| Forum Index > General Forum |
Alright, enough religious debate. If you want to talk about Pope Benedict and what he specifically did or didn't do, go ahead. But no more general discussion on the merits or ills of the Catholic church or their history. -page 12 | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
I'm a non believer somewhere between agnost and atheist. I don't hate Catholics at all. I have neighbours, family members who are catholic. I've been to a catholic school as a kid. Even had catholic girlfiends. I just think it's time for a more modern pope, and yes I think Benedictis did some serious harm. But can I say that without being anti catholic? I sure hope I can. | ||
|
McBengt
Sweden1684 Posts
On February 11 2013 21:58 shadymmj wrote: this thread is disgusting. feel free to make a new "we hate the church" thread and stand on your moral pedestal there. seriously, i didn't even know how a starcraft site becomes a breeding ground for anti-papal sentiments. for other sane onlookers, let's just discuss this surprising decision by a very influential (but ordinary) man. Nothing we write here is even remotely comparable to the heinous crimes against humanity and all decency committed by the Vatican. It is deserving of all the scorn it gets, and more. It epitomizes the worst elements of christianity, the teachings of the kind and generous man they profess to worship forgotten or simply ignored in favour of amassing wealth and temporal power. The Vatican is a blight on the world, that has monopolized this absurd notion of a middleman between an individual and his/her god as a means to acquire power over them, nothing more. | ||
|
Golden Ghost
Netherlands1041 Posts
On February 11 2013 21:44 KwarK wrote: The Vatican is a lot less liberal than most Catholics who live in the real world. Having to deal with real life issues like being unable to afford to support another child don't come up much for priests with billions in the bank,. The first part at least is true. The second part I don´t know. I don´t think your average priest in most countries has a lot of money. But being forced into celibacy a priest can never fully understand the workings of supporting a family and making morgage payments (houses being normally provided by the church). For sure the big TV preachers in the USA make millions but in the Netherlands the church is actually losing money fairly rapidly. There is also a severe shortage of priests. In my city for example, there is only 1 priest for 5 churches and he is 80. The other 5 chuches are being tended by an Indian priest that had to be imported. However my experience with the clergy is that if you as a community talk with them about your concerns with how the Catholic church as a whole operates and dictates its policies, a good deal of them actually agree. Unfortunately the hierarchical structure of the church is so that these moderate voices will never be raised to a position of power or real influence (even on a local level). The only bright spot I see is that the biggest critics on how the church operates are the retired priests as they don´t have to be afraid anymore about repercussions or being removed from their job. | ||
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:15 Zandar wrote: For the record to my Catholic fellows here. I'm a non believer somewhere between agnost and atheist. I don't hate Catholics at all. I have neighbours, family members who are catholic. I've been to a catholic school as a kid. Even had catholic girlfiends. I just think it's time for a more modern pope, and yes I think Benedictis did some serious harm. But can I say that without being anti catholic? I sure hope I can. Yes of course you can. The church doesn't necessarily equal catholic belief, it's just supposed to represent it. Critic against the representation =!= critic against the belief itself. | ||
|
shadymmj
1906 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:16 McBengt wrote: Nothing we write here is even remotely comparable to the heinous crimes against humanity and all decency committed by the Vatican. It is deserving of all the scorn it gets, and more. It epitomizes the worst elements of christianity, the teachings of the kind and generous man they profess to worship forgotten or simply ignored in favour of amassing wealth and temporal power. The Vatican is a blight on the world, that has monopolized this absurd notion of a middleman between an individual and his/her god as a means to acquire power over them, nothing more. yeah, i would love to have some of that high class crack you smoke all religions take a stand on something, and some religions take an even more extreme stance (eg. islam...) it's unrealistic to expect benedict to make a complete u-turn on church doctrines, that would be absurd personally i do not see anything wrong with advocating (read, advocating - not the position itself) a firm stance against abortion and homosexuality. i mean, if you said, i don't think he made a very good pope because of his failure to address condoms and AIDS, hopefully his successor will be better...then I think it is a perfectly valid comment. other inflammatory comments, not so much. | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:17 DarkLordOlli wrote: Yes of course you can. The church doesn't necessarily equal catholic belief, it's just supposed to represent it. Critic against the representation =!= critic against the belief itself. Thank you  | ||
