Pope nearing death

[ringmastery]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A34474-2003Oct2?language=printer

Reuters
Thursday, October 2, 2003; 1:39 PM

By Crispian Balmer

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - A senior European cardinal said on Thursday Pope John Paul was nearing death -- the latest top churchman to ring alarm bells about the state of the 83-year old pontiff's health.

Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn made his comments on the same day the pope's private secretary was trying to play down concerns about the pope's evident frailty.

Pope John Paul, who suffers from Parkinson's Disease and can no longer walk without help, has appeared weaker than normal in recent public appearances and has struggled to speak at times.

"The whole world is experiencing a pope who is sick, handicapped and dying -- I don't know how close to death he is -- who is approaching the last days and months of his life," Schoenborn told Austrian radio.

[Wetzelbill]

1. That's sad, I pray for him and wish the best

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. well,

We know what's gonna knock Limbaugh and Traitorgate off the front pages for at least a few days....

[tom_paine]

3. I guess he is not the Pope who will have to deal with the AntiChrist

Whoever comes next will have to deal with Ma-Bus.

[carpetbagger]

36. Wrong! See the picture below

http://prorev.com/!pope.jpg

[Hippo_Tron]

39. LOL, great pic...

My prayers go out to the pope.

[calimary]

55. Great point - great photo!

Poor old JP2. While I disagree with a lot of his reactionary leanings, he still stood up to bush on Iraq, and he stood up to more tyranny than that in his life.

Hate to see him go out slowly and painfully and miserably like this.

Go with God, your Holiness...

(And knock Arnold off the headlines next week, okay?)

[Bombero1956]

74. if I may offer

a moment of levity, it looks like his Holiness is thinking "goddamn this man is stupid".

[molly]

4. That's sad for us - good for him - I really like this Pope

[Octafish]

26. Me, too. He helped end the Soviet Union...

... and freed hundreds of millions of people. It's not the Pope's fault Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton decided to use the resulting US peace dividend to enrich their friends in the military-industrial-petroleum complex.

[Padraig18]

5. Pray for him.

He is a good man, and while I do not agree with much he has done to the Church, I shall mourn his passing. :(

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wetzelbill]

7. unfortunately there is some merit to that

a touch indelicate, but yeah.

I believe the Pope is a good man with a good heart. I don't agree with some of his notions, nor do I feel positive about church conduct on many affairs. However, I have much respect and a great faith in the basic message of Christianity. His sickness and inevitable passing saddens me nonetheless.

[DealsGapRider]

10. Glad to see...

...good old-fashioned anti-Catholic bigotry is alive and well! Hey, a lot of the Freepers are anti-Catholic, too. You'd fit right in.

[FlemingsGhost]

17. I am Roman Catholic. Baptised, altar boy, confirmed, etc.

I now consider myself "in recovery," though.

[Blue_Chill]

12. couldn't keep from throwing insults could you?

This thread is about a man who is dying.

If you want to bash the guy start your own thread like everyone else.

[FlemingsGhost]

19. I attacked the institution, not the man.

In fact, I described the man as "extraordinary."

[salin]

40. timing is everything

broadside slam - at this moment in time (context)... one should expect a negative reactions.

[FlemingsGhost]

57. Agreed. I expected flames...

I presented a provocative argument at a time when it's impact would be felt the most. In my opinion, the timing was perfect.

[Blue_Chill]

91. Who had time for respect when you have to get out a message.

Yup that's the way we should be, screw having a heart.

I guess the time of bleeding heart liberals is dead. Now we just have extremist nuts like the right wing.

[FlemingsGhost]

105. Yup... that's me: a heartless, extremist nut.

What a well thought out rebuttle.

[FightinNewDem]

62. Oh, bullshit!

You compared him to a Mafioso. If you are going to be a blatant bigot, at least have the balls to stand by your twisted convictions!

[FlemingsGhost]

69. I stand by my words.

The title, "Pope John Paul" was put parenthesis for a reason.

I purposely revealed his real name, Karol, to emphasize the distinction between the man, and the title which was bestowed upon by a very wealthy corrupt business network.

The assertion came directly from my brain, not my balls.

(on edit: typo)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. You Should Read About Catholic Socialism...

I disagree with the Catholic Church on sexuality but the Catholic Chrurch has been tireless advocates of social justice...

[Mairead]

15. Only parts of it...the 'liberation theology' movement and individual

religious have been, but the Church as a whole hasn't been.

[Liberator_Rev]

22. "the Catholic Church has been tireless advocates of social justice..."???

Demsincebirth,
You need to get out more, out of the Catholic library.
You haven't read http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/PopesvsChrist or
http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/RCscandal have you?

I'm a former Catholic priest who's been a social activist for over 50 years, so don't even SUGGEST that I don't know the score!!!

( I'm glad the Catholic Church identified with the working class when it was the church of the immigrant working class in America. But, in most other circumstances, the Catholic hierarchy has tended to identify with and put most of its muscle behind the ARISTOCRACY against the proletariat.)

[Woodstock]

25. Amen, Liberator_Rev

I've been looking over your site, it is really a nice place to spend some time. I especially appreciate your pro-woman's equality writings.

Jesus was a feminist.

[blondeatlast]

33. But he wouldn't approve of his hatred for the Catholic church or its

followers. I'm not Catholic, I am a Christian; as in, one who follows the words and teachings of Christ.

