• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Pope Says Some Great Things!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
kia75 said:
and...your...point...is? That...you...can...put...ellipses...everywhere? You do know that a church and a person are different things, right? If not I can point you to dictionary.com so you can learn the difference between the two.



Fred Phelps knows that he shouldn't focus on hating gays? Because he and the Westboro Church continues to do so. So do Mormons, so do many different religious people. Religious anti-abortion protesters continue to protest abortions in Kansas after successfully killing a doctor last year. "Stop focusing on gays and abortions" is something that all religious conservatives need to hear.
Click to expand...


My overall point is that I don't understand the infatuation with, and the foaming at the mouth over Francis' admission that, while the Catholic Church is still against SSM/Abortion, religion can have an opinion while taking a fly-on-the-wall type disposition toward these issues.

So he is essentially saying they [Catholics] should be nicer to gays while still opposing gay marriage and STAYING OUT OF STATE ISSUES with their religious legislating.

I recall this being the overall position of secuarists, decades before he become pope -- people are acting as if this is breaking news and some sort of new revelation endowed upon the masses.
 
I think all the Pope is saying is that the Church has bigger issues to deal with - they shouldn't be focusing on an incredibly small number of issues and giving those issues far more weight and importance than they really deserve.
 
Mary should have had an abortion? She should not have allowed herself to be burdened with the king of peace. This is so funny.

This is a rhetorical statement.
 
Last edited:
It seems like the press always brings up this gay stuff. We don't talk about it too much at church. It seems like catholics are always saying they will not give Holy Communions to politicians that vote for abortion or some such thing. They bring it all on themselves. In my church we just say vote your conscience.
 
piasabird said:
Mary should have had an abortion? She should not have allowed herself to be burdened with the king of peace. This is so funny.

This is a rhetorical statement.
Click to expand...

It should have been her choice. I'm guessing she would have carried to term. Why no faith in your religion? (this is a rhetorical statement).
 
Near as I can tell the church opposed all things gay marriage and abortion because such things are counter-intuitive to their goals; make as many Catholics and by extension donors as possible and keep the gravy train rolling for those on the top. The tax exemption fits in with that plan nicely, as does "letting the lord" determine the size of your family with no birth control. The church, in my opinion, has become an overly glorified business. It sure is run that way. They want your money and they have a product to sell.
 
DrPizza said:
I think all the Pope is saying is that the Church has bigger issues to deal with - they shouldn't be focusing on an incredibly small number of issues and giving those issues far more weight and importance than they really deserve.
Click to expand...

I agree, but my reaction was based on the reactions of Catholics/non-Catholics alike; "God has blessed us with this man", or "he's really teaching love and compassion, full acceptance... as would the Christ".. and so on.

Those seem to be overreactions.

Personally, it was slightly disturbing to hear people fall out of their chairs like that.
 
Rob M. said:
I recall this being the overall position of secuarists, decades before he become pope -- people are acting as if this is breaking news and some sort of new revelation endowed upon the masses.
Click to expand...

It's news not because the message, in and of itself, is some sort of "new revelation endowed upon the masses."

It's news because of who said it.

The Pope saying what he did is akin to Adolf in 1943 saying, "You know, maybe we shouldn't focus so many resources on exterminating non-combatant civilians like the Jews right now, we've got more pressing priorities on the Eastern Front." <----- Bad taste and flawed joke analogy, but the point is:

This is news because before this Pope said what he did, it was unimaginable that any Pope would ever have said anything even remotely similar. What he said won't materially change anything today or tomorrow, but the cat of common sense compassion is now out of the Catholic bag, and it can never be put back again.

Institutional change happens slowly, if at all, but the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step, and there is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.

Please give this humble Brazilian lifer cleric credit for speaking truth to the entrenched institutional power than spawned and thought it owned him.

I sure do.
 
Perknose said:
It's news not because the message, in and of itself, is some sort of "new revelation endowed upon the masses."

It's news because of who said it.

The Pope saying what he did is akin to Adolf in 1943 saying, "You know, maybe we shouldn't focus so many resources on exterminating non-combatant civilians like the Jews right now, we've got more pressing priorities on the Eastern Front." <----- Bad taste and flawed joke analogy, but the point is:

This is news because before this Pope said what he did, it was unimaginable that any Pope would ever have said anything even remotely similar. What he said won't materially change anything today or tomorrow, but the cat of common sense compassion is now out of the Catholic bag, and it can never be put back again.

