The new pope

giberski · Post by **giberski** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 7:53 pm

Don't be negative about this pope, it's a hero!!!

BogPoet · Post by **BogPoet** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:32 pm

Well, I was baptized and went to Catholic Sunday School, but left when I was 16, especially because I started thinking about things such as "If God said 'Thou shall not kill', then what was the Inquisiton all about?", "Why did Solomon had so many wives and is considered a holy man by the same Church that keeps talking about 'the sanctity of marriage'?" and, specially, "If sex is only for procriation, then why did God create sexual pleasure?". I turned into an agnostic, which lasts until these day. (In my case, being an agnostic means I believe there's something up there, I just don't know what it is - and I honestly don't care. It also means I believe all religions in the world are Man's creation and they have absolutely no connection with God whatsoever)

Having said this, I believe the Catholic Church has the right to choose who the hell pleases it to be their leader. The fact that they opted for an uber-conservative is their own business. As much as I'd like to see a pope that concerns himself with gender parity, gay rights and other such matters, I know it probably won't happen. OK, so he doesn't think as I do. Who cares?

Yes, I know, the pope's influence isn't felt in the Catholic Church alone. John Paul II reinstated the role of opinion maker to the papacy spot. The Holy See is present in international institutions; a lot of non-Catholic Christians look up to the pope with respect. Still, there many more opinion makers in the world, the pope's just one of them. I don't want everyone in the world agreeing with me - if they did, who would correct me when I'm wrong?

@Chiel: I read in the paper today that Ratzinger chose this name because St. Benedictus is the patron saint of Europe. It's supposed to be a protest against the absence of a reference to the "Christian Tradition" in Europe in the European Constitutional treaty.

Yannn · Post by **Yannn** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:54 pm

I'm fully in agreement with you, BogPoet.
Nobody is forced to follow what the Pope says, so it's not so important if he's a conservative or not.
Some reproach the Papacy not to be helpful in the struggle against AIDS, especially about its position about condoms.
But... do you think it's the Pope's job to fight AIDS ?

So why should we expect JP2 or B16 to give some medical advice on this issue

Dakkus · Post by **Dakkus** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:12 pm

Yannn wrote:I'm fully in agreement with you, BogPoet.
Nobody is forced to follow what the Pope says, so it's not so important if he's a conservative or not.
Some reproach the Papacy not to be helpful in the struggle against AIDS, especially about its position about condoms.
But... do you think it's the Pope's job to fight AIDS ? 8O So why should we expect JP2 or B16 to give some medical advice on this issue :?:

Pope is telling people not to fight AIDS. That's real bad, because in some not-so-developed countries people still believe in the christian religion much more literally than Europans do. When the pope says "no" to condoms, then it's no can do for those people. If they feel like having to choose between dying to AIDS and going to heaven and avoiding AIDS and going to hell, which one will they choose?
If the popes didn't speak so stupidly, millions of human lives could be saved.
It might not be pope's job to fight AIDS, but it's not his job to help a deadly disease to spread, either.

BogPoet · Post by **BogPoet** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:07 pm

Dakkus wrote:Pope is telling people not to fight AIDS.

Actually, I disagree with you. If the principles of the Catholic religion were strictly adhered to by people, AIDS would not be widespread as it is in underdeveloped countries. The Catholic doctrine on this matter involves much more than a simple "Don't use condoms". Catholics theoretically should be chaste before marriage, have sex for procriation reasons only and always be monogamous. This is actually pretty coherent. Not that I like the way the Church thinks, but I have to admit it is.

bingo` · Post by **bingo`** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 12:11 am

BogPoet wrote:
Dakkus wrote:Pope is telling people not to fight AIDS.
Actually, I disagree with you. If the principles of the Catholic religion were strictly adhered to by people, AIDS would not be widespread as it is in underdeveloped countries. The Catholic doctrine on this matter involves much more than a simple "Don't use condoms". Catholics theoretically should be chaste before marriage, have sex for procriation reasons only and always be monogamous. This is actually pretty coherent. Not that I like the way the Church thinks, but I have to admit it is.

I can only agree with you in this point

Yannn · Post by **Yannn** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:46 am

BogPoet wrote:
Dakkus wrote:Pope is telling people not to fight AIDS.
Actually, I disagree with you. If the principles of the Catholic religion were strictly adhered to by people, AIDS would not be widespread as it is in underdeveloped countries. The Catholic doctrine on this matter involves much more than a simple "Don't use condoms". Catholics theoretically should be chaste before marriage, have sex for procriation reasons only and always be monogamous. This is actually pretty coherent. Not that I like the way the Church thinks, but I have to admit it is.

Exactly ! Once again I fully agree.
I precise that personnally I don't follow the Church's recommendations (

) , and am not a "believer". Nevertheless, I feel I am of, let's say, a "catholic cultural background"

soilian · Post by **soilian** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:17 pm

For us Lutherans it's difficult to understand what the Pope really means to the Catholics. They seem to think he is like a god.

This is my point of view of this subject.

groentje · Post by **groentje** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:23 pm

The pope is no God, he is a spiritual leader. Of course, it's not completely the same, but you could say, he's a bit like a president of an organisation, with whom you can disagree, but who will still be your president.
I hope, the speach he gave today, where he asked the full support of all cardinals, and his admitting of the fact, he is not the pope many people wanted, is a sign of his modesty, with which he will lead the church. Hope makes the mad merry, so let's hope.

Fons · Post by **Fons** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 12:17 am

"Papa" = Pope

+ Ratzinger

= PAPARAZZI

pinguino79 · Post by **pinguino79** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:00 pm

My opinion is that the Catholic Church took one step forward and three backward.
As an atheist, I shouldn't care; as a citizen of the most prominent Vatican feud (officially knows as Italy) I'm afraid...

bingo` · Post by **bingo`** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:03 pm

Fons wrote:"Papa" = Pope

+ Ratzinger

= PAPARAZZI

i think the sun had a stupid headline.
something like: "from hitler youth to paparatzi"

but what do you expect from the sun...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:52 pm

bingo` wrote:i think the sun had a stupid headline.
something like: "from hitler youth to paparatzi"

This has been a source of misinformation here, too.
Yes, Ratzinger was a member of Hitler youth, but because it was mandatory!
Yes, he was a member of nazi army, but once again it was mandatory (he actually deserted later).

I add that the equation German=nazi often found in British newspapers is a symptom of a low intelligence.

pinguino79 · Post by **pinguino79** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:56 pm

Anonymous wrote:This has been a source of misinformation here, too.

Sorry, forgot to logon.
That was mine.

bingo` · Post by **bingo`** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:07 pm

pinguino79 wrote: I add that the equation German=nazi often found in British newspapers is a symptom of a low intelligence.

popular paper...they print, what the people want to read...

We got the "BILD"

they had a funny title either "Wir sind Papst", as the whole nation is now pope