Anyone who goes on record [talking about Africa] to say that when one spouse has HIV and the other doesn't, the couple can't use condoms because "It's a sin," is pure evil.
Yeah. I had this argument with a Catholic the other week, it isn't ~just~ the covering up of pedophile activity and actively enabling further abuse of children, there's all sorts of other reasons to consider the Pope one of the most evil men on earth.
The rules of GOOD and BAD dictate that if your views do not fit a horribly tortured binary opposition then you should leave a comment explaining them in detail :->
Ecclesiastically, it's a sound idea: the bishop of Rome is a first-among-equals position, and it's nice to have someone who can cast the tiebreaking vote in any situation; plus, whether it's what Jesus meant or not, the role pays homage to the apostle Peter, who is a fairly laudable guy as far as New Testament folk go. Theologically, it's questionable (as the office does have no explicit Biblical basis), and has been made more so by all the even more non-Biblical infallibility doctrine that's sprung up around the position, leading to a lot of incidents with abused power. Historically, it's been a complete toss-up, varying from pope to pope.
But I get the sense that the general voting here is going toward an evaluation of Papa Ratzinger, in which case I'm going to throw in with the BAD and maybe a side order of EVIL.
My understanding of Papal Infallibility is not that the Pope is always divinely right about everythin, but more a kind of "The judges decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into" kind of a thing. Which isn't that bad.
It's more that he's infallible when discussing certain things, under certain conditions:
"The Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the universal Church a dogmatic teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation. It is also taught that the Holy Spirit works in the body of the Church, as sensus fidelium, to ensure that dogmatic teachings proclaimed to be infallible will be received by all Catholics."
Great if you want a Crusade, inconvenient if he preaches one against you.
Oh, hang on, you're not talking Medieval Total War! Seriously, is there still a Pope? Must be one of those honoury offices. You're not telling me Christianity has survived into the 21st century, are you?
I don't doubt that people believe in things that aren't there -- just go into any unknown place like a cellar or attic in the dark, and try to explain exactly the creepy feeling you get, or why you feel like someone should be watching your back. So yes, even the most impartial scientist or committed atheist may sometimes behave in an irrational manner.
However, quite how this translates into a very particular belief in something so specific that you feel able to argue with other people who believe in something quite similar but not identical, and further that it enables you to judge people because they don't share your belief, or behave in a manner contrary to what you think your belief should imply... well that I don't get.
For this reason, I feel much more able to accept anyone who tries to find their own path in life, and explain the odd thoughts they get in a totally original way, than someone who believes verbatim the words that someone else tells them.
Yup. I am perfectly respectful towards my friends who have had 'odd' experiences and have beliefs based on them, because they're going on the information they have. People who are basing their beliefs on passed-down knowledge, and extrapolation from pretty much nothing, on the other hand...
Anyway, I think he and the rest of hierarchy betray honest good Catholics every day with their arrogance and refusal to see how the world has changed (most Catholics are in 'the 3rd world,' for example) so I suspect that's BAD.
Interesting. I wouldn't expect the Pope to change along with the world. I'd expect him to be the guardian of sacred ancient wisdom which is known to be perfect in its rightness, due to being passed down by the creator of the universe.
And this is /exactly/ why I dislike him. You've said much better than I could have. I am an atheist that grew up a Catholic and I get so sad that I things I thought were core to the religion are abandoned. But, he does know full well that the majority of the Catholics are in the 3rd world (making his comments about AIDS/condoms even worse) and he's given up on the first world which compounds the sense of betrayal.
I have been contemplating this, the visit 28 years ago. I might have gone along, its not often you get to see a holy man. I'd go see the dali lama for the same reason. I don't follow the religion, but i would like to demonstrate my respect for those who occupy a less selfish plane of existence than i am capable of.
However, this pope is not a holy man! A holy man is someone who practices what he preaches, who allows people to believe what they want without judgement and believes that people should essentially be kept happy, healthy and fulfilled without damaging others. Or something along those lines. the fall in numbers for the mass, from even how many the catholic church thought would be there. Shows that I'm not alone in feeling the church and the pope have rather lost any claim for being holy, being in touch with reality.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2010-09-16 10:46 am
no subject
Anyone who goes on record [talking about Africa] to say that when one spouse has HIV and the other doesn't, the couple can't use condoms because "It's a sin," is pure evil.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Ecclesiastically, it's a sound idea: the bishop of Rome is a first-among-equals position, and it's nice to have someone who can cast the tiebreaking vote in any situation; plus, whether it's what Jesus meant or not, the role pays homage to the apostle Peter, who is a fairly laudable guy as far as New Testament folk go. Theologically, it's questionable (as the office does have no explicit Biblical basis), and has been made more so by all the even more non-Biblical infallibility doctrine that's sprung up around the position, leading to a lot of incidents with abused power. Historically, it's been a complete toss-up, varying from pope to pope.
But I get the sense that the general voting here is going toward an evaluation of Papa Ratzinger, in which case I'm going to throw in with the BAD and maybe a side order of EVIL.
no subject
no subject
no subject
"The Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the universal Church a dogmatic teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation. It is also taught that the Holy Spirit works in the body of the Church, as sensus fidelium, to ensure that dogmatic teachings proclaimed to be infallible will be received by all Catholics."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility
no subject
no subject
no subject
I think *this* Pope has not been a good one.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Mixed
Oh, hang on, you're not talking Medieval Total War! Seriously, is there still a Pope? Must be one of those honoury offices. You're not telling me Christianity has survived into the 21st century, are you?
Re: Mixed
Re: Mixed
However, quite how this translates into a very particular belief in something so specific that you feel able to argue with other people who believe in something quite similar but not identical, and further that it enables you to judge people because they don't share your belief, or behave in a manner contrary to what you think your belief should imply... well that I don't get.
For this reason, I feel much more able to accept anyone who tries to find their own path in life, and explain the odd thoughts they get in a totally original way, than someone who believes verbatim the words that someone else tells them.
Re: Mixed
no subject
YOU ARE A POPE!
(try and be a good pope)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Anyway, I think he and the rest of hierarchy betray honest good Catholics every day with their arrogance and refusal to see how the world has changed (most Catholics are in 'the 3rd world,' for example) so I suspect that's BAD.
no subject
no subject
I am an atheist that grew up a Catholic and I get so sad that I things I thought were core to the religion are abandoned. But, he does know full well that the majority of the Catholics are in the 3rd world (making his comments about AIDS/condoms even worse) and he's given up on the first world which compounds the sense of betrayal.
no subject
However, this pope is not a holy man!
A holy man is someone who practices what he preaches, who allows people to believe what they want without judgement and believes that people should essentially be kept happy, healthy and fulfilled without damaging others. Or something along those lines.
the fall in numbers for the mass, from even how many the catholic church thought would be there. Shows that I'm not alone in feeling the church and the pope have rather lost any claim for being holy, being in touch with reality.
if that makes sense
no subject
Damn.
no subject
Wanna do a post with your protest sign in it, so that I can link to it?
no subject
Here. I'll edit and probably say something (and use a smaller edit of the pic) in a bit but for now that will do.
no subject
no subject
this pope? cunt punt!
no subject
This poll needs a setting for "UGLY"
Also, tickyboxes instead of radio buttons wouldn't hurt.