Why do people like the Pope so much?

[Lark]

I never said it was okay, that's why I put 'only' in quotation marks....during its peak, it was much like the use of odious 'blasphemy' laws in contemporary Pakistan, or lynchings in the era of segregation, spread out over many years....an atrocity, but not on the same level as genocide or slavery. Equating the two results in an unjust distribution of guilt, and perhaps more importantly, obscures the conditions which led to such crimes, and consequently the ways in which societies and institutions need to be reformed to prevent such crimes in the future (and whether they already have-for instance, it would be ludicrous to single out the modern Catholic Church for its past stance against democracy or religious freedom).

As for pedophilia, its probably no more prevalent than in any other similar institution overall (though the sheer size of the institution makes the aggregate total immense), the crimes to which the Catholic church as a whole (as opposed to individual priests) needs to account for are the widespread cover-ups, and the institutional incentives for the same.

All I'm doing is noting that people should keep things in perspective and criticize the contemporary Catholic church for its actual crimes, and balance those crimes beside any good it has accomplished, not turn the institution into a whipping boy or scapegoat simply because they are an easy target on the internet.

Exactly.

In the UK the celebrity Jimmy Saville abused more people, over a longer span, with far more opportunities for the authorities to apprehend him than any of the RCC clergy in the UK and ROI combined. So I guess that celebrity and secular society actually cause peadophilia or are a greater cause than roman catholicism. I mena just to employ the thinly disguised sectarian logic of the forumers hating on roman catholicism. For the Nth time.

The reality is that peadophiles exploit any avenues open to them, if at one time and place becoming a priest permits it they'll do that, if at another joining the police, social services, cultivating a public persona or celebrity its what they'll do.

I'd not be surprised if the present stoking of hatred for the RCC has got its fair share of pedophile support because its the mother of all diversions from their behaviour, so while everyone is busily focused on an institution which is doing its best to rectify its mistakes and attempt to prevent anything of that kind happening again they wont be focused on as yet undetected ways.

 

[Lark]

You don't get it.

I'm the evil one.

Maybe others too. But definitely me.

People who say "Turn the other cheek"? Not very evil.

You blame all the wrong people in your criticism of religion. Your real enemy is humanity. And the human forces that use religion.

I dont think its either humanity or religion which are wicked, they are just channels for wickedness.

 

[Sniffles]

The Black Legend lives on, how nice.

 

[greenfairy]

There were 'only' tens of thousands (a large majority were indeed women) over the centuries, most of whom probably weren't witches.

Whatever. Estimates vary, and it's still a lot. Millions have died in total in the name of Catholicism, how about that? I just have emotional attachment to a fraction.

I'm just pointing out the absurdity in being so passionate against a religion with directives like the one I pointed out above. The people you should worry about are like me. The ones who have trouble "turning the other cheek" and "are living by the sword", and don't want to "serve others" or "love everyone". I want to be that good, but I struggle with it. So do many others. Because we're human. Yet here you are thinking one of the great problems of the world are religions that try improve these strains in humanity.

Humanity's weaknesses are a problem, but if I solely focus on them I lose sight of the problems in systems, and I prefer to focus on systems because I'm more adept at solving those problems than I am at changing people. Arguably human nature is basically the same everywhere at every time; we just have to figure out how best to mold circumstances so that they channel human nature in positive directions. You can't really change people, you can only change circumstances. So your argument is sort of just rejecting the problem in my opinion. I don't think people who have trouble living up to ethical standards are "the" problem; they are "a" problem which is much more difficult or even impossible to solve; so "the" problem for me is one that I have a hope of solving.

 

[Sniffles]

Whatever. Estimates vary, and it's still a lot. Millions have died in total in the name of Catholicism, how about that? I just have emotional attachment to a fraction.

Oh have they now?

 

[greenfairy]

Oh have they now?

I'd say so. But I don't feel like trying to prove it. It's not important the exact sum. The important thing is it's an absurdly high number which is too many. Do you deny this fact? Do you think it's just trivial? Or are you just nitpicking?

 

[salad]

didn't john paul shoot phil mitchell?

 

[swordpath]

Who knows. Just a very significant tradition I guess.

 

[tinker683]

Because he's Goddamned Awesome like Flash Gordon or something like that.

This one is a Jesuit and I agree with him on a lot of things so far, although he did distance himself from the liberation theologians and for most of my life I believed they were a great source of inspiration, with the sharp, sharp decline and disappearence of Marxism though I kind of think those who didnt hitch themselves to that wagon were on a much more perrenial track.