BTW, I, too, am a feminist. And I am not a fan of this Pope, but respect is due; deep, abiding respect.

[Liberator_Rev]

76. What would Jesus say to Catholic hierarchy?

What would Jesus say to Catholic hierarchy?
This is a sermon I preached as a Catholic priest in several churches and then sent to every Catholic bishop in America and to the Pope's representative.

A reading from the Gospel according to Matthew, Ch. 23:
"At that time, Jesus addressed the crowds and His disciples, saying : 'The scribes and the Pharisees speak with the authority of Moses, so you must do what they tell you and follow their instructions. But don't make the mistake of imitating their lives! For, they preach but do not practice. They pile up back-breaking burdens and lay them on other men's shoulders -- yet they themselves will not so much as raise a finger to move them. Their whole lives are planned with an eye to effect. They increase the size of their prayer books and lengthen the tassels of their robes; they love seats of honor at public functions and front places and to have men call them 'rabbi' or 'teacher'. As for yourselves, don't you ever be called 'rabbi' -- you only have one teacher, and all of you are brother of one another. And don't call any human being 'father' -- for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. And you must not let people call you 'leaders' -- for you have only one leader, the Anointed One (Christ). The only 'superior' among you is the one who serves the others. For, every man who promotes himself will be humbled, and every man who learns to be humble will find promotion.
But alas for you, you scribes and Pharisees, play actors (hypocrites) that you are! You lock the doors of the kingdom of Heaven in men's faces. You will not go inside yourselves, and neither will you allow others to enter."
Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
There's a story often told about a mighty ruler who was so full of himself that a clever tailor was able to convince him that he looked 'simply marvelous' in a suit consisting of nothing at all. None of his subjects had the courage to challenge his delusions until at a public parade a young child saw him and asked out loud, "What's wrong with the emperor, parading around like that with no clothes on?" We may chuckle over the candor and honesty of such a child, but as adults aware of the power authorities wield over us, let's face it: we are much more likely to behave like the adults in that story, rather than the child.
Maybe it's time that something happened to wake us up, so that we too might begin to see things as they really are. It's time, in particular, that someone, somewhere, blew the whistle on those who think that they have a God-given right to be princes, kings or emperors in our own Roman Catholic Church! It is time that whoever claims to be Peter's successor be told that Christ never intended him or any man to be or to act like the "4th person of the blessed Trinity." Instead, Jesus directed "Anyone who wishes to be first in the kingdom of god should make himself the last and the servant of the rest." It's time that those who claim to derive their authority from Christ take another look at Our Lord and get off of their high horses, out of their luxurious vestments and automobiles, and out of their palatial homes, and away from their rich and powerful friends and neighbors. Instead of constantly condemning the faithful for new-found sins supposedly missed by the authors of the Bible, such as the practice of birth control, the marriage of the clergy, masturbation and yes even abortion, when are today's high priests going to pay attention to what the Bible says repeatedly and unequivocally TO THEM?
In the Gospel selection that inspired this sermon, Jesus insisted that the leaders of his new religious community should never go around having people address them with honorific titles like 'father,' 'teacher,' and 'leader'. How can anyone imagine Jesus being anything but horrified by titles like "Monsignor" (meaning "my Lord'), "Your Excellency," "Your Eminence," "Your Holiness," "Supreme Pontiff," and most presumptuous of all "the Vicar of Christ"? Do such people take Jesus Christ seriously? Or, are they only using Christ as a means of having trusting people take them seriously?
Today's "high priests" quote some of Christ's words, namely those which suit them and seem to support the overwhelming authority they enjoy wielding over others. They won't let their subjects forget for example, that Jesus once said to the Apostles, "Whoever welcomes you, welcomes me." And they are forever reminding people that Jesus seemingly intended to put Peter, and all of his successors on pedestals, in a class by themselves, when he said: "You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church; and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be considered bound in heaven, while whatever you loose on earth shall be considered loosed in heaven." (Matt. Ch. 16) But why are they so silent about the words Jesus proceeded to address to this same Peter, just a few verses later: "Get behind me, Satan. You are an obstacle in my path, for the way you think is not God's way but man's." And what about the warning the Lord gave to those to whom he was entrusting a role of leadership in his new Church: "You know that among the pagans, rulers lord it over their subjects and their great men make their authority felt. This is not to happen among you. No, anyone who wants to be great among you must be your servant, and anyone who wants to be first among you must be your slave, just as the son of man came, not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Matt. Ch. 20)
Jesus had tried many times to instill this attitude in his leadership, saying to them, for example, when he overhead them arguing among themselves as to which of them was the greatest, " If anyone wishes to be first, he must make himself the last, and the servant of the rest." Finally, on the night before his death on the cross, Jesus made one last attempt to get this same message across. Although Peter objected strenuously to it, Jesus didn't feel it was beneath his dignity as the Son of God to put himself at the service of mere human beings -- that was what his life was all about! Getting down on his knees before each of his apostles, he washed their dirty feet! And when he had finished, in order to make sure that this dramatic lesson had not been wasted on them, he asked, "Do you understand what I have done to you? you call me lord and master, and rightly so, because that is what I am. But if I, the lord and master have washed your feet, so much the more should you wash the feet of others. for I have given you an example so that you may copy what i have done to you." (John Ch. 13)
Is that the example you see being followed by those who claim so boldly to be filling Christ's shoes on earth? Are they acting as servants when their "Excellencies" mount their royal thrones to proclaim their doctored-up version on Christ's teaching in such pontifical tones?
Is it Christ's example they are following when they try to make the majority of young married people feel guilty of grave sin for merely trying to plan for the family's future?
Is it Christ's example of loving and understanding service that they are practicing when they tell thousands of people that their previous disastrous marriages to monsters are still binding, while their present ones, no matter how successful, should be dissolved?
Is it the welfare of Christ's flock that they are looking after when they deprive millions of Catholics the services of marvelous priests just because those priests will no longer allow them to arbitrarily deprive them of a right so basic as the right to marriage?
Whom are they serving when they proclaim on their own authority alone that any man natural enough to want to share his life with a woman, no matter how holy, must be considered unfit to serve mankind as a priest?
Why are these clergymen so rigid in their interpretation of Scripture when it applies to married and/or divorced people but the very opposite when interpreting Scripture that is addressed to themselves?
And finally, whose example are they following when they allow many of the Church's younger generation to turn off the Church, and possibly Christ, in order to search elsewhere for an inspiring message and meaningful way of serving their fellow man?
Such policies and improbable doctrines are not God's will; they are man's will pure and simple. They are the policies and doctrines of men who have managed, over the centuries since Christ's time, to amass so much power into their hands that they have been able to force anyone and everyone to play their particular version of make-believe Christianity. So powerful have they become that anyone who attempted to unmask them -- even if only to wake them up to what they might have done unknowingly -- was easily put out of the picture by "excommunication", or by being branded a "heretic," a "fallen away priest" or the like. And so, again and again, Christ's prophecies about the fate of faithful followers has come true: "The disciple is not greater than his master. . . If they have called the master of the house (Jesus himself) 'Beelzebub' (one of the jewish names for Satan) what will they not say of his household?" (Matt. Ch. 16)
But how long will this charade be allowed to continue? I don't know, but I suspect the answer lies with YOU, the "People of God". As you well know, Jesus eventually allowed the chief priests, the experts in the old law, and the Pharisee leaders to capture him, put him through a mock trial and have him executed. But did you ever notice that the Gospels give the people the credit for Jesus' being able to continue his ministry for so long in the face of the fury of the so-called "men of God" of that day? "When they heard his parables, the chief priests and the scribes realized that Jesus was referring to them. Nevertheless, though they would have liked to put Jesus behind bars, they were afraid of the crowds, who looked on him as a prophet." (Matt. Ch. 21) Just as the common people of that day had the good sense to repudiate the slanderous lies the hierarchy was always trying to spread about Jesus, today's Catholics should think twice about the charges made by today's high priests. Many such leaders need to be reminded of Jesus' reproach: " Should you say, 'friend, let me help you get that speck out of your eye,' when you can't even see because of the board in your own? Hypocrite! First get rid of the board; then you can see to help your brother." (Matt. 7:4-5)

