The Forum > General Discussion > Should the pope be
Should the pope be
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Page 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- ...
- 27
- 28
- 29
-
- All
Posted by Severin, Saturday, 17 April 2010 1:49:09 PM
| |
Dear Severin,
I guess that I should have explained what I was trying to say with my "pobody is nerfect," (nobody is perfect) comment. I was thinking ahead to what I hoped would be the future of the Church in that - the Church will change for the better. That it will provide genuine leadership and a willingness to confront both the difficulties and the opportunities that it faces. This doesn't mean that it will be perfect or that parts of it won't wither and die, or that it won't make mistakes. I was hoping that the magnitude of the task facing the Church won't engender a sense of pessimism and hopelessness - which might result in inaction. Action is so very necessary, as you and others have pointed out. Hence my comment. I'm not sure if I've explained it properly even now. But I hope that you will understand. Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 17 April 2010 2:21:21 PM
| |
I had always entertained the hope that out of all the mess the Church has found itself in that good will grow out of evil, that there would be a truth and reconciliation born out of openness, and the Church would grow strong again because innocence and truth would be accepted over the need to protect position,office, power and authority, but it seems that the latter four are highly addictive. The pope has gone public with his policy to bring new life to his community. What is that new policy? He has called on the Church everywhere to do pennance. It doesnt go beyond that. It is the feeblest response he could have made and it is very disappointing.
Every time the Church admits to more instances of paedophilia (because that wont stop.) the loyal and faithful will be called to do more pennance. At the rate at which priests offend a numbness will attach itself to the offences till there wont be any genuine remorse. Pennance would be prescriptive instead. They will soon lose sight of innocence. They will soon cease seeing evil where it appears again as it too frequently had appeared in the past. They would turn to their threadbare coverings of pennance. The institution is far too important to the office holders to allow a genuine response. More new pennances will be invented. Is the Church entering a period of creative responses? What does that do to their spirituality? If Jesus Christ were alive today he would probably denounce them all as he once did in Galilee. He'd shout out loud:"You hypocrites.You whited sepulcheres.! You snakes and hypocrites." And the pope would act swiftly by ordering another round of pennances. socratease Posted by socratease, Saturday, 17 April 2010 2:44:03 PM
| |
Foxy
I do. I got it. Perhaps this current scandal will be the one to start a change for the better. Hope is something we can all hold to our hearts and minds. Posted by Severin, Saturday, 17 April 2010 2:48:11 PM
| |
Cornflower,
What cost should the RC clergy pay to fix* the Catholic Church? Do you agree with my earlier comment that if 50% of the clergy have covered-up (or were silient) for, say, 1% of their peers, who are paedophiles; then 51% of the clergy should be behind bars? Appreciate that for every active cover-up Bishop, there will dozens of others who know exactly what is going on. Do the aides that type Cardinals' and Bishops' letters go to the Police. I suggest they don't. Clergy study sin for a living, they know many of their kin are criminals and probably know names. How many Catholic typists or filing clerks are going render their Cardinals unto Caesar? * Maybe, not the correct word, becaue the Pauline-Constantinian Church of the Holy Roman Empire has always been broken Posted by Oliver, Saturday, 17 April 2010 3:20:59 PM
| |
Dear Foxy.... "...I hoped ... the
future of the Church... will change for the better.... it will provide genuine leadership and a willingness to confront both the difficulties and the opportunities that it faces", and so on. As the fella in The Castle says, 'tell her she's dreaming'. Why would any church change the habits of a 2000 year lifetime, for a mere 'hope'? Socratease understands very well "The institution is far too important to the office holders to allow a genuine response" but as with yourself and Severin "Perhaps this current scandal will be the one to start a change for the better" there is no harm at all in that hope. I even share it, to some limited extent...knowing full-well that nothing will, or can, change for the better. If that happened, the entire edifice would fall away, to dust, where it belongs. But beyond this particular sex-shame of the last 2000 years, let's go away from the direct priestly scandals and cover-ups to see what happens under the guise of this and other churches elsewhere, and this is why I, and clearly others here, view 'religion' as a toxic brew of anti-humanity. Let's all trip to the latest Pew info here: http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=515 Now, I am not suggesting that 'the church' is suggesting that its 'Christian' followers have their female children 'circumcised' at all. But just what clear and unambiguous message is it delivering here? I suspect, reading through this horrible report of gloom-doom for Africa, and by extension us, and all of 'humanity', that the various so-called 'Christian' churches and Islamic muftis are more engaged in powerplay here and recruiting in the face of each other than they are the least bit interested in calling a halt to their collective barbaric rituals. After all, religion is built on barbarous rituals, myths and fairy tales. But I was rather amused by this line: "Large numbers of Africans actively participate in Christianity or Islam yet also believe in witchcraft, evil spirits, sacrifices to ancestors, traditional religious healers, reincarnation and other elements of traditional African religions". So, what's new Posted by The Blue Cross, Saturday, 17 April 2010 3:54:43 PM
|
Well said.
Cornflower is my OLO shadow - reflects very little truth of what I am trying to say.
I have no doubt we are all guilty of remaining silent sometimes. I did in the past - to keep a job, to avoid being attacked myself.
I no longer care. I always feel better expressing myself as honestly as I can - I don't always get it right, sometimes I misunderstand but unlike some, I am not into mind-fluk games.
I like to play but not on a forum about abuse be it children, gays, men or women. If I have a button that is easily pushed it is bullies - they exist in many guises from the relatively mild "I was only joking" variety to the psychopath heading a corporation, government or church.