than someone who pays less? What if as a tax payer I said I "tolerated" those who through whatever circumstances live on benefits? What if as a heterosexual person I said I "tolerated" Gay people? What if you shut the f*ck up and stop poisoning every bloody thread on this forum by promoting hate wherever and whenever you get the opportunity? I'm first for free speech, but f*ck me drunk, you'd be first up against the wall come the glorious revolution... |
|
16 Mar 13 - 12:16 PM (#3491133) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter > How about "All Catholics/Blacks/Jews/Mexicans are not the same" instead? Because it didn't fit into olddude's proffered format. Obviously, however, that's my meaning. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 12:40 PM (#3491143) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,olddude what I am saying is it is a hypocrite thing to behave like it is all ok to bash peoples faith. We do not tolerate racism do we, I don't so why is is ok on mudcat to constantly go after people of faith. I don't do that to others, I don't like others doing that to me. When someone uses a racist comment around me, when they wake up off the floor they know it probably wasn't a good idea to say that to me. But day after day those of us with faith deal with the non stop bashing. Now the Catholic church has more than a few issues. It is heart breaking to Catholics. We wait to see if it will someday change and do everything we can to make it change. Maybe this guy will do that. Maybe not .. but it is not ok for constant attacks |
|
16 Mar 13 - 12:53 PM (#3491148) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,olddude should have said in my younger days. Now I just walk away from such. Like I said I am talking to a wall |
|
16 Mar 13 - 01:18 PM (#3491154) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Musket Perhaps olddude, questioning faith as applied to society as opposed to purely its members is seen as faith bashing? Fair question, but not a fair point. When I see people talking about religious equality, it invariably means religious privilege. You see, when a religious cult has influence, the wrong messages are sent. Contraception becomes rarer leading to child poverty and high infant mortality, Gay people are seen as second class, women are told they can't wear pointy hats, people grow up scarred by mea culpa, scientific discovery is held back by "legitimate other views," abortion becomes less of a life saver and more of an excuse to bring misery, especially to the widows, widowers and orphans of those healthcare professionals terrorised by criminals working in the name of their Lord, let alone the poor women needing help. You are right, it is heart breaking, but those with club membership cards hold the key to sorting it and rather than constant attacks as you put it, constant scrutiny is more than justified? Those who you feel we should leave alone are those who can sort this mess out. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 01:37 PM (#3491164) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Many a "faith" spends much of its time bashing other faiths or bashing atheism. The Catholic church certainly bashes people who demur from its dictats on matters it regards itself as having the authority of God to decide on. The Catholic church has long taught that abortion is wrong, contraception is wrong, homosexuality is wrong, and now gay marriage is wrong. There is no room for discussion about whether the Church could, in fact, be wrong about these things itself. No, these things are just wrong, and all we are allowed is a conscience get-out clause that the more educated Catholics might get but which less educated Catholics (the vast majority) probably don't get. Mother Teresa said she didn't ever want to hear of a single abortion in Ireland. No-one in the upper echelons of the Church told her to shut her mouth, did they? That there was room for conscience? The Church is all too happy for mixed, confused messages to be put out. And that is the one thing that is definitely wrong. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 03:07 PM (#3491180) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude 90% of all Catholics don't listen to what the pope says unless it is about the sacraments. So if you are not Catholic exactly how does it affect you.Other than just hating Catholics. Now taking that same logic do you think all Germans hate Jews because of their past sins. You can go on for centuries, how about what happened to the native Americans. Think about it every organization, political, religious, social, gathering, tribe anything by man is riddled with scandal. Maybe this is the guy who will fix the broken church, maybe not but I will give him his due first. By the way, definition of cult, any organization you are not involved with or don't like |
|
16 Mar 13 - 03:47 PM (#3491189) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Many a "faith" spends much of its time bashing other faiths or bashing atheism. That would appear to include the atheist face, which is in many ways effectively the established church in many influential circles... |
|
16 Mar 13 - 03:48 PM (#3491190) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,olddude by the way, most people I know including myself do not agree with abortion, however, I would never think of trying to stop a person from making that decision themselves and that is the view of most Catholic I know. Mother Theresa was completely right to have her views without judgement as you are with yours in favor. Abortion is the decision a person has to make. I don't have to agree with it nor do I but they are free to make it . |
|
16 Mar 13 - 04:17 PM (#3491198) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude 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. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 06:15 PM (#3491215) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link yes,but david did get a visit from nathan the prophet taking him to task for his adultery and the death of uriah! |
|
16 Mar 13 - 06:16 PM (#3491216) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 06:40 PM (#3491221) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ed T King David had 500 wives? He must'a had a good job to afford 'em and very good Mojo:) |
|
