The Pope's visit to Britain

[SafeHands]

What the Catholic Church needs is a progressive Pope who is going to move with the times and get the young people back into the chapels.

Poor. Choice. Of. Words.

I stopped being a practicing Catholic many years ago when our priests decided to advertise at the entrance of our chapel who wasn't paying into the collection. There was a lot of families at that time unable to afford to pay anything into the collection, but still found their names in the open book for everyone to see. Of course we were told at the time that it was a sin against God not to contribute to our church. I made a vow to myself at that time when i turned 18 that i would no longer attend church and i was true to my word.

The catholic church interested in taking peoples money? Never!

Please explain why it is a poor choice of words?

[SafeHands]

What the Catholic Church needs is a progressive Pope who is going to move with the times and get the young people back into the chapels.

:shock:

Please explain why you are shocked about this. Not trying to be funny, just interested in your opinion.

[Tomaszk]

[snowychap]

seeing as his cult

I thought you were a 'christian'?

Yes, a raving lunatic too. But the thread is about the Pope.

Why describe Catholicism as a cult, then?

[LondonLax]

What the Catholic Church needs is a progressive Pope who is going to move with the times and get the young people back into the chapels.

:shock:

Please explain why you are shocked about this. Not trying to be funny, just interested in your opinion.

It seems as though you have missed the obvious paedophile double entendre in what you have said...

[snowychap]

The 1st Century Christians had NO Priestly class whatsoever...this was only bought in later on.

When did the mitre start to be worn? What did it look like?

Where is your evidence that in fact the Bishop/Papal Mitre does not derive it's origin in ancient Pagan religions?

What kind of a response is that?

I was asking you to provide evidence that the mitre is 'directly derived ...'

What you appear to have done is googled this claim and lifted some quotes (we don't know where they come from as you haven't given us a link) and said, "Look there, it's true because someone has said it and repeated it over and over again."

Babylon and other ancient cultures is where many so called, Christian, traditions came from.

All cults of worship adopt and adapt some things that pre-existed them. That's natural.

Have religions taken pagan festivals and incorporated them? Quite probably.

Have they taken other bits and pieces? Quite possibly.

Did people wear hats before there were bishops and popes? Yes.

It seems to me you are simply arguing for the sake of it.

No, Julie, I am questioning what you have posted and claimed to be fact.

You said, "I always wondered why the clergy dress the way they do and then I found out that actually it all goes back to Ancient Babylon and the Philistines worshipping the fish god Dagon..."

No ambiguity there; no possibly or some people say but you presenting this as fact when it appears that this is actually just some people's belief.

[Corcaigh]

Then do something?

Like what? :?

chop her head off Louis XVI style?

[bickster]

You aware that covering up a crime is illegal and this pontiff has been personally responsible (before he was merely mortal) for covering up hundreds if not thousands of under age sex crimes.

We still don't know the full extent of the crimes

Yes we dont know, only what the media report.

They are hardly going to report that the Pope flew around the world saving kids left right and centre are they.

Are you claiming the worlds media have some sort of conspiracy going and all the sex scandals in the catholic church across the globe, from Europe through America and down to Australia are some sort of plot and his popeyness wasn't involved in the cover up and its all made up?

Thats pretty far fetched Jez considering the weight of evidence across the globe

[Jondaken]

seeing as his cult

I thought you were a 'christian'?

Yes, a raving lunatic too. But the thread is about the Pope.

Why describe Catholicism as a cult, then?

Because that's what it is :?

You disagree?

[Jez]

Are you claiming the worlds media have some sort of conspiracy going and all the sex scandals in the catholic church across the globe, from Europe through America and down to Australia are some sort of plot and his popeyness wasn't involved in the cover up and its all made up?

Thats pretty far fetched Jez considering the weight of evidence across the globe

No i'm not.

[MrWeedMcGrass]

seeing as his cult

I thought you were a 'christian'?

Yes, a raving lunatic too. But the thread is about the Pope.

Why describe Catholicism as a cult, then?

Because that's what it is :?

You disagree?

Yet other sects , including yours aren't cults. Why?

Who decides which sects are cults and which ones are 'bonafide' Christians , certified by none other than.........?

[Clarry]

In archaeology we used to look at all religions as cults. e.g. the cult of Mithras, the cult of Christianity, the cult of Judaism.

cult   

–noun

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

3. the object of such devotion.

4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

5. Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.

7. the members of such a religion or sect

[bickster]

Are you claiming the worlds media have some sort of conspiracy going and all the sex scandals in the catholic church across the globe, from Europe through America and down to Australia are some sort of plot and his popeyness wasn't involved in the cover up and its all made up?

Thats pretty far fetched Jez considering the weight of evidence across the globe

No i'm not.

So what are you saying, what point are you making?

[Clarry]

And absolutely NOTHING to do with the Roman Catholic Church. What happens to be the sign of Christianity for some? The fish – the “Ichthys”

Showing that from early times "Fish" had a direct link with worship. Early Christians were supposed to have used this as a secret sign between themselves to avoid identification by their Roman captors and torturers. Therefore it doesn't take much imagination to see that once the connection was made, OTHER fish symbolism was adopted by the so called established Churches later on, which derived their origins NOT from Christianity but from more pagan beleifs that were ingrained already and easily adopted.

