NYT tomorrow's edition

[beausox]

If so those who hoped for a more liberal tack are going to be disappointed. Ratzinger is a staunch Conservative. There will be no change in doctrine or teaching. As a youth (9?) he was signed up by authorities in Hitler Youth. It was compulsory.He gained an exemption because he was in the seminary. He was conscripted into Army, deserted same in 1944 and became a prisoner of war.

 

He is considered even by his detractors to be highly intellectual. JPII was also a philosopher of note but his role, or at least his legacy, was to re-endear the world to the Papacy. Ratzinger will now add sumptuous footnotes.

 

Many will not like what they are to hear. Tighten your seat belt.

[VABills]

Those that going in the Pope come out a Cardinal. Being a Catholic myself and from a very conservative parish and Diocese, I expect it to be a conservative Pope. I don't think it will be Ratzinger however.

 

I believe there are several more Cardinals who would play better in the Church and really take a hard look at the "American Catholics" and try to bring them back to the fold on its teachings. I also expect someone who will take a very hard stand on clergy who misuse their position improperly.

[RkFast]

Im starting to get really pissed off at people pushing the Church to change the way it does things, now that John Paul II has passed. I fully understand the Church has problems and needs change. But there is this movement that seem to be saying "OK, hes gone. So do away with your stance on just about every social issue and re-write the books".

 

Doesnt fly.

[VABills]

Im starting to get really pissed off at people pushing the Church to change the way it does things, now that John Paul II has passed. I fully understand the Church has problems and needs change. But there is this movement that seem to be saying "OK, hes gone. So do away with your stance on just about every social issue and re-write the books".

 

Doesnt fly.

307196[/snapback]

Not sure what you're are saying. The books been written but some of the Catholics especially in Canda and the US have been given a lot of leeway in enforcing some of the rules. I am saying that the clergy here maybe in for a rude awakening if a more conservative Pope comes in who enforces the rules. Like forcing excommuncation for divorce, or for abortion or for politician who vote for abortion, or priests who abuse their power.

[Campy]

I'm under the impression that the cardinals were just getting ready to start their enclave. I wonder how the Times 'knows' who the next pope would be before the cardinals have voted?

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I'm under the impression that the cardinals were just getting ready to start their enclave.  I wonder how the Times 'knows' who the next pope would be before the cardinals have voted?

307239[/snapback]

 

The same way they "know" who's going to be president the Monday before elections. The same way I find crap to throw at passers by. They pull it out of their asses.

[/dev/null]

I wonder how the Times 'knows' who the next pope would be before the cardinals have voted?

307239[/snapback]

 

the latest exit polling i've seen shows the next Pope to be...

 

John Kerry

 

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

the latest exit polling i've seen shows the next Pope to be...

 

John Kerry

 

307346[/snapback]

 

 

Or at least he would be, if the Cardinals supporting him hadn't all got mailings saying they can't vote because they have parking tickets...

[RkFast]

Not sure what you're are saying.  The books been written but some of the Catholics especially in Canda and the US have been given a lot of leeway in enforcing some of the rules.  I am saying that the clergy here maybe in for a rude awakening if a more conservative Pope comes in who enforces the rules.  Like forcing excommuncation for divorce, or for abortion or for politician who vote for abortion, or priests who abuse their power.

307234[/snapback]

 

There seems to be a movement that doesnt want the CHurch to just make some small changes...but wants it to completely rethink its entrie policy in regards to social issues. Everything from birth control, to the role of women in the Church, etc. And in some cases, people are demanding that these wholesale changes be made.

[beausox]

There seems to be a movement that doesnt want the CHurch to just make some small changes...but wants it to completely rethink its entrie policy in regards to social issues. Everything from birth control, to the role of women in the Church, etc. And in some cases, people are demanding that these wholesale changes be made.

307416[/snapback]

 

Liberation Theology was an attempt to "modernize" the Church with an amalgamation of Marxism and Jesus' social message. The demise of practiced Socialism and JPII's rejection of Marxism set the movement back in popularity. Communists have worked their way into the woodwork but they lurk in the recesses of fringe issues.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Everything from birth control, to the role of women in the Church, etc.