|
Ljas
Finland725 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:15 Zandar wrote: I'm a non believer somewhere between agnost and atheist. [nitpick] So you're an agnostic atheist? There's no "in between" since agnostic-gnostic and theist-atheist are completely different scales. [/nitpick] | ||
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:17 DarkLordOlli wrote: Yes of course you can. The church doesn't necessarily equal catholic belief, it's just supposed to represent it. Critic against the representation =!= critic against the belief itself. Exactly. The problem is that the representation it gives is pretty ugly, and sometimes lead (in heated debates) to the confuson between the representation and the people represented by it... Then, Zandar, you're not "anti-catholic" by saying you didn't like Benedict... I believe (though I can't confirm, obv) a lot of christians, and even a lot of catholics didn't like him (based on what I hear around me). When you put Benedict in contrast with John Paul II, who did a lot for peace, who tried to gather a lot of religion to talk about peace, who defended Vatican II council rules (which, basically, opened the church and "modernized" it by like a few hundreds year leap forward ~~), then you see there can be better people at this role.... | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:25 shadymmj wrote: yeah, i would love to have some of that high class crack you smoke all religions take a stand on something, and some religions take an even more extreme stance (eg. islam...) it's unrealistic to expect benedict to make a complete u-turn on church doctrines, that would be absurd personally i do not see anything wrong with advocating (read, advocating - not the position itself) a firm stance against abortion and homosexuality. i mean, if you said, i don't think he made a very good pope because of his failure to address condoms and AIDS, hopefully his successor will be better...then I think it is a perfectly valid comment. other inflammatory comments, not so much. How can you not see anything wrong with advocating a strong stance against homosexuality? Abortion, fine, that's still somehow a valid discussion, but not even in the US should homosexuality actually be something you can really have an opinion about. Or you can have an opinion, but you would just prove yourself to be a bigot and ignorant. Basically, saying it's acceptable to advocate a strong stance against homosexuality is just as bad as saying it's acceptable to advocate a strong stance against blacks. It's just not acceptable at all. | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:27 Ljas wrote: [nitpick] So you're an agnostic atheist? There's no "in between" since agnostic-gnostic and theist-atheist are completely different scales. [/nitpick] I know lol. I tend to have a hard time making up my mind. I don't believe at all, but hardcore atheists sometimes sound like believers themselves. Which makes me move to the "I don't know and I for sure don't care" position, which fits agnost better. | ||
KwarK
United States44367 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:16 Golden Ghost wrote: The first part at least is true. The second part I don´t know. I don´t think your average priest in most countries has a lot of money. But being forced into celibacy a priest can never fully understand the workings of supporting a family and making morgage payments (houses being normally provided by the church). For sure the big TV preachers in the USA make millions but in the Netherlands the church is actually losing money fairly rapidly. There is also a severe shortage of priests. In my city for example, there is only 1 priest for 5 churches and he is 80. The other 5 chuches are being tended by an Indian priest that had to be imported. However my experience with the clergy is that if you as a community talk with them about your concerns with how the Catholic church as a whole operates and dictates its policies, a good deal of them actually agree. Unfortunately the hierarchical structure of the church is so that these moderate voices will never be raised to a position of power or real influence (even on a local level). The only bright spot I see is that the biggest critics on how the church operates are the retired priests as they don´t have to be afraid anymore about repercussions or being removed from their job. I don't disagree that individual priests lack the wealth of the Vatican, nor that they actually witness the struggles of real people but they are just as disenfranchised and exploited by the intuition as the regular members. In the UK we have an expression, "wouldn't know the price of a pint of milk" that we use for politicians who have no clue about the lives of ordinary people. But the Vatican, with it's segregated education from an early age, denial of family life, obscene wealth and total lack of accountability making laws for the poorest people on earth is so far beyond that. Only the Vatican could teach abstinence alongside female submission to male authority and then make abortion a sin. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
McBengt