A sermon I preached as a Catholic priest in several churches and then sent to every Catholic bishop in America and to the Pope's representative.

[Liberator_Rev]

77. And if you criticise Bush, you HATE AMERICA !

I criticize THE CONSERVATISM OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC HIERARCHY.
If that translates into "hatred for the Catholic Church and its followers", then everybody here at DU who criticizes the current Bush Admininstration OR ANY OTHER are guilty of hating the United States of America and its citizens.

I'm getting so tired of having to point that out that I'm going to save it to cut and paste, until people STOP making that absurd charge.

Now if you have any evidence to offer that there is anything WRONG or INACCURATE with the SUBSTANCE of my posts. If you actually read what I have to say, you might find out why so many people have wonderful things to say about my site http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/Testimonials.htm.

[youngred]

79. Oh Ray!

The problem is you don't. You attack people's beliefs you scream and kick that they see the obviousness of your solution and your beliefs...in short you try and convert Catholics from the 'danger' that is their own religion.

And far far too often the only "reply" you have for anyone is to copy and paste the same 3-4 links from your website. I have seen exactly one post in which you do not pimp your website. ONE in all the time you've been here (granted I have not read all your posts, but in 99% of my encounters with you that is the kind of thing you bring to the table).

I like the testimonials link, cute. 'See all these people love me. come join me!'. I have said before much of the what you say and write is good and constructive, and the large portion of your testimonials come from that good part of your message. However, your continual insistance on attacking anything remotely Catholic betrays a certain blind spot and bigotry that I and many of the Catholics here cannot stand

[Liberator_Rev]

84. When the Catholic Church stops attacking everybody else

YoungRed,
When you stop "pimping" for your Catholic Church, I'll stop promoting "Liberals Like Christ".

And when the Catholic hierarchy stops attacking MY political representatives who happen to be Catholics who take the Liberal positions which I elected them to represent, I'll stop expressing "attacking" them.
When they stop attacking all the women and especially the poorest of the poor for whom family planning is a matter of life or death, I'll stop attacking this all male celibate club of know it alls.
When they stop making life miserable to gays, like my beautiful daughter, I'll stop attacking them.

When they stop PRETENDING to represent Christ, when all they represent are the traditions of arbitrary dictatorial churchmen.
When they stop claiming to be the one true church and telling everybody that WE PROTESTANTS are all frauds, a claim which they enforced for centuries by torturing and murdering heretics and infidels.