307416[/snapback]

Lord knows birth control and women in church leadership positions are practically chutes to Hell.

 

Welcome to the 21st century, fellas. How's about living in reality?

[beausox]

Lord knows birth control and women in church leadership positions are practically chutes to Hell.  

 

Welcome to the 21st century, fellas.  How's about living in reality?

307617[/snapback]

You are a run the damn ball guy. You believe in basic, no-frills, grind it out, old fashioned football. Then you should love RCC.

 

Re: Women in the Church I quite agree that RCC needs to change. Its problem is that women in leadership roles is not culturally acceptable in many developing countries. The Church does live in reality but what is socially hip in Dubuque may not sell in Nairobi. It can be further argued that RCC has not adapted well to social changes to their benefit! Do not get all excited the last sentence was exactly as I intended it. It could have heeded advice from Voltaire?

Birth control and abortion are a different matter because these are not matters of tradition which is changeable but natural law which is not alterable. Birth control however has its distinctions. Some methods are acceptable in my and most opinion. Some methods are so post copulation that they become abortion. Indeed abortion has been viewed by many as an acceptable form of birth control. Advocates of Ms. Sanger, the founding mother of Planned Parenthood, find defending her eugenic beliefs difficult and even embarrassing.

[IBTG81]

the latest exit polling i've seen shows the next Pope to be...

 

John Kerry

 

307346[/snapback]

 

Have you been talking to RCow?

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Too bad he was a Hitler Youth.

[RkFast]

Lord knows birth control and women in church leadership positions are practically chutes to Hell.  

 

Welcome to the 21st century, fellas.  How's about living in reality?

307617[/snapback]

 

So because its "modern times", the Church is required to go along with whatever whim society puts forth and must throw away its own policies and traditions? Thats BS.

 

And even more, why is the RCC "on the clock" to alter how women are treated and deals with society? Ever see how women are treated in other religions? Compared to many sects in other religions, Catholic women are treated like royalty, and social policies are, dare I say, progressive. But for some reason, its only the RCC that must own up and make wholesale changes to "get with the times". Why?

 

Again...this all comes wit hthe caveat that there are problems, things should change. But for me, as a Catholic, its a "we will change when YOU do" thing. My Church is being forced to do things that I dont see any other religion being forced to do. And thats not right in my book.

[beausox]

So because its "modern times", the Church is required to go along with whatever whim society puts forth and must throw away its own policies and traditions? Thats BS.

 

And even more, why is the RCC "on the clock" to alter how women are treated and deals with society? Ever see how women are treated in other religions? Compared to many sects in other religions, Catholic women are treated like royalty, and social policies are, dare I say, progressive. But for some reason, its only the RCC that must own up and make wholesale changes to "get with the times". Why?

 

Again...this all comes wit hthe caveat that there are problems, things should change. But for me, as a Catholic, its a "we will change when YOU do" thing. My Church is being forced to do things that I dont see any other religion being forced to do. And thats not right in my book.

307912[/snapback]

[/quote

 

That kind of religious apologetics (properly understood) will bring down upon you the wrath of the secularist humanists.

[John Adams]

So because its "modern times", the Church is required to go along with whatever whim society puts forth and must throw away its own policies and traditions? Thats BS.

 

And even more, why is the RCC "on the clock" to alter how women are treated and deals with society? Ever see how women are treated in other religions? Compared to many sects in other religions, Catholic women are treated like royalty, and social policies are, dare I say, progressive. But for some reason, its only the RCC that must own up and make wholesale changes to "get with the times".  Why?

 

Again...this all comes wit hthe caveat that there are problems, things should change. But for me, as a Catholic, its a "we will change when YOU do" thing. My Church is being forced to do things that I dont see any other religion being forced to do. And thats not right in my book.

307912[/snapback]

 

I don't really care if the Catholic Church corrects its failings or not, beyond the fact that it would certainly be good, at least for women, if the Church changed certain things, such as the role of women.