Sweden1684 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:25 shadymmj wrote: yeah, i would love to have some of that high class crack you smoke all religions take a stand on something, and some religions take an even more extreme stance (eg. islam...) it's unrealistic to expect benedict to make a complete u-turn on church doctrines, that would be absurd personally i do not see anything wrong with advocating (read, advocating - not the position itself) a firm stance against abortion and homosexuality. i mean, if you said, i don't think he made a very good pope because of his failure to address condoms and AIDS, hopefully his successor will be better...then I think it is a perfectly valid comment. other inflammatory comments, not so much. Why on earth should the Vatican be granted some kind of moral exemption? Are you suggesting that we should be more tolerant of their disgusting doctrines and rank hypocrisy because they are founded in faith? Regardless, he was a bad pope because he was a bad pope, just like most others. His views are the views of those who elected him, otherwise someone else would have been chosen. I see no reason to expect a more progressive pope this time. The problem is not with this pope, or the previous, or the next. It is a systemic cancer in the Vatican itself. | ||
|
Geneq
Poland165 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:34 SoSexy wrote: So much hate and ignorance in this thread. Disgusting. Yeah, that's catholicism, nothing you can do. | ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
It's sad to see him go, considered I see him everyday in an electricity provider advertisment. Don't look if you have a anti gay marriage stance, you will find this offensive. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://blog.powershop.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/powershop-pope.jpeg) | ||
|
SpeaKEaSY
United States1070 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:15 Zandar wrote: For the record to my Catholic fellows here. I'm a non believer somewhere between agnost and atheist. I don't hate Catholics at all. I have neighbours, family members who are catholic. I've been to a catholic school as a kid. Even had catholic girlfiends. I just think it's time for a more modern pope, and yes I think Benedictis did some serious harm. But can I say that without being anti catholic? I sure hope I can. There's nothing wrong with being criticizing the church, as long as your criticisms are informed and you keep your logic consistent with other religions, social groups and organizations. For example, I think if people held all governments to the same standard we hold the Vatican, there would be a lot fewer bullshit laws on the books. Unfortunately, many people hold a bias against the church because their political beliefs are different than that of the church, so they will excuse or even praise organizations that do the same or worse things than the church does. They readily make uniformed criticisms because they saw a youtube video once or something like that. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:32 Zandar wrote: I know lol. I tend to have a hard time making up my mind. I don't believe at all, but hardcore atheists sometimes sound like believers themselves. Which makes me move to the "I don't know and I for sure don't care" position, which fits agnost better. Would you say you're more of a pure Neutral, Neutral good, or Loyal neutral? | ||
|
Ljas
Finland725 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:32 Zandar wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 11 2013 22:27 Ljas wrote: [nitpick] So you're an agnostic atheist? There's no "in between" since agnostic-gnostic and theist-atheist are completely different scales. [/nitpick] I know lol. I tend to have a hard time making up my mind. I don't believe at all, but hardcore atheists sometimes sound like believers themselves. Which makes me move to the "I don't know and I for sure don't care" position, which fits agnost better. All of the "hardcore" atheists that aren't just bashing religion without any reasoning, like Dawkins for example, are agnostic atheists. It's the idea that we can never be certain that there is no god, but neither is there any evidence to say that there is. The big difference between them and you is that they care because religion is still a powerful force in today's society. | ||
|
StarVe
Germany13591 Posts
I must admit, I didn't think a reactionist like Benedict would be the one to herald such changes. Oh well, I'm fine with it, every time they elect a new pope I have a small glimmer of hope that they'll slowly start to modernize. | ||
|
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
On February 11 2013 22:41 ZenithM wrote: Would you say you're more of a pure Neutral, Neutral good, or Loyal neutral? He definitely looks like a pure neutral. "I don't know and I don't care". I think there's no need to find a specific name for it ^_^. Well... maybe a lazy agnostic, don't know and don't want to try to find out, but that sounds a bit negative (with lazyness). | ||
| ||
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
OSC
OSC
Replay Cast
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Rex vs INexorable
GgMaChine vs HeRoMaRinE
Reynor vs herO
AI Arena Tournament
BSL: Ladder Tournament
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Patches Events
BSL Open Qualifier
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
