The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Patronising popes and saints

Patronising popes and saints

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Personally, I suspect you’re all overanalyzing the situation, or reading too much into it.
Aussie PM’s have traditionally seen the Pope at some stage, he’s a world player, so why not. They also meet the Dalai Llama, (the ones with a spine that is) and the head of the C of E, and even the Patriarchs of the Orthodox sects, again, so what?
As for his support of Mary McKillop’s sanctity, again, he’s only supporting a cause dear to the hearts of many Aussies, that’s part of his job description, surely? Whether or not he has any effect is debatable, but don’t kid yourself there’s no politics in such decisions, they are made by humans after all.
The best thing aussie pollies can do to prevent Global Warming, is shut their mouthes!
Posted by Maximillion, Friday, 3 July 2009 1:21:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I trust neither the Catholic Church or the Prime Minister to decide who is a saint. In actual fact the bible declares all followers of Christ as saints. It is idiotic for a group of men or woman to try and improve on what God has declared. Could you imagine the Apostle Paul or Peter sitting around trying to decide which dead people deserve to be a saint. So so funny if it was not so sad. NO wonder many believers see Catholicism as a perversion of the true faith.
Posted by runner, Friday, 3 July 2009 8:12:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Runner, as a person brought up in an intensely Catholic family, I would like to refute you, but I cannot. That’s the simple truth of it.
Posted by Maximillion, Friday, 3 July 2009 9:20:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ASymeonakis,
Could you please give an exact quote and/or link to where the present pope is saying that the "followers" of the Anglican Church "will go to hell"?

(I do not mean the Dominus Dei where the concept of Church is being discussed, and its Catholic version explained. As far as I remember, there is no mention of hell in this document.)
Posted by George, Friday, 3 July 2009 11:31:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What you must always remember is that since man has been governed by government, Church and State have been one and the same. The Australian Government is a universal catholic church, in the true meaning of the word catholic. Rudd describes himself as a catholic and he is. The Australian Government is sufficient of a political entity, to feel obliged as a political party is to authorize its political advertisements.

The difference between the Anglican democracy we adopted in Australia in 1900 with a written Constitution, and the governments of continental Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa, used to be the separation of Church and State that occurred by including 12 lay people in the constitution of courts. If Hitler’s Germany had courts instead of Courts, the damnation of the world would have been twice as harsh, because they would individually have had to bear the burden of the murder of their Jewish fellow citizens. As it was, it was public servants called Judges, who condoned this slaughter. If Communist Russia had courts, with 12 citizens as judges, as mandated in Australia by s 79 Constitution, sixty million murdered Christians would have been shown justice.

The merger of Church and State in Australia was started in South Australia in 1927. Next to go was New South Wales in 1970, followed by the Commonwealth in the Family Court and Federal Court of Australia in 1975-6. In 1979 the State and Church merged officially in the High Court of Australia Act 1979 , Victoria adopted the unitary Church/State in 1986, Queensland in 1991, Tasmania in 2002 and Western Australia in 2004.

The shonks spivs and conmen who most benefit from crying that the Church and State must be kept separate are the very ones who benefit most from the merger. They are the ones who steadfastly refuse to de-mutualise the Courts, and restore democratic courts, as existed in Australia in 1828, when the Australian Courts Act 1828 was enacted. An Australian court, should separate Church and State, but does not do so while a lawyer paid by the State runs it
Posted by Peter the Believer, Saturday, 4 July 2009 2:53:37 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am not sure it matters, but surprised Rudd is a Catholic.
Is he practising in that church?
Not that it matters either I have zero doubt he is a committed Christian, not a vote winer for me.
I would rather keep all Church's all creeds out of government.
I have few doubts some who claim to believe in a god, in politics, would say anything to help them stay in politics.
While born WASP I am often amazed at the infiltration of Catholics in my party.
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 4 July 2009 3:26:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy