Post #203,913
4/19/05 12:51:43 PM
|

So much for Vatican II
Probably the most conservative Catholic in the entire world.
|
Post #203,914
4/19/05 12:57:44 PM
|

and the head of what they used to call
the Inquisition, to boot! Ein Glaube! Eine Kirche! Ein Papst!
Jawohl, mein heiliger Vater!
cordially,
Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
|
Post #203,915
4/19/05 1:01:01 PM
|

You didn't really expect a different outcome, did you?
JP2 stacked the cardinals with very conservative people and Ratzinger apparently was his right-hand man. It's hard for me to see a different outcome under such circumstances.
Conservative institutions don't change unless they have to. And apparently the leadership of the Catholic Church feels it doesn't have to.
FWIW.
I wonder how the Republican right wing will try to spin this...
Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #203,917
4/19/05 1:03:54 PM
|

The best analogy I can come up with...
...is that it's like the Republican Party selecting Karl Rove as their next Presidential Candidate to succeed Dubya.
|
Post #203,920
4/19/05 1:06:06 PM
|

If only higher-ups in the GOP were voting... ;-)
|
Post #203,930
4/19/05 2:07:06 PM
|

Heard on the radio just now
(paraphrased from memory)
Insipid Young Twit: "I was real disappointed that they chose a 78 year-old European. I'd have preferred to see someone younger, and maybe from the Third World. I think the next pope needs to be younger if the Church is going to stay relevant to young people like me."
************
Odd...the strangest things bring my Inner Curmudgeon boiling to the surface. I felt like snarling "Listen, punk. You're going to be our age one day, or you're going to die first. Either way, relevance to your tender years ceases to be an issue." And I'm not even Catholic...
cordially,
Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
|
Post #203,931
4/19/05 2:15:34 PM
|

He does have a point, if poorly expressed.
The Catholic Church needs young men to go to the seminary to become priests. If it doesn't appeal to some fraction of the younger male population, it's going to shrivel up from below.
(Dreaded Car Analogy follows:)
GM was having problems with Cadillac's sales falling through the floor. Their average buyer age was in the high 60s (or so). All of their customers were dying off. They had to do something or they weren't going to be around much longer.
The turn-around came when they started appealing to younger people...
Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #203,932
4/19/05 2:17:06 PM
|

Another viewpoint I oft hear...
...is that the shortage of priests does have the benefit of forcing the issue of declericizing the church.
|
Post #203,940
4/19/05 3:23:21 PM
|

At 78 years old, he and his views..
arent going to be around very long. 5-10 years, probably.
|
Post #203,948
4/19/05 4:28:30 PM
|

True, but look at his colleagues.
[link|http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/religion/jan-june05/cardinals_4-18.html|NewsHour] from 4/18: GWEN IFILL: Father Reese, in today's homily, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger -- and I want to use his exact words -- criticized what he called radical individualism versus vague religious mysticism in the Church. And he talked about relativism as basically an evil, versus fundamentalism, which he described as clear faith. Is that a signal of the kind of pope that they're searching for?
REV. THOMAS REESE: Well, clearly Cardinal Ratzinger is highly respected by the members of the College of Cardinals. And what he said today is consistent with what he's been saying for years: His criticism of relativism, his criticism of agnosticism, of consumerism. There's a lot of -isms that Cardinal Ratzinger is very critical of.
I think, though, that the cardinals are also looking for someone who can present a positive image and can use -- can explain Christianity in a positive way to the people of the 21st century. And this is extremely important for the Church. I think we have to be not just against things but also have a message, a positive message, that we can bring to the people.
GWEN IFILL: So based on what we heard him say, and even with that kind of internal debate that you're alluding to, is there anyway to be able to figure out who is -- who are the cardinals who might fit the kind of bill that he was talking about today?
REV. THOMAS REESE: Well, I think that most of the cardinals would agree with what Cardinal Ratzinger said. Most of the cardinals, I think, really reflect the views of John Paul II. You know, after all, he appointed all but two of the cardinals who will be electing his successor. So, I think we're going to see someone come out of the conclave very much like John Paul II. We're going to see a lot more continuity than we're going to see change.
For example, I think we will find the new pope will be very liberal on social justice issues, on issues of war and peace. Just like John Paul II, he's going to be very strong, speaking for the poor in the third world, forgiveness of Third World debt, strong support for the United Nations, critical of the war in Iraq, against capital punishment. These are all positions that are to the left of liberal Democrats in the United States today.
On the other hand, on Church issues, on internal Church issues, on issues of faith and doctrine, I think we will see someone who's more traditional. In other words, someone very much like John Paul II. He was wrong about Ratzinger not being the choice, but his points about the conservative nature of the Cardinals (wrt doctrine) are well taken, I think. I don't think Ratzinger's attitudes are going to soften in only 5-10 years unless there are major external changes that force it upon the him (or his successor) and the Vatican. We'll see. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #203,971
4/19/05 7:36:50 PM
|

love that reporter's quote style
criticized what he called radical individualism versus vague religious mysticism in the Church. his exact words? my ass. This guy is like rushbo quoting clinton. thanx, bill
All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett [link|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/]
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 48 years. meep questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #203,976
4/19/05 8:09:12 PM
|

