Not the best of time for the |Catholic Church

[Ramirez]

I don't recall that even being brought up, and in any case, I do indeed ignore it.

I figure this is going to come up since Benedict's Hitler youth past was brought up, so likely is Pius....might as well start another thread to deal with it.

 

[CanuckMA]

I went through the same experience as Tez in Montreal in the 60s. I was the only Jew in my school, and because my parents sent me to the French school board, it was Catholic. It was not one teacher. It was institutionalized, both school and church. I was asked often enough to show my horns. So yes, the Church has a lot to answer for for what it preached back then.

 

[Tez3]

Not sure what that means, but OK if you say so.



You have. I am sorry, but these are your words, not mine:

"Ah yes though, the Church forgave us didn't he, for killing Jesus! However recent Bulls and Encyclicals of Pope Benedict XVI that reinstate anti-Semitic prayers and Catholic societies do not augur well for the Church not condoning anti Semitism."

I'm not twisting your words at all. You stated that Pope Benedict has issued Bulls and Encyclicals that reinstate anti-semitic prayers. Your words, not mine. How can you say you have not stated what you think the Catholic Church believes in?

I haven't stated what the Catholic church believes in, I have said we are worried about the actions of the Pope.



You did say it was anti-semitic, and you did not refer to the past. Read your words again. Pope Benedict, you said, issued Bulls and Encyclicals that reinstate anti-semitic prayers. How is that not "currently anti-semitic?" I'm not playing with your words, these are literally your words, unaltered, unexpanded, and there for anyone to see.

You really do get your knickers in a twist, the Pope gas indeed re-instated prayers that are anti-semetic and yes I will find them for you, I've just got up here so give me time to have breakfast. You may believe the Pope and the church is interchangable, we don't so the actions of the Pope are his alone. I didn't say the Church is anti semitic. I said the Popes actions are very worrying.



And again, I'm not mad, and this isn't a rant. I'm responding to an accusation you have made, which you now deny making. I'm reading back to you your own words, literally, without twisting anything.

You may think thats the case but sadly it's not.



"I think you perhaps need to take a deep breath and actually think before you attack people, it's one of the reasons I've stopped posting so much here, something I used to like doing but the constant aggressiveness of your posts is upsetting."

Again, your words above. You don't post as much as you used to, and I'm the reason for it, according to you. I will amend my statement - you didn't threaten to go away, you said you already partially had, and I'm to blame for it.
Thank you for correcting your statement in which you accused me of threatening to stay away unless you stopped posting etc. where you had a go at me for 'saying that'. You see how you twist my words.
I do indeed not p[ost asmuch, quite rarely in fact for me becuase debating had lost all it's enjoyment when it became tirades.


I do not know how to make my words sound less angry. I can only keep repeating that I am not angry.

They certainly sound it.



You have yet to see me blow my top. I've done it, sure, but I haven't even come close on this forum. I'm not angry, not upset, not pissed off, not vengeful and I don't think you or anyone else is out to get me. By the way, I think you need to look up the meaning of the word 'paranoia'. It's got nothing to do with anger or seeing things that are not there, it's having unreasonable fears.

Exactly!



You said Catholic students. When I suggested that the students themselves were to blame, then and only then did you drop the other shoe and announce that they were egged on by a Catholic teacher, since given the sack. And I agreed with you, rightfully so.

I didn't say Catholic students at all, I said Christians.

Then you stated (need I quote it again?) what the Catholic Church believes based on Pope Benedict's recent anti-semitic prayer reinstatement. So yes, you said the Catholic Church. I can't twist your words, you stated it plainly.

I will repeat...I said it was worrying he has made amendments if you like, to certain things, bringing back things which other Popes had banished, I said this was worrying, you know likely to make us fearful etc etc of what he might bring the church to. For crying out loud everyone even aethiests know that what the church believes and what Catholics believes is likely to be two diffferent things, look at birth control.
I didn't say at all waht the church believes in, I said the Pope was making moves that made Jews worried.