I wish Flash Gordon was the Pope, that would kick serious amounts of ass

On a more serious note, this guy seems to be off to a really good start so I'm looking forward to see what else he'll do

 

[salad]

pedofile mascot and enabler. religion is anti-spirituality and a congame. the earth would be lighter...

 

[Coriolis]

Go take that up with fundamentalist evangelicals then. They're the most strident about literalism. I don't want to be put in a position to explain their view. I want nothing to do with them.

Modern liberal scholars are literalists as well, but they take a more "Discovery channel"/archaeological approach, and like to illuminate the context of the world or conditions surrounding the texts, and what the text was like for the people it was meant for (unlike fundamentalists though, they don't want to recreate that world. They don't really concern themselves with what the text means for us).

We agree at least on fundamentalists. I have no patience for them either. I've seen some of those "Discovery channel" style biblical exposes. They have merit, as long as they stick to the facts, and identify speculation for what it is. Still, precisely because of my inclination to figurative interpretations, it almost seems like they are barking up the wrong tree if the goal is spiritual growth. It really doesn't matter whether the remains of the ark sit on Mt Ararat to this day. It is the moral of the story that is important, just as with Aesop. Everone understands him without the need to prove there really was a tortoise and a hare.

 

[KDude]

We agree at least on fundamentalists. I have no patience for them either. I've seen some of those "Discovery channel" style biblical exposes. They have merit, as long as they stick to the facts, and identify speculation for what it is. Still, precisely because of my inclination to figurative interpretations, it almost seems like they are barking up the wrong tree if the goal is spiritual growth. It really doesn't matter whether the remains of the ark sit on Mt Ararat to this day. It is the moral of the story that is important, just as with Aesop. Everone understands him without the need to prove there really was a tortoise and a hare.

Their goal isn't spiritual growth, I think. At least not on the scholarly end. Or if it is spiritual, it's sort of a social/political gospel. Which is cool too. But they don't really emphasize the interior and figurative spirituality I think you're talking about. The [Christian] groups that tend to interpret the bible in those ways are orthodox, gnostic/copts, and some Catholics (some Catholics can be pretty fundamentalist too. Or liberal. There seems to be a representative for all types). Afaik, all of the early church commentaries are like this. While literalism kind of coincides with wider strains in Western thought, imo.

 

[Mole]

I don't claim to know much about the Pope, otherwise I wouldn't have made this thread in the first place.

It is necessary to share the Faith to understand why the Pope is so important.

So the Pope is important because he is Christ's Vicar on Earth, in other words, he represents Jesus Christ on Earth.

And the Pope is important because he is in a direct line from Peter, the apostle.

And the Pope is important because he is the Head of a Church with 1.2 thousand million members.

 

[entropie]

I always thought the english word 'Pope' would stand for things you can get out of your nose, which would be 'Popel' in german. I just recently found out that it means Papst :/

 

[Orangey]

pedofile mascot and enabler. religion is anti-spirituality and a congame. the earth would be lighter...

Agreed. Fuck dat shit, fuck pigs, and fuck da Pope.

 

[Sniffles]

Agreed. Fuck dat shit, fuck pigs, and fuck da Pope.

I'm quite sure His Holiness, Francis, Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Summus Pontifex Ecclesiae Universalis, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God is worried about what people on Typology Central think about him.

 

[Orangey]

I'm quite sure His Holiness, Francis, Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Summus Pontifex Ecclesiae Universalis, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God is worried about what people on Typology Central think about him.

LOL "primate."

 

[Sniffles]

LOL "primate."

That makes you giggly like a horney school girl? To each their own I guess. *shrugs*

In the Western Church a primate is a bishop possessing superior authority, not only over the bishops of his own province, like the metropolitan, but over several provinces and metropolitans. This does not refer to episcopal powers, which each bishop possesses fully, but to ecclesiastical jurisdiction and organization, especially in national churches.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12423b.htm

 

[Orangey]

That makes you giggly like a horney school girl? To each their own I guess. *shrugs*

P.S. - Everyone knows it doesn't mean "primate" in the Linnaean sense, hahahaha. Don't be fresh!

P.P.S. - "Horney school girl?" Odd time to add a sexual element. That's weird, Peguy.

 

[RaptorWizard]

I wonder what sexually charged primates look like in authority positions.