[youngred]

85. I'm not pimping the Catholic Church

In fact I would tell most people not to be Catholics for many of the same reasons you would. What anyone does with their spiritual life is their business not any of mine...nor of yours.

And the protestants were just as sweet in return. Ray, My Uncles are Gay Catholics. I have gay friends who have suffered great abuse at the hands of some catholics, and who have been lifted up and shown true compassion and acceptance by some Catholics. Your assertion that the whole catholic church is wrong and evil and out to get you and others is beyond ridiculous and insulting. Protestants claim to be the only true way, so do Muslims and Hindus and Jews...the very nature of religion and faith is based on the idea that it is to one degree or another "true".

Your only response is to be offensive and attack the Church and its members and clergy. You never even stop to consider that your anger and comments do more to drive people away from a peaceful and liberal message than all the good things you could say.

[Liberator_Rev]

92. You really nailed that strawman, YoungRed

You show how desperate you are when you blatantly misrepresent your opponent's position.

"Your assertion that the whole catholic church is wrong and evil and out to get you and others is beyond ridiculous and insulting."

I dare you to humiliate the hell out of me by finding ONE instance where I said anything like "the whole catholic church is wrong and evil".

And as for your claim that "Protestants claim to be the only true way," that is only true of FUNDAMENTALIST protestant groups, who are like the Catholic Church in that respect. Most other Protestants PREFER their own church without being so arrogant as to believe EVERYBODY has to prefer it.

[youngred]

95. riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

exaggeration perhaps, strawman no. You may not see your bias perhaps, but dozens of Catholics, Protestants and Atheists here have all seen it and confronted you on your unusually vicious attacks on the Catholic Church.

And no, your assertion about Protestants is incorrect, most protestants believe if you aren't saved through us you're not saved. Which is as much BS when the Catholics, Protestants, Muslims or anyone says it.

[JohnKleeb]

97. Ray why do you pick fights with the Catholics

Many of us including myself like your idea of liberal christianity but I as a Catholic dont like your idea of singling out the church. Of course Catholic history isnt the best but neither is it of most faiths. You shouldnt single out the Catholic church, I like your idea of liberal christianity but you have it out for the church that my family members were raised in.

[Liberator_Rev]

102. Celebrating Columbus is akin to celebrating Hitler.

JohnKleeb, since you want to make me the issue in this thread, and ask for reasons why I have problems with your Pope using the name Christ, who is MY LORD, by claiming to his "Vicar". In addition to all the OTHER reasons I spell out in great detail on the pages of my web site, here are some more reasons, which will become part of a new page I am working on: America was a country populated by as many as 100 million people who were considered "savages" and "pagans" when Columbus led a "Christian" invasion of these lands and stole them in the name of the Catholic King and Queen of Spain and the Catholic Church, and began a holocaust of the natives that didn't end until almost ALL of those "savages" and "pagans" were dead, often after a period of inhuman slavery.

Here is how many of them died, as excerpted from American Holocaust, an extraordinary book about what REALLY HAPPENED when the Old (Christian) World met the New "uncivilized" World :