You didn't express doubts, you made a flat statement. I would like to see these Bulls and Encyclicals that reinstate anti-semitic prayers, if you don't mind. To date, he has issued three Encyclicals, entitled "God is Love," "Saved by Truth," and "Love in Truth." Please tell me which of these contains anti-semitic prayers. He has issued no Bulls whatsoever to date.

Of course it is an attack if it contains statements that are not true and which disparage the object of the statements. You expressed doubts, and that is certainly your right and not something I would ever object to. But you did make flat statements, and in my opinion, they're untrue. I've been trying to politely make that clear, but you seem determined not to accept responsibility for your own words, so I present them back to you once more:

"Ah yes though, the Church forgave us didn't he, for killing Jesus! However recent Bulls and Encyclicals of Pope Benedict XVI that reinstate anti-Semitic prayers and Catholic societies do not augur well for the Church not condoning anti Semitism."

Tell me in what way your statement is not an accusation. Tell me what Bulls and Encyclicals you speak of. Point out the anti-semitic prayers, if you would be so kind.

And attack? Yes, you attacked. I am defending. This is standard, common, everyday discussion. I am not angry, not upset, I am asking for you to stand behind your words and defend them. I'm sorry if you're upset, but you can't make accusations and expect no one to take issue with them; especially if they're untrue.

I'm not upset at all, I'm bored by the bombast, the hectoring and the self righteousness.



I agree that might well the root cause as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/world/europe/25pope.html

http://vlights.posterous.com/bbc-news-outrage-at-anti-semitism-comparison-0


The prayers are in the Tridentine Mass which he has brought back/allowed/permitted.

The prayer in the rite's Good Friday liturgy reads: "Almightly and everlasting God, you do not refuse your mercy even to the Jews; hear the prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of your truth, which is Christ, and be delivered from their darkness."

Jews and Catholics have had good relations under the last two Popes this one seems to be taking the clock back a long way before them.

Oh and I said the Pope, not Catholics singly or en masse. Perhaps to non Catholics there is a separation there than Catholics like Bill can't see. This is one Pope who worries us in what and who he encourages.

 

[Tez3]

Thanks for the neg rep whoever!
Shame you didn't have the guts either to sign it or post up on here under your own name, anonymous comments are worthy only of contempt.
Coward.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/world/europe/25pope.html

http://vlights.posterous.com/bbc-news-outrage-at-anti-semitism-comparison-0


The prayers are in the Tridentine Mass which he has brought back/allowed/permitted.

OK, let's go there. First of all, the Tridentine Mass is not new, nor has the Pope issued any Bulls or Encyclicals dealing with it. I wasn't going to mention this, but since you refuse to take responsibility for your words, I'm going to out you; they weren't your words.

The phrase you used was cut-and-pasted from another website:

The Zionism and Israel Information Center (Ami Isseroff). Interesting source, but hardly unbiased.

http://www.zionism-israel.com/hdoc/Papal_Bulls_Jews.htm

"Many believed and hoped that Catholic persecution of Jews had ended in the period of Pope John XXIII. Recent Bulls and Encyclicals of Pope Benedict XVI that reinstate anti-Semitic prayers and Catholic societies do not augur well."

You took the words of someone else and offered them up as your own. You then refused to defend them, and now pretend that you didn't say what you said.

I asked you to defend those words you claimed as your own. What Bulls? What Encyclicals? No response, you ignore my requests. What does that say to your integrity? To your honesty? To your honor? Not only were they not your words, but you throw accusations about and then refuse to even acknowledge the words you claimed as your own.

But let us turn to your newest accusation of anti-semitism. You link to two New York Times articles.

"Pope Reinstates Four Excommunicated Bishops"

In this article, the current Pope has reinstated four bishops who had previously been excommunicated from the Church. One of them, Richard Williamson, had been excommunicated for being one of four new bishops created in defiance of Vatican orders. The current Pope chose to lift that excommunication for whatever reasons he has. However, this caused an outrage among some because among other things, Bishop Williamson does not believe that the Holocaust occurred (he also does not believe women should wear pants, I'm told).

And this is an anti-semitic move by the Church in what way? I find Bishop Williamson's beliefs absurd, bordering on insane. However, his personal beliefs are not a consideration when it comes to his relationship with the Holy See. He either is or he is not in communion with it. And at the moment, he is in communion.