Institutional change happens slowly, if at all, but the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step, and there is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.

Please give this humble Brazilian lifer cleric credit for speaking truth to the entrenched institutional power than spawned and thought it owned him.

I sure do.
Click to expand...

I agree with your point about who said it, and I will not dwell on the past with that institution.

I give him credit for saying it -- I know it wasn't the easiest thing to do.

But the reason why I am a bit hesitant to give him credit for being sincere about his remarks is because deep down, I feel this is a political move. With the world's tolerance toward gays and abortions and such, and the West becoming apparently more secularized and leaving religion behind by the day it seems, he either really wants to embrace them, or see the need to fill the parishes again.... you know "adapt or die". I've talked to Catholics who haven't been to Church in over 20 years, and I personally know an ex-Catholic couple who have de-converted, but I am not sure the reason why they did.

I don't know for sure, so when I see change, then I will become a believer. I sure as heck am not gonna proclaim this man as the second-coming of Christ just because he spoke out against corruption as many ordinary people do and hardly get any publicity behind it -- he's still just a fallible person, in all respects, and as far as I am concerned, is just as easily ignorable.

Too many religious leaders are quick to pay lip service these days.
 
ThinClient said:
The catholic church has NEVER been politically neutral. Hell, they backed the Nazis and have never apologized. The catholic church is the physical embodiment of evil.
Click to expand...

They had the insight to realize that between the Communists and Nazis, one was the lesser of the two evils.
 
The best part about this is that if it is talked about less, the fewer people will believe it as part of their faith. They will be less inclined to force these religious views onto others.
 
kia75 said:
I love this Pope! May he have a long and just reign!

You're right, it's hard to claim according to the bible being gay and abortions are wrong, because the bible doesn't say it. How they became biblical stances, I have no idea.

This is what gets me. The bible never says abortion is wrong. God routinely demands the death of babies and kills children. There's references that God knows you from the moment you take your first breath until you die, suggesting that the first breath is where life begins, not conception. God doesn't conceive Adam, he gives Adam the breath of life. People that actually read the bible should know better! Yet somehow being anti-abortionist, the opposite stance of the bible, is a religious issue. 🙄

Same is true with Gays. In an issue of commandments that prescribe the death penalty to talking bad about one's parents and eating shellfish there's a law stating that guys should not lay with guys like they lay with women. That's it! That's all the bible has to say about Gays. Lesbians are never mentioned!

There's like 2 other mentions in the New testament that warn against Sexual Immorality but are sometimes translated as homosexuality but it's a bad translation. Heck, people that say they want a biblical marriage of one man one women are lying because a lot of men in the bible had multiple wives! To go back to the biblical definition of marriage would involve polygamy! And yes, Polygamy is mentioned so many more times in the bible then homosexuality!

There are tons of verses against being rich (love of money is root of all evil) on not honoring your parents (it's a commandment and also punishable by death), and even divorce (Jesus says it's immoral) yet Christians put their biblical capitol on Gayness.
Click to expand...
As someone chastising others for their lack of knowledge regarding the Bible, perhaps you need to brush up yourself. Jeremiah 1:4-5. Psalm 139. The Bible is long enough and written by enough different people in different languages that it can be used to say just about anything you want. Very few people know how to translate both ancient Hebrew and Greek nowadays so the English translation (usually King James) is taken as definitive, thereby losing all context.
original.0
 
busydude said:
Sorry to rain on your parade but just today he urged Catholic doctors to refuse abortions.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/20/pope-catholic-doctors-refuse-abortions
Click to expand...
he clearly stated before that that he wasn't changing his positions as the position of the church is known and he's a son of the church, he just wanted to move discourse from condemnation of those who commit those "sins", to actually being spiritual supporters first, and making the moral teaching come after that.

It's the field hospital ideology he had stated stated before that.

You know, being more discreet about it, because otherwise all the talk about the church is negative and polemic since journalists wake up and jump on any statement regarding those themes and atheists use it as a weapon, together with the child-abuse issues. It would calm down the constant polemic and ideological fight in Italy.

In this case he reiterated that position because it was specifically a meeting with catholic gynecologists, but he wants to avoid talking about it outside of meaningful contexts like this one.

So this doesn't rain on anyone's parade, he's sticking to his strategy for now.

I don't think his strategy will ultimately change the fate of the church, but it's better than nothing, at least he's trying to change the discourse instead of being a mummy like other popes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top