Gwen Ifill's a she. :-)
It might be a transcription error - quite often quotation marks don't get used these days. Knowing where she put the quotation marks is impossible without hearing the transcript. [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A942-2005Apr19?language=printer|Washington Post]: In his sermon Monday in St. Peter's, Ratzinger defended a conservative approach to faith.
"To have a clear faith according to the church's creed is today often labeled fundamentalism," he said, "while relativism, letting ourselves be carried away by any wind of doctrine, appears as the only appropriate attitude for the today's times. A dictatorship of relativism is established that recognizes nothing definite and leaves only one's own ego and one's own desires as the final measure."
The church has been shaken by "numerous ideological currents," Ratzinger said. "The boat has been unanchored by these waves, thrown from one extreme to the other: from Marxism to liberalism, up to libertinism; from collectivism to radical individualism; from atheism to a vague religious mysticism; from agnosticism to syncretism, and on and on.
"An adult faith does not follow the waves of fashion and the latest novelty," he concluded. FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #203,981
4/20/05 8:16:52 AM
|

Besides which
the vague religious mysticism may refer to yon new age Wicca types.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #203,927
4/19/05 1:31:09 PM
|

Groan................
If I didnt already have enough issues with the Church....
|
Post #203,933
4/19/05 2:37:30 PM
|

Well, become a Pagan then, it's easy . . .
. . just remove the Jesus stuff from all the holidays and rituals the church adapted and you're on your way.
Actually, you can even keep Jesus with just minor adjustments (sim. Osiris and other dying god formats), and of course Mary (Isis) and you've got a whole bunch of saints you can return to their original jobs as local "gods" and "goddesses".
Oh, one catch: we don't have cheap forgiveness - you have to take responsibility for your own actions - no "he who believeth in me shall have eternal life" escape clause. On the other hand, no original sin either - all sins are entirely your own.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #203,934
4/19/05 2:56:56 PM
|

No original sin...
...you get to innovate all new ones. :-)
|
Post #203,942
4/19/05 3:56:05 PM
|

As many as you want to take responsibility for anyway.
Of course the competition has sin down pat Get in line in that processional Step into that small confessional There, the guy who's got religion'll Tell you if your sin's original" - Tom Lehrer
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #203,936
4/19/05 3:09:00 PM
|

Pagan, huh?
I'm probably more pagan than I care to admit but I dont like the word "pagan". It inspires visions of naked people dancing around the burning wicker man. (Not that I'm against naked dancing around a fire, mind you.)
What do you call someone who believes in God but is fed up with the limitations, restrictions and politics of organized religion?
And you think Catholics have cheap forgiveness? You try sitting in a pew for hours saying your "Hail Marys" and "Our Fathers" as your penance for swearing at your mother or having impure thoughts about the neighbor boy. Being accountable for your own actions is a cake walk compared to that!
No original sin? I can get on board with that, but I would miss the cake at the baptism parties.
|
Post #203,937
4/19/05 3:13:24 PM
|

What do you call...
What do you call someone who believes in God but is fed up with the limitations, restrictions and politics of organized religion? In past centuries, they were affectionately referred to as Heretics and Apostates. :-)
|
Post #203,939
4/19/05 3:17:04 PM
|

Re: Pagan, huh?
"What do you call someone who believes in God but is fed up with the limitations, restrictions and politics of organized religion?"
Confused.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #203,941
4/19/05 3:24:43 PM
|

Yes, but you knew that already, didnt you?
|
Post #203,944
4/19/05 4:15:12 PM
|

Re: Pagan, huh?
It inspires visions of naked people dancing around the burning wicker man. No, that's just the accounting department again. And what do you call? You can call it by your own name. Like it or not you are on your way to becoming God (very long ways to go, but the way). Scripture: upon Eve serving Adam the apple God said (to his wife?) "Behold he has become as we, knowing the difference between good and evil". That was a defining step on the way to becoming God that made man more than the animals. Judaism, Christianity and much more so Islam have been trying to send responsibility for their actions back to God in return for worshiping Him. This is futile and dehumanizing. Accept the path you are one and go forward.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #203,947
4/19/05 4:23:07 PM
|