If the Church had expelled him for for holding the bizarre belief that the Holocaust had never occurred, and then brought him back, I might understand your objection. However, he was not excommunicated for denying the Holocaust, he was excommunicated because he was made a Bishop in an unauthorized manner by a rogue Arch Bishop. This was and is an internal Church matter. It has nothing to do with his outlandish beliefs.

If the Church were to pander to every outside group that demands a priest be defrocked for holding unpopular (and incorrect) views on such topics, then Democrats would demand that Republican priests be defrocked and so on. The man's personal beliefs, however wrong, are neither illegal nor the business of the Church inasmuch as they do not interfere with his duties as a Bishop of the Church.

Are all Rabbis scrutinized to make sure they don't believe or say anything offensive to Christians? Should they be?

Anti-semitic? Bishop Williamson may be, I can't say. But the Pope? I don't see it that way.

The second link you posted was a reference to a more recent news story:

"BBC News - Outrage at anti-Semitism comparison by Pope preacher"

http://www.totalcatholic.com/tc/ind...stances-itself-from-holocaust-comparison.html

Fr Raniero Cantalamessa said in a Good Friday homily, which was listened to by the Pope in St Peter's Basilica, that a Jewish friend wrote to him to say the accusations against the Church reminded him of the "more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism".

The comparison has been criticised by both Jewish and victims' groups who have said it was inappropriate to compare the discomfort being experienced by the Church leadership in the sex abuse scandals to the violence which culminated in the Holocaust.

The Vatican’s spokesperson, Fr Federico Lombardi, said Fr Cantalamessa was not speaking as a Vatican official.

Such a parallel could "lead to misunderstandings and is not an official position of the Catholic Church," Fr Lombardi said, adding that Fr Cantalamessa was speaking about a letter from a friend who lived through a "painful experience".

So a Vatican priest said that a Jewish friend had written him and said that recent attacks on the Catholic Church reminded him of the "more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism."

I fail to see in what way this is anti-semitic! Although it is quite common for many groups to take offense at ANYTHING being compared to either anti-semitism or the Holocaust, if anything, the priest in this statement was pointing to anti-semitism as a horror and and outrage, by comparing the current persecution of the Church to it. If anything, this priest was saying that anti-semitism is bad, not good.

And now we turn to the Tridentine Mass...

The prayer in the rite's Good Friday liturgy reads: "Almightly and everlasting God, you do not refuse your mercy even to the Jews; hear the prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of your truth, which is Christ, and be delivered from their darkness."

That is incorrect. It was correct for a brief period of time (less than a year) after the Pope reinstated the Tridentine (Latin) Mass.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1577720/Pope-removes-anti-Semitic-text-from-prayer.html

Pope removes 'anti-Semitic' text from prayer

The correct quotation is:

Oremus et pro Iudaeis: Ut Deus et Dominus noster illuminet corda eorum, ut agnoscant Iesum Christum salvatorem omnium hominum. (Oremus. Flectamus genua. Levate.) Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui vis ut omnes homines salvi fiant et ad agnitionem veritatis veniant, concede propitius, ut plenitudine gentium in Ecclesiam Tuam intrante omnis Israel salvus fiat. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen

http://uvcarmel.org/2008/04/04/clar...emus-et-pro-iudaeis-on-the-1962-roman-missal/

This translates as:

Let us also pray for the Jews: That our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men. (Let us pray. Kneel. Rise.) Almighty and eternal God, who want that all men be saved and come to the recognition of the truth, propitiously grant that even as the fullness of the peoples enters Thy Church, all Israel be saved. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

It corresponds roughly to the Good Friday Prayer for the Jews:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0800689.htm

"Let us pray for the Jews. May the Lord Our God enlighten their hearts so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ, the savior of all men. Almighty and everlasting God, you who want all men to be saved and to reach the awareness of the truth, graciously grant that, with the fullness of peoples entering into your church, all Israel may be saved."

