Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lead by example Pope!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
    The catholic church has and remains hostile as has most religions to rationality. It is no wonder that many of the founders of the United States were agnostic and children of the enlightenment. That the Pope would offer useless and contradictory advise should come as no surprise to any student of history. That those focused on the next life, and who lack any practical experience, it should come as no surprise that they are incompetent at leading people in this life. It is easy to constitute a morality that is not based on practical consequences but it is equally pointless.
    Sigh.

    1. Pope Francis was ordained priest at 33 years of age. That's rather old even today and it was extraordinarily old at that time. He has experience as a worker, having worked as a humble janitor, as a chemistry technician and even as a night-club bouncer. He also has experience as a second-generation immigrant, of course, born of a family that fled Italy because his father was escaping Fascism.

    2. Agnostics and atheists can be exactly as irrational as any believer in a supernatural being. If you really insist, I can provide a long list of examples.

    3. The Catholic Church of course isn't against reason. You could start by reading Fides et Ratio, by John Paul II; Caritas in Veritate, by Benedict XVI; and Lumen Fidei, by the current Pope. When you have read those, I can provide more suggestions.
    Naturally, the Church does not deem that reason alone is enough of a guide for man. If you want a list of regimes whose atheist, enlightened dictators thought it would be, I can provide it, so you can look up the body counts.

    4. The advice provided by the Pope on this issue is hardly contradictory. He never said anything like "boot those filthy foreigners out". As to the advice being useless, one might disagree with it, of course, but that's not the same thing.
    Michele

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Michele View Post
      Sigh.

      1. Pope Francis was ordained priest at 33 years of age. That's rather old even today and it was extraordinarily old at that time. He has experience as a worker, having worked as a humble janitor, as a chemistry technician and even as a night-club bouncer. He also has experience as a second-generation immigrant, of course, born of a family that fled Italy because his father was escaping Fascism.

      2. Agnostics and atheists can be exactly as irrational as any believer in a supernatural being. If you really insist, I can provide a long list of examples.

      3. The Catholic Church of course isn't against reason. You could start by reading Fides et Ratio, by John Paul II; Caritas in Veritate, by Benedict XVI; and Lumen Fidei, by the current Pope. When you have read those, I can provide more suggestions.
      Naturally, the Church does not deem that reason alone is enough of a guide for man. If you want a list of regimes whose atheist, enlightened dictators thought it would be, I can provide it, so you can look up the body counts.

      4. The advice provided by the Pope on this issue is hardly contradictory. He never said anything like "boot those filthy foreigners out". As to the advice being useless, one might disagree with it, of course, but that's not the same thing.
      I can't help but agree with you here, even though I have been having doubts and criticisms of the faith of my upbringing and religion in general, I do have a large amount of respect for the current Pope and many things the Catholic Church does and has done in general. Also many criticisms but as you point out plenty of irrationality among many in the atheist/agnostic camp.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by joea View Post
        I can't help but agree with you here, even though I have been having doubts and criticisms of the faith of my upbringing and religion in general, I do have a large amount of respect for the current Pope and many things the Catholic Church does and has done in general. Also many criticisms but as you point out plenty of irrationality among many in the atheist/agnostic camp.
        Thanks. Please note that none of the facts I listed mean that no criticism can be leveled at the Catholic Church in particular or at organized religions in general. Criticism is possible and founded criticism is a good thing.

        It's groundless, uninformed criticism that I reject. And I'm not rejecting it because it's aimed at the Catholic Church, because I'm a Catholic; I would reject it against anybody and anything, because it's just wrong.
        Michele

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Michele View Post
          Sigh.

          1. Pope Francis was ordained priest at 33 years of age. That's rather old even today and it was extraordinarily old at that time. He has experience as a worker, having worked as a humble janitor, as a chemistry technician and even as a night-club bouncer. He also has experience as a second-generation immigrant, of course, born of a family that fled Italy because his father was escaping Fascism.

          2. Agnostics and atheists can be exactly as irrational as any believer in a supernatural being. If you really insist, I can provide a long list of examples.

          3. The Catholic Church of course isn't against reason. You could start by reading Fides et Ratio, by John Paul II; Caritas in Veritate, by Benedict XVI; and Lumen Fidei, by the current Pope. When you have read those, I can provide more suggestions.
          Naturally, the Church does not deem that reason alone is enough of a guide for man. If you want a list of regimes whose atheist, enlightened dictators thought it would be, I can provide it, so you can look up the body counts.

          4. The advice provided by the Pope on this issue is hardly contradictory. He never said anything like "boot those filthy foreigners out". As to the advice being useless, one might disagree with it, of course, but that's not the same thing.
          The problem for Americans is that we believe in the separation of Church and State. So long as the Pope sticks to leading the Catholic faithful everything is fine, but when he attempts to dictate such things as international policies regarding illegal aliens, it isn't.

          The Vatican, as you know, has immense wealth at it's disposal. How much of that wealth is being used to ease the plight of these people? None that I know of.