 

Your defense of "But other people are worse" is pretty hollow, and cannot be satisfying; Ditto to your "we'll change when they do" argument. You're arguments are saying that you'd rather your church play second fiddle to others on moral issues like subjugation of women. That's sad.

 

And who is "forcing" the Catholic Church to change? First, it's unlikely that it will. Second, if it does, who is "forcing" it?

[RkFast]

I don't really care if the Catholic Church corrects its failings or not, beyond the fact that it would certainly be good, at least for women, if the Church changed certain things, such as the role of women.

 

And Im saying that it would be good...BETTER if all religions updated its roles for women.

 

Your defense of "But other people are worse" is pretty hollow, and cannot be satisfying; Ditto to your "we'll change when they do" argument. You're arguments are saying that you'd rather your church play second fiddle to others on moral issues like subjugation of women. That's sad.

 

Its not "hollow" to say that "other people are worse" when its being used in the context of who is being pushed to change its ways and who is not. Youve got a cop on the streetcorner. One guy is jaywalking. The other is mugging somebody. You going to tell me its proper to walk up to the cop and just point out the guy crossing in the middle of the block?

 

And its not "hollow" to say "we will change when you do" when a double standard exists. You going to tell me its proper for the neighbor who throws his garbage over his fence to come to me and complain that I havent mowed my lawn in a week?

 

Context, my boy......context.

 

And who is "forcing" the Catholic Church to change? First, it's unlikely that it will. Second, if it does, who is "forcing" it?

 

There is movment out there right now that has stated "Now that JPII is dead, the Church must embark on wholesale reforms." Given whats going on in the world, thats just not fair.

 

And A-G-A-I-N.....this all comes with the acknowledgement that the RCC CAN BENEFIT from some reform.

[John Adams]

 

And its not "hollow" to say "we will change when you do" when a double standard exists. You going to tell me its proper for the neighbor who throws his garbage over his fence to come to me and complain that I havent mowed my lawn in a week?

 

 

308076[/snapback]

 

Your colorful and irrelevant analogies dodge the fact that the Catholic Church is wrong. That someone else is wrong is their concern, and as this may relate to certain Muslim nations, they are widely criticized for it. When Jesus stood beside the adulteress about to be stoned, did he say, "Throw all the stones you want. But if the Jewish Elders say not to, then follow suit and do what they do."

 

And you also ignore that LOTS of religions, many protestant and some sects of Judaism, have already taken the lead on the roles of women. So, THEY have changed. Who is the Catholic Church waiting to follow?

[RkFast]

Your colorful and irrelevant analogies dodge the fact that the Catholic Church is wrong.

 

Ive stated TWICE in this thread that I acknowledge the RCC has its issues. Im not going to do it again. If you cannot read an entire thread before coming up with your condascending holier-than-thou retorts, thats not my problem.

 

And WHO says they are "wrong". YOU? NOW? And define "wrong". The fact that only men can be Priests? Lets hear it.

 

That someone else is wrong is their concern, and as this may relate to certain Muslim nations, they are widely criticized for it. When Jesus stood beside the adulteress about to be stoned, did he say, "Throw all the stones you want. But if the Jewish Elders say not to, then follow suit and do what they do."

 

This thread is not about what the RCC does and how its percieved by itself. Its about how the media and the general public perceives it. SLIGHT difference, there.

 

And you also ignore that LOTS of religions, many protestant and some sects of Judaism, have already taken the lead on the roles of women. So, THEY have changed. Who is the Catholic Church waiting to follow?

 

Are you reading ANYTHING Im writing? Doesnt appear so. Becuase this is the THIRD time in this thread (Yer Out!!!) that you either ignored or mis-read my comments. I said "Compared to many sects in other religions, Catholic women are treated like royalty, and social policies are, dare I say, progressive. " CERTAIN sects. Parts of a whole, not the entire thing. So many have changed. Many have not. Go ask a Hassidic Jewish woman how "things have changed". Or a Burqua wearing woman in Medina. Ask her how its going these days.

 

This is my point....social issues and how religions sometimes relate to them span the entrie religious community, not just the RCC. So its unfair for the RCC to be held to a standard others are not.