It prays for the conversion of the Jews. Obviously, the Jews do not wish to be converted, which is quite understandable, but since Christianity is based on Judaism, and Jews are still seen as the Chosen People of God, and because Jesus was Himself a Jew, we pray that Jews will also come to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior. How can that be seen as anti-semitic? Does it call for the destruction of the Jews or of Israel? Does it ask for God's wrath to be sent down upon them? Any smiting going on? No, it asks God for their hearts to be opened to what Christians believe is true, that Jews accept Jesus and JOIN US. Yeah, that's real anti-Jew. We hate them so much, we want them to become more our brothers and sisters than they already are.

Jews and Catholics have had good relations under the last two Popes this one seems to be taking the clock back a long way before them.

No, that's simply untrue. He's ruffled feather by refusing to bow to the wishes of those who want a un-excommunicated Bishop re-excommunicated (not for disobeying Vatican orders, but for having an incorrect opinion about a historical event), and one of his priests in the Vatican made the mistake of reading something a 'Jewish friend' had written him comparing current attacks on the Church with anti-semitism. Whoa, there, that's big stuff? He's taking the Church back to the stone age with that? Sorry, that doesn't wash.

Oh and I said the Pope, not Catholics singly or en masse. Perhaps to non Catholics there is a separation there than Catholics like Bill can't see.

Nonsense. You worry about the Pope taking the Church in dangerous directions, but then you say you are only speaking of the Pope and not of Catholics in general. You acknowledge the power of the Pope in one breath, and then claim you didn't mean it that way in the next breath. It's one or the other; either the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church, and his policies affect how Catholics believe; or his opinions mean nothing to everyday Catholics, and in that case, what's your worry about?

This is one Pope who worries us in what and who he encourages.

Your original attack was taken from a Zionist webpage and claimed as your own words. You refused to defend them when asked repeatedly. Your two links to news stories say nothing about what the Pope 'encourages', but merely points out your own bias. Even the reference to the Tridentine Mass prayer for the Jews was incorrect, using old information and not acknowledging that the prayer had been changed at the request of various Christian and Jewish groups around the world who were concerned with how it would be interpreted.

Now, it is apparent to me that you have a personal problem here. You say you have nothing against Catholics. Based on your comments, I do not believe you. You have made accusations and refused to back them up. When pressed, you made new accusations and abandoned the old ones, and even they are incorrect. You make statements that are not only untrue, I believe that you know they are untrue. And you deflect any criticism of your arguments by calling me 'angry'.

I am moving on from this thread now. I'm sorry you have an issue with the Catholic Church, and if you truly believe you don't, I am sorry for that too; you should take a deeper look at your own statements and conduct.

 

[CanuckMA]

It prays for the conversion of the Jews. Obviously, the Jews do not wish to be converted, which is quite understandable, but since Christianity is based on Judaism, and Jews are still seen as the Chosen People of God, and because Jesus was Himself a Jew, we pray that Jews will also come to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior. How can that be seen as anti-semitic? Does it call for the destruction of the Jews or of Israel? Does it ask for God's wrath to be sent down upon them? Any smiting going on? No, it asks God for their hearts to be opened to what Christians believe is true, that Jews accept Jesus and JOIN US. Yeah, that's real anti-Jew. We hate them so much, we want them to become more our brothers and sisters than they already are.

Yes, it does call for the destruction of the Jews. Once nobody practices Judaism, then there are no Jews. It can be a hard concept to grasp for non-Jews, I know I have to try and explain it often, but Judaism and behind a Jew are intertwined more than any other religion-'ethnicity' could ever be.
When all Jews are Xtians, then there are no Jews.

 

[Tez3]

I write for that site. Tez stands for Terribly Eager Zionist.

 

[kaizasosei]

Well, whatever. Happy Easter everyone. Religious or not. Peace, wisdom and understanding can bring us closer to the truth-whatever it is.


j

 

[Ken Morgan]

Hey if anyone wants to join up with we atheists, I got some blank membership forms around here somewhere, oh and its only $19.99 a month, so send me your credit card numbers so i can do preauthorised withdrawals.