"Using armed Spanish troops to capture Indians and herd them into the mission stockades, the Spanish padres did their best to convert the natives before they killed them. And kill they did. First there were the Jesuit missions, founded early in the eighteenth century, and from which few vital statistics are available. Then the Franciscans took the Jesuits' place. . . . < Most people just assume that the "missions" were about "doing the Lord's work" for the benefit of God and the Indians. The recorded history of this time and place, however, do not bear this out.>
And what was done was that they brought more natives in, under military force of arms. Although the number of Indians within the Franciscan missions increased steadily from the close of those first three disastrous years < when the number of deaths caused the Indian population living in the missions to decline> until the opening decade of the nineteenth century, this increase was entirely attributable to the masses of native people who were being captured and force-marched into the mission compounds. Once thus confined, the Indians' annual death rate regularly exceeded the birth rate by more than two to one. This is an overall death-to-birth ratio that, in less than half a century, would completely exterminate a population of any size that was not being replenished by new conscripts. The death rate for children in the missions was even worse. Commonly, the child death rate in these institutions of mandatory conversion ranged from . . . one of every six to every three. . .
In short, the missions were furnaces of death that sustained the Indian population levels for as long as they did only by driving more and more natives into their confines to compensate for the huge number were being killed once they got there. This was a pattern that held throughout California and on out across the southwest. Thus, for example, one survey of life and death in an early Arizona mission has turned up statistics showing that at one time an astonishing 93 % of children born within its walls died before reaching the age of ten. . .
{ p.136--7 } There were various ways in which the mission Indians died. The common causes were the European-introduced diseases -- which spread like wildfire in such cramped quarters -- and malnutrition. The personal space for Indians in the missions averaged about seven feet by two feet per person for unmarried captives, who were locked at night into sex-segregated common rooms that contained a single open pit for a toilet. It was perhaps a bit more space than was allotted a captive African in the hold of a slave ship sailing the Middle Passage. Married Indians and their children, on the other hand, were permitted to sleep together -- in what Russian visitor V.M. Golovnin described in 1818 as "specially constructed 'cattle--pens.' " He explained: I cannot think of a better term for these dwellings that consist of a long row of structures not more than 7 feet high and 10 to 14 feet wide, without floor or ceiling, each divided into sections by partitions, also not longer than 14 feet, with a correspondingly small door and a tiny window in each -- can one possibly call it anything but a barnyard for domestic cattle and fowl? Each of these small sections is occupied by an entire family; cleanliness and tidiness are out of the question: a thrifty peasant usually has a better--kept cattle--pen."' Under such conditions Spanish--introduced diseases ran wild: measles, smallpox, typhoid, and influenza epidemics occurred and re--occurred, while syphilis and tuberculosis became, as Sherburne F. Cook once said, "totalitarian" diseases: virtually all the Indians were afflicted by them. As for malnutrition, despite agricultural crop yields on the Indian--tended mission plantations that Golovnin termed "extraordinary" and "unheard of in Europe," along with large herds of cattle and the easily accessible bounty of sea food, the food given the Indians, according to him, was "a kind of gruel made from barley meal, boiled in water with maize, beans, and peas; occasionally they are given some beef, while some of the more diligent catch fish for themselves." On average, according to Cook's analyses of the data, the caloric intake of a field--laboring mission Indian was about 1400 calories per day, falling as low as 715 or 865 calories per day in such missions as San Antonio and San Miguel. To put this in context, the best estimate of the caloric intake of nineteenth-century African American slaves is in excess of 4000 calories per day, and almost 5400 calories per day for adult male field hands. This seems high by modern Western standards, but is not excessive in terms of the caloric expenditure required of agricultural laborers. As the author of the estimate puts it: "a diet with 4206 calories per slave per day, while an upper limit neither excessive nor generous, but merely adequate to provide sufficient energy to enable one to work like a slave." Of course, the mission Indians also worked like slaves in the padres' agricultural fields, but they did so with far less than half the caloric intake, on average, commonly provided a black slave in Mississippi, Alabama, or Georgia. Even the military commanders at the missions acknowledged that the food provided the Indians was grossly insufficient, especially, said on given "the arduous strain of the labors in which they are employed"; labors, said another, which last "from morning to night"; and labors, note a third, which are added to the other "hardships to which they are subjected." . . . The resulting severe malnutrition, of course, made the natives all the more susceptible to the bacterial and viral infections that festered in the filthy and cramped living conditions they were force to endure -- just as it made them more likely to behave lethargically, something that would bring more corporal punishment down upon them. . . .
When not working directly under the mission fathers' charge, the captive natives were subject to forced labor through hiring-out arrangements the missions had with Spanish military encampments. The only compensation the natives received for this, as for all their heavy daily labors, was the usual inadequate allotment of food. As one French visitor commented in the early nineteenth century, after inspecting life in the missions, the relationship between the priest and his flock "would . . . be different only in name, if a slavehoheder kept them for labor and rented them out at will; he too would feed them." But, we now know, he would have fed them better.
In short, the Franciscans simultaneously starved and worked their would be converts to death, while the diseases they and others had imported killed off thousands more. The similarity of this outcome to what had obtained in the slave labor camps of Central and South America should not I surprising, since California's Spanish missions, established by Father Junipero Sera aptly dubbed "the last conquistador" by one admiring biographer, and currently a candidate for Catholic sainthood), were direct modeled on the genocidal encomienda system that had driven many millions of native peoples in Central and South America to early and agonizing deaths."

[youngred]

29. And as a former Catholic priest you carry a lot of baggage

resentment and dislike.

Your message would be so good if you could lay off the catholic bashing

[blondeatlast]

34. Amen.

[Liberator_Rev]

78. Catholic Hierarchy's message would be so good if they stopped bashing

YoungRed,
In this post I believe you are violating at least the spirit of DU's very sensible rule NOT TO ATTACK the PERSON, but to respond to the IDEA being posted. "And as a former Catholic priest you carry a lot of baggage . . . resentment and dislike."

Now for the substance of your post. You keep insisting that you are a Liberal and that there's plenty of Liberalism in the Catholic Church, while arguing with me every time I take a stand which I know that I would have welcomed as a Liberals WITHIN the Church.
You give me this advice: "Your message would be so good if you could lay off the catholic bashing."

Now don't you agree that
"The Catholic Hierarchy's message would be so good if they stopped bashing the homosexual life style of NON-Catholics, as well as Catholics."
that
"The Catholic Hierarchy's message would be so good if they stopped bashing the birth-control decisions of NON-Catholic organizations and individuals, as well as Catholic ones."
that
"The Catholic Hierarchy's message would be so good if they stopped bashing NON-Catholic woman who believe that abortion is a choice they should have available to them."
that
"The Catholic Hierarchy's message would be so good if they stopped bashing and firing Catholic Theologians who can't agree with ideas imposed by old clerics who are no match for them intellectually."

???

[youngred]

81. Perhaps it does Ray

indeed I would not object if it were removed, however I do strongly feel that you are biased in this regard and bring your bias with you to the table. The facts however do not change. You are an ex-priest. You do bear great resentment towards the Chuch and anyone foolish enough to still believe in Catholicism. You reached your decision, fine. Stay out of mine.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS MYRIAD FAULTS AND PROBLEMS. Not least of which is a conservative power grab and moves by the US church to preach only part of the message.

I do love how this thread(like every Catholic thread you seem to post to) has turned into your crusade against the chruch, completely off topic.

[Liberator_Rev]

88. Who steered this thread off course?

Tsk. Tsk. YoungRed,

While your obsession with me causes you to accuse ME of knocking this thread off topic : "I do love how this thread(like every Catholic thread you seem to post to) has turned into your crusade against the chruch, completely off topic."