16 Mar 13 - 06:42 PM (#3491223) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: gnu 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. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 07:08 PM (#3491225) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 08:34 PM (#3491245) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: RichM 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. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 08:57 PM (#3491249) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude 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 |
|
16 Mar 13 - 09:12 PM (#3491253) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton 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. |
|
16 Mar 13 - 09:33 PM (#3491263) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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. |
|
17 Mar 13 - 05:24 AM (#3491322) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Shimrod 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! |
|
17 Mar 13 - 06:24 AM (#3491337) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie 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. |
|
17 Mar 13 - 07:31 AM (#3491357) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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. |
|
17 Mar 13 - 08:18 AM (#3491368) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Shimrod 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. |
|
17 Mar 13 - 09:37 AM (#3491384) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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. |
|
17 Mar 13 - 02:23 PM (#3491489) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow 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. |
|
17 Mar 13 - 04:35 PM (#3491524) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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 |
|
17 Mar 13 - 04:40 PM (#3491526) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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? |
|
17 Mar 13 - 06:11 PM (#3491550) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow 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. |
|
17 Mar 13 - 08:20 PM (#3491574) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw We are in complete agreement I think. Cheers. |
|
18 Mar 13 - 08:13 AM (#3491690) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Two people who've been arguing expressing agreement about something - I think that's almost a first on the Mudcat... |
|
18 Mar 13 - 10:23 AM (#3491744) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger The jury is still out on this Pope. Pope and the death squads |
|
18 Mar 13 - 10:38 AM (#3491748) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger "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. |
|
18 Mar 13 - 02:08 PM (#3491827) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow 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. |
|
18 Mar 13 - 07:37 PM (#3491923) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger 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. |
|
18 Mar 13 - 08:11 PM (#3491937) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw 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. |
|
18 Mar 13 - 10:55 PM (#3492001) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow 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. |
|
19 Mar 13 - 11:48 AM (#3492205) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger 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? |
|
19 Mar 13 - 12:18 PM (#3492217) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow ."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. |
|
19 Mar 13 - 01:56 PM (#3492251) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude 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 |
|
19 Mar 13 - 04:36 PM (#3492324) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger "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. |
|
19 Mar 13 - 04:57 PM (#3492330) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: olddude 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. |
|
19 Mar 13 - 05:51 PM (#3492347) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,mg 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... |
|
19 Mar 13 - 06:19 PM (#3492358) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer 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- |
|
19 Mar 13 - 06:35 PM (#3492363) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Wolfhound person 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 |
|
19 Mar 13 - 06:50 PM (#3492369) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: gnu 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! |
|
19 Mar 13 - 09:27 PM (#3492431) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Peter K (Fionn) 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. |
|
19 Mar 13 - 09:48 PM (#3492439) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow 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. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 05:00 AM (#3492487) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton 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. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 07:24 AM (#3492531) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter 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." |
|
20 Mar 13 - 08:35 AM (#3492550) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Penny S. 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 |
|
20 Mar 13 - 10:19 AM (#3492579) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow 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. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 12:01 PM (#3492611) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger "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. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 12:21 PM (#3492627) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Rog Peek 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 |
|