          I happen to admire this Pope greatly for his actions, but he has gone over the line this time. There are one billion Catholics in the world, but that leaves six billion who are not, and who do not follow his spiritual guidance. It is presumptuous of him, to say the least, to make such statements to the entire world while ignoring the very real reasons these people are fleeing their own countries to begin with, and it's hypocrictical as well.
          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by joea View Post
            I can't help but agree with you here, even though I have been having doubts and criticisms of the faith of my upbringing and religion in general, I do have a large amount of respect for the current Pope and many things the Catholic Church does and has done in general. Also many criticisms but as you point out plenty of irrationality among many in the atheist/agnostic camp.
            Your statement is absolutely stunning in it's hypocrisy and bigotry: "plenty of irrationality among many in the atheist/agnostic camp".

            In other words, anyone who dares question or criticize these actions has to be "irrational" in your opinion because...why? Because you believe in invisible beings?

            Holy CRAP! Entendre` intentional.


            The Pope is a spiritual leader, not a political one and not in a position to dictate to the nations of the world while ignoring the root causes of the problems he comments on.

            For example, maybe if the Catholic Church didn't oppose birth control, population pressure would be a great deal less, people could more easily feed their smaller families, and fleeing to other countries to survive would not be necessary.

            Or perhaps the Pope could concentrate on reforming the tyrannical and corrupt leaders of many of the nations involved, instead of deciding that other nations are supposed to end up paying for the problems they didn't create to begin with.

            The only thing "irrational" about all of this is your apparent belief that a mere human being like the Pope, who lives in a secluded, incredibly rich and heavily guarded enclave, is infallible.

            If that is true, then someone like Bill Gates must be Saint Peter.
            Last edited by Mountain Man; 18 Jun 15, 11:04. Reason: spelling errors secondary to diplopia
            Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              The problem for Americans is that we believe in the separation of Church and State. So long as the Pope sticks to leading the Catholic faithful everything is fine, but when he attempts to dictate such things as international policies regarding illegal aliens, it isn't.
              That would depend on what one means by "separation of Church and State". Personally, I believe that if there is a state religion... or if the state laws are religious laws... or if the state discriminates on religious basis... or if church leaders have a direct ability to determine state policies... those are examples of a (very negative) absence of separation of Church and State.

              On the contrary, if a religious figure speaks publicly of public matters, up to and including suggesting not just the appropriate behavior of private citizens but also the appropriate policies of the state, then that's not a lack of separation of Church and State IMHO. The religious figure has no ability to actually exercise authority on state policy-making. He has, rather, the ability of exercising moral suasion.
              And frankly speaking, a religious leader who never takes a stance on issues concerning the social relationships of his flock, their public life, and yes, their politics, is a leader of a religion that sees faith as a private matter; something you carry out by private celebrations and/or in a private, direct relation between you and your God.
              Unfortunately, that is not the kind of religion that Christianity is. So I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Catholic Church to behave as if faith in Jesus does not affect the way in which believers have to behave in their public, social and political life.
              I might add that I've seen lots of non-Catholic religious leaders in the USA also stating in public what they deemed the state should do on a variety of issues.


              The Vatican, as you know, has immense wealth at it's disposal. How much of that wealth is being used to ease the plight of these people? None that I know of.
              First, if you don't know what has been done and is being done in these days, maybe it's because you don't read the news. Please follow the link provided.

              Second, as mentioned above, the situation is way more complicated than you seem to know, if you think that "the Vatican" has immense wealth per se, that's a gross simplification. The Holy See's pockets are not the Vatican City's pockets, nor the Diocese of Rome's pockets, leaving aside the pockets of the whole Catholic Church all over the world. Just speaking, what do you think was the profit/loss result of the Holy See + Vatican City in 2013? In 2009? Do you believe it was always in the black?
              Michele

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Michele View Post
                First, if you don't know what has been done and is being done in these days, maybe it's because you don't read the news. Please follow the link provided.
                What link? You didn't post one.

                And yes, I know about the Vatican Bank scandals. At a guess, I've been to the Vatican more times than most people except priests - six times, and I've been publicly blessed by the Pope each time. I even stayed in a hostel run by Catholic nuns. Drives my Catholic friends crazy with jealousy.

                You'd be surprised where I've been and what I've done, but none of that is relevant to the point being discussed. I happen to think that the Pope stepped over the line when he tried to publicly pressure world nations into acting the way he thinks they should act, while not addressing the root causes of the problems.
                How would he feel, I wonder, if Obama told the world how the Pope and the Catholic Church should act in matters such as birth control, female priests and shielding priestly pedophiles?

                "Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's...and unto God what is God's", right?
                Last edited by Mountain Man; 18 Jun 15, 11:14.
                Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  What link? You didn't post one.
                  I did. Post #42.

                  No comment on those profit and loss statements? Are you looking them up?
                  Michele

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Michele View Post
                    I did. Post #42.