The truth IS that the rest of us were discussing the direction the Catholic Church has taken with this pope at the helm, all of which is ON TOPIC, aren't YOU the one who jumped in and tried to steer the thread off into a debate ON ME and "Liberals Like Christ"?

[youngred]

89. Nope, you jumped in with a broad attack on the churches history

of social justice.

[blondeatlast]

32. Could we, just once, just ONCE, have an objective link?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. I Was Speaking Generically

The Pope has speaken out on workers rights numerous times... He's my kind of capitalist or my kind of socialist....

I'll repeat it....

He's my kind of capitalist or my kind of socialist...


He's in favor of private enterprise as long as you treat your workers with dignity and respect....

As an employee at one time and employer at others I can appreciate that....

[LeahMira]

47. Seems that way...

But, in most other circumstances, the Catholic hierarchy has tended to identify with and put most of its muscle behind the ARISTOCRACY against the proletariat.


It does, at least in what I've read about the life of Archbishop Romero, who happens to be someone Catholic that I admire. Also, I've read that he is not getting canonized in part because that would irritate the wealthy in El Salvador and cost the Catholics their support.

The Catholic bishops came out with a statement, Economic Justice for All, in 1986. How is it that most American Catholics seem to never have heard of it?

I'm Jewish, but raised Catholic, and I've found in my experience that Jews and Catholics both are concerned for social justice. I find a lot of Catholics (or "recovering" Catholics) involved in these kinds of efforts, yet the Vatican seems to be silent, or even sometimes outright hostile to them.

If you "know the score" then what is the score with the Vatican?

(I don't believe that Jesus was G-d, but it does seem that he was pretty radical!)

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NicRic]

48. To add to that ....

They have done much good around the world in helping the needs of the poor and hungry ! This Pope is very admired by me ,he always was on the side of peace and real compassion for the lees fortunate !

[IranianDemocrat]

35. If you substituted "The Catholic Church" for "Islam" in your sentence...

...you'd be tombstoned immediately, while this post is allowed to stay.

[blondeatlast]

37. You are so right. And the non-theists feel persecuted?

That is the wisest thing I've read in a long time.

Thanks you.

[FlemingsGhost]

104. They were Bill Maher's words. Not mine.

I merely quoted the man, and agreed with the sentiment.

[FlemingsGhost]

72. C'est la Vie... Your forum, your rules.

God Ble$$ America.

[Mari333]

8. My mom is going to freak

and he was pretty cool when he came out against Bush and his war as Immoral...
My mom is probably freaking out because of Rush now anyway, so I think this double whammy will really make it impossible to talk to her..
Ill call her next week........ya thats the ticket.

[Mairead]

9. Let's hope the next one channels Roncalli instead of Pecci or Sarto

[The White Rose]

21. No kidding.

I still wish we could have seen what John Paul I might have achieved...

[Mairead]

41. Yes, I was reading where the circumstances of his death

still haven't been explained in a satisfactory way.

[displacedtexan]

11. i saw this pope

in rome 20- odd years ago. i had a seat in st. peter's square (white plastic chair. there were easily 100,000 people there. the pope arrived in his new pope mobile (glass topped golf cart thing). he began the blessing in latin... fourteen languages later, he got around to english.
i got up to leave and found an ancient old lady to take my seat. she cried and kissed my feet. it was weird. i went to babbington's tea room for a snack.

[Blue_Chill]

13. God bless him

If it were up to him he would still be riding around in his hilarious pope-mobile and trying to do what he thinks is right.

I hate to see him in his present condition.

[JohnKleeb]

16. Thats sad

[dfong63]

18. he spoke courageously against the iraq war

[eleny]

20. I'm a "retired" Catholic...

but still, this will be the passing of an era. I only hope that they can move into a more progressive mode in the future. It's either that or the church may whither away in the U.S. Maybe that's a good thing.

Frankly, I always did love the Blessed Mom Goddess. Didja know - when you can't get into heaven, you just go around to the side. There, you'll see a window with a window-box full of geraniums and petunias. Knock on the window and Mary comes and she let's you in. At least that's what my mom taught me when I was little!

[Padraig18]

23. He is first of all a *man*

It is unfortunate, but nonetheless true, that we often seize upon a man's failings and frailties and overlook the tremendous good that same man has done.

The Pope fought the Nazis, and then he fought the Communists, and then he fought genocide, and the death penalty, and slave and child labor, and starvation, and war, and... I won't go on, because my point is made.

He is a man, with all the frailties that accompany that, and now he is old, feeble and dying. Let God and history both judge him, but pray that his passing is easy, for he has earned that much, at minimum.

"May He bless you and keep you; may He make his countenance to shine upon you, and may He give you rest."

Go with God, Karol Wojtyla.

[Woodstock]

24. This arch-conservative pope caused untold suffering

I'm Catholic.

I hate the suffering and yes, death, that has resulted from his zealous anti-contraceptive drive in the third world. Sperm is far more sacred to him than the lives of women and children.

I hate his throughly, absolute, and complete sexist attitude about women. He's done everything in his power to subject women in the church.

I don't wish anyone to die or to suffer. But this man has caused untold suffering and his policies have resulted in a great loss of members of the church. I will not miss him. Although he has stacked the cardinals full of arch-conservatives like him, there is still hope that the next pope will be better.