20 Mar 13 - 12:25 PM (#3492633) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Err.. yes. The church can promote and defend family values. But until it recognises gay families it will be as irrelevant as Akenbigotedaken. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 12:59 PM (#3492653) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger 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. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 07:08 PM (#3492797) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer 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- |
|
20 Mar 13 - 07:42 PM (#3492805) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow 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". |
|
20 Mar 13 - 07:50 PM (#3492810) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: RichM 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. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 07:57 PM (#3492816) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Bill D 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. |
|
20 Mar 13 - 10:16 PM (#3492851) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow From today's Guardian. Pope Francis did not denounce me to Argentinian junta, says priest |
|
21 Mar 13 - 01:56 AM (#3492910) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/21/pope-francis-argentinian-junta-priest httpq://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/21/pope-francis-argentinian-junta-priest |
|
21 Mar 13 - 08:39 AM (#3492966) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Peter K (Fionn) Bil D, that's ridiculous. Mugabe's movements in Europe are tightly controlled - in fact he is banned from travel in the EU to all intents and purposes. He could not have got to Vatican City without dispensation, short of landing a private jet in St Peter's Square. In any case, the visiting heads of state were not merely "part of the crowd," any more than the serried ranks of cardinals. Joe, Francis's two predecessors had been building up cordial relations with Palestine and no doubt that policy will continue. Both visited the Holy Land, including Bethlehem in the West Bank. In some ways the relationship with Palestine is less of a challenge than that with Israel. In the latter case there are always tensions: partly historic, going back through the blood libel to the crucifixion; and partly present-day. (There has been a series of difficult negotiations about Christian holy sites in Jerusalem, for instance, in which - among other things - the Vatican finished up ceding control of the so-called last-supper room to Israel. |
|
21 Mar 13 - 08:58 AM (#3492971) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow As a Nass killer Mugabe isn't in the same league as Bush, Putin, Blair. |
|
21 Mar 13 - 12:42 PM (#3493062) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Stringsinger The veneer that religion places over conflict would lead people to believe that wars are exempt from religious bias and practice. They are not. There are many preachers and rabbis in American religious institutions who hearken back to St. Augustines precept of "Just wars" which is a oxymoron. There are no just wars. The innocent is victimized as the "enemy". The old testament "time to kill" is another ancient rationalization for one of the most destructive activities that could finish mankind as a species. This "just wars" attitude informs the policy of the U.S. regardless of the type of war. The "Great War" is a misnomer when you consider that Afghanistan is the longest war ever perpetrated. Somehow, this rationalization was a religious and political move that insinuated itself by clerics into the realm of religious thought. |
|
21 Mar 13 - 02:18 PM (#3493107) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow The veneer that religion places over conflict would lead people to believe that wars are exempt from religious bias and practice. That's certainly not a view I've ever come across. It would be pretty extraordinary if were the case. Afghanistan the longest war ever? Not yet, even including the Russian ccupation as part of the same war. Hundred Years War, Thirty Years War... |
|
21 Mar 13 - 02:31 PM (#3493111) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Musket Mugabe isn't in the same league as any leader of a democracy. Prat |
|
21 Mar 13 - 06:50 PM (#3493216) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer I am pleased to report that the Catholic Church is moving closer and closer to abandoning the "just war" rationalization. If you look at Catholic documents about warfare over the last thirty years, you'd think they were frickin' pacifists. And many Catholics in my right-wing community are worried that the Catholic Church is becoming "socialist" in its attitude toward poverty. Now, if they can just mitigate their attitudes about homosexuality, women in ministry, and birth control/family planning issues... -Joe- |
|
21 Mar 13 - 08:03 PM (#3493251) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: McGrath of Harlow Very few wars, if any, pass the conditions that could entitle them to be called "just war". The conditions of a Just War are: it must be fought by a legal recognised authority, eg, a government the cause of the war must be just the war must be fought with the intention to establish good or correct evil there must be a reasonable chance of success the war must be the last resort (after all diplomatic negotiations have been tried and failed) only sufficient force must be used and civilians must not be involved About the only war that arguably could be argued to meet these conditions that I can think of might be World War II - and many of the actions carried out by the Allies were in breach of the last condition. |
|
21 Mar 13 - 08:16 PM (#3493254) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer That last requirement that "civilians not be involved" is one that counts World War II out of the picture, too. Also, the Americans cranked so much racism into the war against the Japanese, that it MUST have been immoral, too. -Joe- |
|
31 Mar 13 - 05:09 AM (#3496959) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: DMcG Well, it's only been a little over two weeks since he became Pope, so it's a little early to make judgements. But there's certainly been some things I regard as positive signs. On Maunday Thursday he went out of the Basilica and washed the feet of prisoners, some of whom were women and some of whom were Muslim. It's a symbol, nothing more, but it is a good start. And it gives another, more subtle signal. One of the priests in a parish I was at changed the service so that only the feet of men could be washed, on the grounds the twelve were all men. The Pope's actions declare that sort of literalism |