                    No comment on those profit and loss statements? Are you looking them up?
                    Seriously? That link goes to a news article in Italian.
                    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      Seriously? That link goes to a news article in Italian.
                      Yes. So what? Do you think that the only news worth reading are in English? You are asking for what the Vatican City is doing and the Vatican City is in Italy. relevant articles may well be in Italian.
                      Michele

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Michele View Post
                        To a point. Not that it's not rich; the questionable idea is that it's a single organization. It's more like a conglomerate or a corporate group, in business terms. In a corporate group, there are many individual companies - those are "single organizations". Then there is ownership of them by the group and cross-ownership within the group, and flows of money back and forth within the group, to and from the companies. But each individual company can very well be rich or poor, produce profits or debts, and even go bankrupt - on its own.
                        The same goes for the Catholic Church. A diocese can very well go bankrupt - it happened. The difference is that the Pope has less power over the various parts of the church, than a board of a corporation has over its companies. The board can always sell a company. The Pope can hardly sell a diocese.
                        Are you saying that, in his role as "Supreme Pontiff Of The Universal Church," the pope cannot order -- as a matter of faith -- the various Roman Catholic dioceses worldwide to provide greater services to the poor, the displaced, the indigent, etc, etc? :surprised: The pope tells parishes around the globe what the Tridentine Mass should be, right down to its specific verbiage. It seems counter-intuitive that since the pope defines what faith should be for some one billion Roman Catholics that he can't mandate that his princes do more for the poor -- as a matter of faith, not economics.

                        Originally posted by Michele View Post
                        If you want to see practical measures taken by the Pope within the limited wiggle room he has in what he directly controls, then you only have to read the news.
                        http://www.leggo.it/NEWS/ROMA/san_pi.../1398268.shtml
                        Dude, I haven't seen that much Italian since I was in elementary school, so might you be kind enough to give it to this dumb American in English? Mille grazzi.
                        I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode]What link? You didn't post one.

                          And yes, I know about the Vatican Bank scandals.
                          That was not the question. The question was whether you know the profit and loss statements consolidated for the Vatican City state and the Holy See. I see that you don't and that you prefer to deflect rather than honestly acknowledge that you don't and don't want to take the time to do your research.
                          Michele

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                            Are you saying that, in his role as "Supreme Pontiff Of The Universal Church," the pope cannot order -- as a matter of faith -- the various Roman Catholic dioceses worldwide to provide greater services to the poor, the displaced, the indigent, etc, etc? :surprised: The pope tells parishes around the globe what the Tridentine Mass should be, right down to its specific verbiage. It seems counter-intuitive that since the pope defines what faith should be for some one billion Roman Catholics that he can't mandate that his princes do more for the poor -- as a matter of faith, not economics.
                            First, it's not counterintuitive at all. The Pope's word is much more important in issues concerning the faith than in pastoral issues.
                            That said, of course the Pope can "tell" - as in, invite, encourage, recommend - the Bishops to do this or that. The Bishop conserve remarkable latitude in responding.
                            Alternatively, the Pope could write a bull or a motu proprio or something more binding. At which point you'd have Bishops bristling - US Bishops first, of course - and the same contributors here that find fault in his policies making such observations as "What, does he think this is the Middle Ages?! The Bishop of New Mexico knows much better than him what are the pastoral needs of his Diocese!" And so on.

                            That said, there are Bishops who just need the encouragement and don't need an explicit order at all:
                            http://www.vitatrentina.it/rivista/2...elli-immigrati

                            A nice tall building in good condition given by a Diocese to a local administration for hosting refugees. Free of charge - the Diocese doesn't gain a penny.


                            Dude, I haven't seen that much Italian since I was in elementary school, so might you be kind enough to give it to this dumb American in English? Mille grazzi.
                            Sure. The Vatican is setting up spaces for the homeless to sleep indoors, after having offered a range of other services for them. Note this is not addressed to people having a right to asylum (these are hosted by the state) nor to people having filed an application for asylum. The weakest link in the chain as of now is the newly arrived, who have not yet registered with any state or local administration agency and who will fall into the cracks of the system until they manage to.
                            I see it here in my city; in a week or so, these guys have worked their way into the system and have a bed in one of the centers, know where to go for the meals, have got a change of clothes and a few basics, etc. - or they have moved along, heading for the German or Swedish dream. But new ones show up every night, and they are the ones sleeping under the rain in parks on an empty stomach.
                            Michele

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              This Pope is a clown. Climate change? Good grief. He's an embarrassment to the Catholic Church.
                              I do not wish to have the slave emancipated because I love him, but because I hate his master."
                              --Salmon P. Chase

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by joea View Post
                                I can't help but agree with you here, even though I have been having doubts and criticisms of the faith of my upbringing and religion in general, I do have a large amount of respect for the current Pope and many things the Catholic Church does and has done in general. Also many criticisms but as you point out plenty of irrationality among many in the atheist/agnostic camp.
                                You understand two atheists just defended your pope? It would be nice to not be insulted for a change.
                                First Counsul Maleketh of Jonov

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X