[Mz Pip]

28. I wonder

what the next Pope will do in this regard. THe Catholic Church is so entrenched in its 11th century attitudes about women and procreation. I just don't see it changing anytime soon. The College of Cardinals or whatever they are called these days are hightly unlikely to elect a progressive this time around.

Just like Mother Teresa, the powers that be in the Catholic Church condemn one of the very things that might actually make peoples lives better.

I never understood it and left the Church years ago because of it.

MzPip
:dem:

[Liberator_Rev]

80. Thank you for speaking on behalf of women.

Though a male myself, I'm blessed with seven daughters and now 8 grand-daughters. (and 3 sons and 5 grandsons) That may be why I'm more a feminist than many women I've known.

[MoonAndSun]

27. May he not suffer in his last days.

[Sterling]

30. The Pope thinks Bush Mihoped

That is part of why he opposed Iraq.

[ShaneGR]

31. See ya in Heaven Pope!

At least I hope I see him in heaven. I'm sure if there is one, he'll have a really nice apartment or something.

[jiacinto]

38. I will pray for him

This is sad. And those DUers who are hostile to Catholics should be ashamed of themselves for being anti-religious at a time like this.

[Spentastic]

43. What?

"And those DUers who are hostile to Catholics should be ashamed of themselves for being anti-religious at a time like this. "

So even those that believe that organised religion causes more grief than good should "be ashamed" because the passing of a pope means little to them?

Some people should be ashamed of their patronising attitude.

[arwalden]

44. "Amen." (Said the atheist.)

Personally, I think the Pope is a hypocrite. I have no feelings one way or the other about his immenent demise.

Perhaps the next pope will be a little less hateful to gays and lesbians... and perhaps he will be a little more forthcoming when it comes to handling pedophile priests.

Someone's death is not an excuse to give them a free-pass on the misery they've caused or purposely neglected to act upon.

-- Allen

[ronnykmarshall]

87. I'm not catholic

but I did have the honor of seeing Pope John Paul in 1987 and it was a very moving moment for me.

I pray that he is not in pain and thank him for his work for peace in the world.

[Loonman]

45. Another thread.....

Another thread where people cannot respect an honorable man because he happens to be the Pope, or handle a thread concerning religion.


Dem party is "home of tolerance" LOL ha ha ha.....what a crock!

[Spentastic]

46. Another thread

Where people tell people what to feel about stuff. That's pretty intolerant too.

[youngred]

49. And more responses

where people come in and disrupt the feelings of others over their personal beef for no fucking reason. No one's asking you to respect or like or even tolerate the Pope. What they are asking is that some people get some class and not say something that is deliberately insulting and uncalled for.

Just because you can say something doesn't mean you ought to

[Padraig18]

53. Thank you!

:hi:

[VelmaD]

54. So much for free speech

So it's perfectly acceptable for y'all to have a thread gushing about a man that many on the board do not like or admire...but it is not ok for people to post about the questionable behavior of this man just because it upsets you. Have you considered that the constant beatification of the Pope upsets us. That the constant cry of "anti-Catholic bigot" when we point out his public behavior that has hurt people might upset us. Does this seem a little out of whack to anyone else besides me?

That said, I do not hope he suffers needlessly. I just don't want to have to hear him lionized all the time while any attempt to bring a little perspective and blanace to the conversation is shouted down.

[youngred]

56. Please

John Paul has many many faults. I am the first to admit it. He and I disagree on a very large number of issues (gay and lesbian rights, women in the priesthood, priestly marriage, birth control etc etc), but coming in and being rude and disrepectful is completely unecessary. He has done a lot of wonderful and stupid things in his life. His legacy will be a strong man who stood for the common worker and opposed totalitarianism, whereas his other draconian positions are a product of his position.

The constant cry of Anti-Catholic bigot, that stems from the actual bigotry of many posters here towards catholicism for its stances on some issues and the fact that many rich Catholics vote republican based on one issue because that is the issue which the US chruch has decided to emphasize

[VelmaD]

60. I personally am not trying to intentionall offend...

I just think a lot of you see anti-Catholic bigotry where none is intended. Any comment in oposition to the Church gets flamed as anti-Catholic when most Catholics would agree that the Church has serious problems.

BTW, I find it interesting how you deflected blame off the Pope for the bad things he has done. "His other draconian positions are a product of his position". Spare me. If he had wanted to he could have changed Church doctrine on things like birth control and the place of women in the Church. He chose not to. Other Popes in the past have shown a willingness to try to bring the Church into the current century but this Pope did not. He had enormous power and popularity and he did not use it to help my gender one little bit. If he had really been devoted to ending suffering and privation in the porrer countries of the world he couldn't have picked a better starting point than advocating birth control and increased status for women, but he did not.

[LadeJarl]

61. Well said..

and well deserved.

Even beeing a man and totally not religious at all, I think this Pope has done more harm than good to the evolution of the catholic church than anyone prior to him, esp to the points you made. I'm sure it is possible to find some good things to say about him, but on all the big issues, he has failed to make himself known as modern pope. I would consider him to be the Bush of the Catholic Church

[VelmaD]

64. Thanks, but I don't know...

if I'd go quite that far. There have been worse Popes...worse by a lot. I just think this one had a golden opportunity and dropped the ball. There were parts of the bigger picture that he just missed because he was too hide-bound in the traditional misogyny of the Church hierarchy. *sigh*

I also wouldn't compare him to Bush. This Pope was definitely not an idiot. Misguided sometime. Misogynistic often. But compassionate sometimes as well. And definintely not dumb.