|
31 Mar 13 - 05:11 AM (#3496961) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: DMcG (oops) ... sort of literalism quite beside the point, and missing the basic message of the Gospels. So, as I say, very early days, but a promising start. |
|
31 Mar 13 - 09:13 AM (#3497012) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter There will never be a perfectly "just" war any more than there will be a crime-free society. But some wars are juster than others. Of course, which ones those are depend on whom you ask. Furthermore, some populations are far more anguished by injustice in war than others. Assuming that counts for anything - and I think it does. |
|
31 Mar 13 - 09:22 AM (#3497015) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Lighter About the foot washing: Bear in mind that Francis is the first Pope in *history* (that about two thousand years) known to have washed the feet of women and non-Christians. Like all faiths, the Catholic Church is heavy on tradition and symbolism. What Francis did was, in a symbolic sense, epoch-making. I'm far from being a Catholic, but I'm impressed by somebody who seems so deeply committed to ecumenicism, simplicity, and human dignity. Not even a Pope can be perfect, but stay tuned. |
|
31 Mar 13 - 11:47 AM (#3497058) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Bill D Presumably, the cardinals knew a bit about Bergogglio's history and attitudes, seeing as he was runner up in the last conclave. I have no doubts that some voted against him because the feared exactly the sort of tradition-breaking he has engaged in. But I suspect that others knew the church needed some 'shaking up' and figured Bergogglio was the one to do it."Better him than me." Most will never admit their motives, and we can only speculate. |
|
31 Mar 13 - 12:09 PM (#3497064) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: sciencegeek I remember Pope John 23 and how human and caring he came across as... and how he shocked the world by selling off some of the papal wealth... and reached out to other faiths. If Francis can help women and the poor achieve some measure of social justice, I'm all for it. I'm not a Christian... but the "teachings of Christ" that I've read promote tolerance, charity and empathy, which are ideals that I value. Here's hoping the new pontiff can leave the world a better place. |
|
31 Mar 13 - 12:30 PM (#3497071) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw I agree with that, sciencegeek. But by his fruits shall you know him, not by the little crumb-like seeds of niceness he's throwing at the moment. I hate to sound cynical, but I can't help thinking there's a fair bit of spin going on here. After the lamentable years of the last two popes, who did nothing to stem the Church's imploding from within, it could be that someone has decided that a more folksy and chummy image is needed. Let's see what he does for the women of Africa and Latin America, eh? |
|
01 Apr 13 - 06:38 AM (#3497351) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Bonzo3legs I hear that he is handing out contraceptives in St Peter's Square!!! |
|
02 Apr 13 - 05:09 AM (#3497727) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Nigel Parsons A news report last week said that the Pope had met the 'Pope emeritus' for a meal. Did they go to Frankie & Benny's? |
|
02 Apr 13 - 09:26 AM (#3497798) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw He had a meal with eggs-Benedict?? I'll get me coat... |
|
02 Apr 13 - 09:26 AM (#3497799) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw He had a meal with eggs-Benedict?? I'll get me coat... |
|
02 Apr 13 - 05:35 PM (#3497988) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Couldn't you find it the first time? :0) |
|
02 Apr 13 - 10:15 PM (#3498082) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Ebbie The pope's moment with the child suffering from cerebral palsy was rather moving. I'm not Catholic but I have hopes for this man. |
|
03 Apr 13 - 03:47 AM (#3498159) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: akenaton Its not the man Ebbie, its the organisation. Get real people into the priesthood and all will be well. The bridge has been swept away and needs to be rebuilt. |
|
03 Apr 13 - 06:06 AM (#3498197) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw Indeed. It would be millions of times more moving if he did something to help the women in Africa and Latin America out of ignorance, poverty, subjugation and inequality. They might not be too impressed with just a kiss. I know I'm a crusty owld cynic, but the Vatican is just as skilled at spin as any political party or lobby group. |
|
03 Apr 13 - 12:41 PM (#3498336) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: DMcG I know I'm a crusty owld cynic, but the Vatican is just as skilled at spin as any political party or lobby group. Really? It's very easy for any organisation to *recognise* the importance of good PR, but it's a great deal harder to achieve it. I would say that the recent record does not suggest the Vatican is skilled at spin. So I'm more inclined to assume this is one guy doing it his way, which will sometimes work and sometimes not, rather than a dark Machiavelli in the background. |
|
03 Apr 13 - 07:42 PM (#3498533) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Steve Shaw OK, but let's just see if he permits contraception in order to avert HIV/Aids in Africa so that millions of women can better fight discrimination, poverty, disease and misery, the legacy of the Catholic Church in Africa. Don't get me wrong. I like a chap who eschews the wealthy trappings he's entitled to and who kisses disabled people. But those actions are neither useful in that wider sense nor necessarily indicative of how the rest of his papacy will go. There has been a public relations disaster in recent years and he's beyond blame for trying to put that right. But we have a bit of a wait ahead of us. His true colours are not looking good. |
|