You and I must chat some time.
|
Post #203,945
4/19/05 4:16:47 PM
|

Now I've got a song running through my head :-/
You reminded me of All Souls Night by Loreena McKennitt. I like the song so this is at least somewhat OK.
Anyways there is a variety of forms of paganism. You don't have to dance naked around a burning wicker man if you don't want to. (OTOH if that floats your boat...)
Also pagans don't have to give up a belief in God. Many pagans believe in God, but believe that God is too big to worship all at once, which is why you just worship one aspect at a time. (The variety of pagan deities all being components of one Deity.) Not all pagans believe this, but I've met plenty who do.
Cheers, Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #203,950
4/19/05 4:43:08 PM
|

They used to be called "Lutherans" ;)
|
Post #203,952
4/19/05 4:50:14 PM
|

But now they have their own politics :-P
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #203,972
4/19/05 7:42:42 PM
|

well you could join the motorcycle non bathing branch
All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett [link|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/]
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 48 years. meep questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #203,983
4/20/05 8:25:46 AM
|

What do you call them? Maybe a Christian?
[link|http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2023%20;&version=31;|Matthew 23] tells me that Jesus didn't think much of organized religion in his day.
YMMV.
Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #204,052
4/20/05 11:24:11 AM
|

:) Was hoping some would notice that
|
Post #206,564
5/8/05 10:02:05 PM
|

Saved me pointing it out...
Is it enough to love Is it enough to breathe Somebody rip my heart out And leave me here to bleed
| | Is it enough to die Somebody save my life I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary Please
| -- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne. |
|
Post #204,119
4/20/05 6:39:16 PM
|

Episcopalian?
jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #204,241
4/21/05 9:10:53 AM
|

Re: Episcopalian?
Ah yes, the liberal Catholics. I looked at them. And the Unitarians. Then I gave up and am now on an extended religious sabbatical.
|
Post #204,252
4/21/05 10:06:36 AM
4/21/05 10:06:54 AM
|

Liberal Catholic, my rear end
They're Anglicans. That's Church of England, which has a certain unique history as a non-Catholic denomination.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by jake123
April 21, 2005, 10:06:54 AM EDT
|
Post #204,262
4/21/05 10:46:14 AM
|

I understood they share a lot of the same beliefs
We call them "Catholic-lite"
Explain the differences. Like I said, I'm not all that much into organized religion so I dont know much.
|
Post #204,268
4/21/05 11:00:35 AM
|

you dont have to cut off your wifes head, divorce is allowed
All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett [link|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/]
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 48 years. meep questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #204,273
4/21/05 11:29:01 AM
|

:-)
|
Post #204,274
4/21/05 11:30:36 AM
|

Let's see
As boxley said... (like I said, a unique history). No confession. No priestly celibacy. There is communion. No idolatry of saints, no rosary, no 12 stations of the cross, etc.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #204,296
4/21/05 2:48:26 PM
|

No. They are not. But I know why you think that.
First of all technically an Episcopalian Church is one that looks to bishops for leadership. There are many Episcopalian Churches in the world, ranging from Eastern Orthodox to various members of the Anglican Communion.
Now what most people mean by the Episcopalians is The Episcopal Church in the USA. This group is in a unique position. It looks both to the Anglican Church and the Catholic Church, and has special dispensations within both of them. The result is that both Anglicans and Catholics tend to view Episcopelians as being versions of themselves.
For instance a Roman Catholic priest can switch to Episcopalian and back without losing his ordination. This is true for no other Church. It is also very common for Catholics (yeah, I know there are a couple of dozen Catholic churches, most people only know the one) in the USA to switch to/from Episcopalian. (It is often joked that Catholics become Episcopalian when they want to do something bad..and this joke has a lot of truth since the Episcopalian Church allows a lot of things that the Catholics do not.)
Historically until the US revolution, many in the US were Anglicans. After the revolution when Samuel Seabury was elected bishop for Connecticut there was a problem. To be consecrated in the Anglican Church meant swearing the Oath of Supremacy to the British Crown, which he wasn't willing to do. He therefore went to Scotland and was consecrated there. But he continued to view himself as part of the Church of England.
During the 1800s the ties to the Church of England were maintained but Episcopalian practice drifted away from the Anglican and towards the Catholic. For instance their communion more closely resembles a Catholic communion than an Anglican one. I'm not sure where or when their special relationship to the Catholic Church was recognized, but they definitely have it.
Cheers, Ben
PS I knew the broad outlines of this off of the top of my head. Most of the details I just pulled from Wikipedia. The fact about the special relationship with the Catholic faith I learned from a Catholic who was a co-worker at a previous job. He cared because his wife is an activist in the Roman Catholic Church who wants priests to be able to marry freely. He therefore knows all ways that they can already marry - and one is to switch to Episcopalian, marry, then switch back to Roman Catholic.
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|