Anyhow I've tried to make the point and I'm not arguing over this.

The fish symbol comes from a play on words I (Jesus) C (Christos) etc...and he was know as the fisherman.

Whether the use of fish comes directly from earlier usage, cannot be proven or disproven, unless someone left a manual. It's like relating the pyramids of Egypt to those in Mexico. Makes nice stories, but they are in fact very simple structure/shapes (but a bugger to build).

[regular_john]

Please explain why it is a poor choice of words?

Your initial comment was that a new, dynamic pope was needed to get the young people back into the church. The current pope is a known protector of priests who rape, or have raped, the 'young people' in the church.

Can you not see why making reference to getting young people in to a catholic church was a poor choice of words?

[TheDon]

but they are in fact very simple structure/shapes (but a bugger to build).

Which is why they had help from the aliens to build them.

[chrisp65]

Intersting commentary in The Times today asking why atheists and humanists etc. so often have to be so nasty, even vile, in their condemnation of catholicism and the papacy. I can't link it unfortunately as the evil one wants a pound to access his little website.

My precis of the article is: if they are so cock sure he's a nazi paedo lizard alien would their cause be helped by being a little less sensational about it all? Essentially, rather than websites overheating with vitriol about cultist child buggery an actual calm considered examination of whether an anti abortion stance helps women would be worth exploring. Or, would the third world be helped by taking the straight to hell stigma away from contraception. Or, would allowing priests to marry take away the cover of celibacy for kiddy fiddlers. One last one, would an investigation into the finances and riches of the church illustrate the financial priorities of an organisation that appears to have billions in assets but charges £25 a head to see the supposedly top representative of God on Earth?

I just read that little article (didn't buy the paper!) and it reminded me of some of the threads here. It gets very predictable very quickly, which is a shame really.

I'm not that interested in the Pope and if i had an instant vote button I'd probably opt out of stumping up a portion of my tax contribution on funding his visit. But then I'd also opt out of funding our vast military killing machine, payrolling royalty and giving Kenneth Clarke a winter heating allowance. However, others would probably wish to opt out of funding my kids' schools and my wife's job. So as a broadly civilised society we accept that not everything is for our personal selfish advancement. Doesn't mean we can't constructively try and turn the tanker around, inch by inch. Just means there's little point in runnning up and down the deck shouting ****!

Looks like tomorrow's Independent may be worth a £1, and that I would pay for. Might link that once I've read it.

[JulieB]

That's a really good post Crisp. I think people fear what they cannot understand and it's easier sometimes to think in black and White terms.

The Catholic Church has at times done good things...and not all Priests are by any means kiddy fiddlers. There are many sincere Catholics

all over the world... In just the same manner that there are sincere and moderate Muslims, Humanists and Atheists who still show respect and care for their fellow human beings.

I know it's discussed in another thread but one of the most touching pieces from the 9/11 documentaries that have been on over the weekend, was the account of a young Muslim New Yorker stumbling as he ran for his life away from the dust & debris cloud descending on NY after the 2nd tower collapsed. As he lay for a second on the ground a man's hand grabbed him and pulled him up saying "Come brother we need to get out of here" As the Muslim man looked up the hand belonged to an obvious orthodox Jew complete with beard, curled sideboards & wearing a skull cap. They ran from the blast holding hands for comfort and support but lost each other in the mayhem afterwards, so the young Muslim man never got a chance to thank him properly. I thought that was a wonderful story at such a terrifying moment in history.

[TheDon]

Intersting commentary in The Times today asking why atheists and humanists etc. so often have to be so nasty, even vile, in their condemnation of catholicism and the papacy.

So essentially, the article is a huge strawman as that's not at all true.

Often Atheists see the dangers in religion, the harm it causes, and want to speak out against it. Speaking out against someones beliefs always causes people to react badly, and atheists are then painted as the ones stoking the fire. It's impossible for an atheists to truly comment on religion without someone claiming that they're being "nasty" because it involves completely writing off many peoples beliefs.

[chrisp65]

Intersting commentary in The Times today asking why atheists and humanists etc. so often have to be so nasty, even vile, in their condemnation of catholicism and the papacy.

So essentially, the article is a huge strawman as that's not at all true.

Often Atheists see the dangers in religion, the harm it causes, and want to speak out against it. Speaking out against someones beliefs always causes people to react badly, and atheists are then painted as the ones stoking the fire. It's impossible for an atheists to truly comment on religion without someone claiming that they're being "nasty" because it involves completely writing off many peoples beliefs.

mmm well I think we disagree then. Someone wishing to discuss my beliefs and challenge them and try to persuade me I'm just plain wrong is fine. Be it my choice of car, politics, religion or whatever I'm happy to face a challenge and either stick to my guns, but thanks for the work out, or admit I just learnt something and move on up. So speaking out is not always going to end badly. You tell me there are concerns over x, y and z and we can discuss it. You tell me I'm a mentalist that funds child rape and needs shooting, I'm less likely to bother engaging in debate*.

I'm not suggesting atheists are all wrong and bad, no social grouping has bragging rights on being 100% made up of dicks. I'm just suggesting that the debate is often kinda surface deep reaction by numbers rather than informed criticism.

*this is an example and not an accusation

there you go, wouldn't it be boring if we were all the same