03 Apr 13 - 08:38 PM (#3498544) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Joe Offer A friend of mine, a former Jesuit priest, is probably the most notorious opponent of the death penalty in our very conservative county. Last week, he was a speaker at a forum on the death penalty at our local community college. There were no speakers on the panel who were in favor of the death penalty, and the right-wingers were outraged. They claimed this was "brainwashing" our junior college students, a horrible thing indeed. Posters in this forum often decry Catholic leaders who speak against birth control and homosexual marriage. The implication is that this is "brainwashing" poor, mindless Catholic lemmings. While I disagree with the Catholic Church's opposition to birth control and homosexual marriage, I don't really think they're horrible for holding those positions. That's what they think. I am free to think otherwise. If I'm a lemming, it's my own damn fault. Pope Francis is unlikely to change the Catholic position on birth control. I'd like him to, but I won't hate him if he doesn't. In general, I try not to hate people who have thoughts different from mine. I might try to change their minds, but I won't hate them. Same with Mother Teresa. I disagreed with her conservative thinking, but I hardly think she was an evil person for thinking as she did. I think she did the best she could to help the poor of Calcutta. -Joe Offer- |
|
04 Apr 13 - 03:30 PM (#3498837) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: GUEST,sciencegeek Most people change with age and experience... even if we still have our basic personality, it gets tempered or hardened as we go through life... think mellowed with age or grown embittered or rigid... the new pope is showing his own mind and convictions in small ways and as he grows into the "job" I expect that he will continue making his own stamp on the papacy. I also think that he will do a good deal of "soul searching" as the results of his actions become apparent. Actions have intended and unintended consequences. Over population is a real issue and will get worse before it gets better ( and how that may occur is anyone's guess)... But there has been a definite trend to smaller families in the more affluent societies- regardless of faith. If birth control is affordable, it will be used. Abortion is expensive retroactive birth control - only to use as last resort. If he stays out of health education and recognizes that free will is only free will if there is actually choice available, I'll be happy. Surprised, but happy. |
|
05 Apr 13 - 10:13 AM (#3499163) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: Rog Peek I watched a very disturbing, moving report about the 'stolen babies' of Argentina's 'dirty war' on BBC's Newsnight yesterday. Newsnight If you can's get Newsnight for any reasin, story is here At the end of the report Jeremy Paxman spoke to Sue Lloyd Roberts, the author of the report about a development involving Pope Francis which I have transcribed below: Jeremy Paxman: "Sue Lloyd Roberts who made that report is here now, there's a development tonight?..." Sue Lloyd Roberts: "There is a development concerning the Pope. One of the grandmothers, one of the founding grandmothers, Estela de la Cuadra, has been on television and radio in Argentina over the last few days, saying that the current, the new Pope who is of course Argentinian should not have been elected because he lacked integrity. And the reason she says this is because the family appealed to the Pope when he was just a Jesuit priest, his name was Jorge Bergoglio for help. Their daughter who was five months pregnant had been arrested, and they knew that she had come to term, and there were rumours about these babies being born in captivity and they wanted to know what had happened to the mother and baby. So, they went to Bergoglio, and he did listen, he did help, many priests just told the mothers to go away, they didn't want to get involved, they were afraid, but Bergoglio wrote to his bishop whom he knew had good contacts with the military. They went to see the bishop and the bishop told them that "Yes, their granddaughter had been taken by a very important military family and he warned the biological family not to delve further otherwise they would get into serious trouble." Jeremy Paxman: "Why does this matter?" Sue Lloyd Roberts: "The reason this matters is that, you can see on the note which Bergoglio wrote to his bishop that the date is 1977, you see his signature beneath, and when Cardinal Bergoglio as he later became was giving evidence to the court a couple of years ago when the court was looking into the conduct of the Catholic Church during what's called 'the dirty war' he claimed that he knew nothing about the mothers, or the grandmothers, or these stolen babies until 1985, a good two years after the dictatorship came to an end. Now, why would he do this? Well his critics say it is because everybody who's of a certain age in Argentina today, has to account for what they were doing during 'the dirty war', particularly the church who had a very bad reputation. The majority of the priests collaborated with the regime or turned a blind eye. A few were very brave, indeed nineteen priests were murdered, including two bishops, but the critics of the Pope say he is saying he didn't know because by saying he didn't know, he can be forgiven for not having done more to help the victims of this terror. So if you like, he wants to stand on the side of the angels in this sad episode in Argentinian history, which is a good place for a Pope to be." How, anyone living in Argentina could have been oblivious to what was going on I cannot imagine. Rather reminds me of the lines in Tom Paxton's song: "We didn't know said the Bergermaster, About the camp on the edge of town, It was Hitler and his crew that Brought the German nation down" Rog |
|
05 Jul 21 - 08:56 PM (#4112432) Subject: RE: BS: Pope Francis From: keberoxu Getting half of your colon surgically removed and stitching together what remains . . . Old age is not for sissies, is it! If he were one of my relatives, I would tell him to resign, like Benedict/Ratzinger, at this point. If only for his own health and for other people to stop worrying over him. Too much confusion in my own mind over his office and how he ought to use it. I just feel for him as one senior citizen feels for another. And I hope, selfishly, that we do not have another long drawn-out deathwatch phase as we did with John Paul II. |