 

[kaizasosei]

Thanks but no thanks for me. Same as with the beliefs, I prefer to not believe stuff for free, soul matters aside. Plus i don't really have the cash anyway...
the light shines brightest in the dark

 

[Empty Hands]

It might be more politically correct to ignore (our) history about how Jesus came to die on the cross, but we don't do that.

Then where is the collective guilt and blame assigning for the Italian (once Roman) people who actually did the deed?

 

[theletch1]

After reviewing the last few pages of this thread I want to take a moment to enter a gentle nudge in the "polite discussion" direction. Religion is one of the few things that many people simply cannot discuss reationally. Take this into consideration as you continue this topic of discussion.

Also, remember that our site policy requires you to bring problematic matters to the attention of the moderation staff, be that a rude post, PM or reputation comment. Please don't bring yourself in for sanction by not allowing the staff to do our job.

Carry on, please, but be polite. :asian:

 

[Carol]

I am going to throw up.

The Bishop of Canary Islands (obispo de Tenerife) has stated publicly that children are partly to blame for the paedophilia in the church. This is mortifying.

En una declaración aberrante, inconcebible y que, se supone, obligará al Papa a echarlo de inmediato de la Iglesia, el obispo de la ciudad española de Tenerife dijo que "hay menores que desean el abuso e incluso lo provocan".

This is a word for word traranslation of the quote that is bolded.

Hay (there are) menores (minors) que (that) desean (desire) el abuso (the abuse) e (and) incluso (even) lo provocan (lead you on).

In Spanish, provocar can mean "to provoke", but in sexual situations, it refers specifically to the person that leads the other one in to the behaviour.


http://www.rosarionet.com.ar/rnet/opinion/notas.vsp?nid=49398

Here is the googlefished version:

ABERRANT
One bishop said that "there are children who want to abuse"

08/04/2010 - In a statement that turns your stomach, the highest religious authority of the Spanish in Tenerife, asked why the child molester is sick? "

In a statement absurd, inconceivable, and that is supposed to force the Pope to throw away of the Church, the bishop of the Spanish city of Tenerife said that "there are children who want to abuse and even cause it."

"There may be children who do consent, referring to the abuse, and indeed, there are. There are adolescents who are under 13 years and are in close agreement and also forward to that. Even if you cause you're not careful," said The bishop, in a statement that riles common sense.

The head of the Church in Tenerife, Bishop Bernardo Alvarez made the curious and sensitive analysis of the pedophilia that moves the foundation of the Vatican and naked like never miseries of Catholicism, which has yet to answer many questions during their history.

Bishop Alvarez began to discuss the serious problem of child abuse in an interview in the local newspaper 'La Opinion'.

The bishop likened homosexuality to the abuse and, while ensuring that the difference between homosexuality and abuse is clear, poses a question: "Why is the child molester is sick?".

As for his opinion about homosexuals, Alvarez, despite claims to respect the sexual condition, again displayed their most critical and said that "the phenomenon of homosexuality is something that harms people and society."

For the bishop today "is not politically correct to say that is a disease, a lack, a distortion of the nature of human beings. That saying any dictionary of psychiatry decade ago, today you can not say."

He considers that because homosexuality "eventually pay the consequences as other civilizations have paid."

Alvarez advised not to reach these ends "we must promote education and instill the values of femininity and masculinity."

To the question of whether to target homosexuality, Bishop was even more critical, noting that "you can not leave people fought for what comes out (sic)

Why not do the same with violence or other impulses that the human being? "Is preguntnó.

In addition, assimilated (homosexuality) to sexual assault, "the person practices, such as practicing child abuse."

After the scandal caused by Alvarez, the Bishopric of Tenerife had to leave to explain that Alvarez did not try to justify their statements "in any case, an event as condemnable as the abuse of minors."

For the rest of the statements, the bishop refers only to the interview.

Statements opened a fierce controversy, especially after some dioceses of the Catholic Church, particularly in the USA-Boston, San Diego, Los Angeles-and Ireland-Dublin, were involved in serious sex abuse scandals that the Church has come to make payments to victims millionaires.

 

[Blade96]

i'm gonna go be ill now

but its common that victims are often blamed for their being attacked by someone (sexual assaults its very common)