[youngred]

66. Bush of the catholic church?

Can't think of a single big issue for good?

Oh boy :eyes:

[youngred]

65. You try changing a billion member institution centuries old on a dime

see how far you get. he could have done more absolutely, but he's an arch-conservative and that's his opinions.

I don't see that when its not there, when people tell me on DU that all catholics should be fed to the lions then I would say that's a little anti-catholic bigotry. Some is more subtle than that, but not always.

I did not single you out as behaving poorly, but you said there was no poor behaviour here and there is unfortunately. Criticize fine, but be civil or find a different thread to do it in.

[VelmaD]

68. I'm still not seeing anything...

on this thread that even comes close to "feed 'em to the lions". I do see some legitimate complaints about this Pope, some from actual Catholics even. I have seen no sweeping generalizations about Catholics as a group on this thread, though I have seen some about anti-Catholics.

Frankly, your last statement concerns me and ties back to my original foray into this thread regarding free speech. I will post on what thread I like thank you very much. No one gets to start a thread around here on ANY topic and have the automatic expectation that no oposition will be allowed.

[youngred]

71. That was not what I said at all

I did not say it was so evident here. Review the thread. Some people laid some mild, but unecessary criticism. Some people said c'mon give somebody his due. A memorium thread or one that speculates on his iminent death is no place for some to cheer and scream good riddance. What good does that serve? What help does it do besides being rude and divisive? If you want to talk about the real crimes of the Catholic Church do it in another thread. You don't go to someone's deathbed and talk about what an asshole they were in front of friends and family.

This thread is mild, but elsewhere this is very common, in fact too common.

Stop thinking everyone's out to censor you and shut you down, no one is, just some are asking some rude posters to have some common decency

[VelmaD]

73. If this thread is mild...

then why the outcry about anti-Catholic bigotry?

No one here is cheering or screaming good riddance. If you post a memorium thread I guarantee that you will get nothing but sympathy and good manners from me and I will be all over anyone who behaves badly. (My momma taught me better.) But I don't see where a thread speculating on his passing is not an appropriate place to discuss his legacy both for good and ill.

[youngred]

75. there isn't?

I was explaining the position of people here because for many there is an anti-catholic bias, though it is not evident here. Some are not so well mannered as you. I think the fawning is unecessary and some criticism here is perfectly valid. you asked a why and I'm trying to explain

[Liberator_Rev]

82. "try changing a billion member institution centuries old"

Come on, YoungRed,
I've taken you seriously until now, but you're suggesting that this Pope can't be blamed for not moving the church forward because it's so hard to
"change a billion member institution centuries old on a dime" is just too much. He's succeeded in PREVENTING your "billion member institution centuries old" from entering the 20th, let alone the 21st century, and has done his best to make sure that the many bishops and cardinals he has appointed in his own image (not in Christ's image) will continue to keep the church from changing any time soon!

As for this other gem of yours,"when people tell me on DU that all catholics should be fed to the lions then I would say that's a little anti-catholic bigotry. Some is more subtle than that, but not always."
now I know why you go ballistic over my posts, because you see all those lions I never knew were there!

[youngred]

83. Nope, Wrong Again

I didn't say he couldn't have, or that it was impossible. I'm saying its not hard, and its counter to his beliefs.

and your last assertion is such total bullshit its not even worth responding to. If you thin that I'm that scared of you you're sadly deluded by your testimonials.

And cheers on not including a link to your site!

[nini]

98. Catholic Bashing is a favorite past time of some here.

it happens every time.. It turns into a battle of the extremes..Catholic haters against those of us here who are good, caring, non judgmental believers.

I try not to even look at these posts because of the wording used one cannot take the comments personally - though some keep assuring us 'it's not personal' - well it is.

I am tired of being told I cannot be intelligent for believing in a God or Christ or any teachings of the Church.

I agree to disagree with others on religion. I never push my beliefs on others and detest those that do.. I wish that some of those here who are so obsessed with bashing those like me would remember that there are actually people like me who would defend their rights to disagree and beating us up does no good for either side.

This whole issue is the only thing that frustrates the hell out of me about DU.. it's sad really.

[JNelson6563]

50. This saddens me

While I am not a believer in any religion I do think this Pope has done some good things in his life. One that I did not see mentioned but merits it is the apologies he has issued regarding some Church history.

I see some complaints regarding women and birth control issues. I hate to break it to them but IMO it is bible based stuff and those of the RCC perpetuating those doctrines are actually right in that regard--bible-based religion wise.

Take a look at poor Oman in Genesis. God struck him dead for "wasting" his sperm on the ground instead of impregnating his brother's wife.

Got a problem with subjection of women? Well my advice is to address the source of those teachings within Christianity (not just the RCC); the bible. It's not just those dreaded OT Christians either, anyone familiar with Paul's stuff will know that.

With all of that said, I wait with bated breath to see what is now in store for the RCC. Which direction will it go? How will it wield its influence? Should be interesting to say the least.

My condolences to those of you who admire this man and feel a sense of loss that is inevitable. In spite of his mortal imperfections I think there is much to admire.

Julie

[Crowdance]

63. The problem lies in the interpretation of the bible

and that is performed by the people involved. Many misogynist religious edicts which claim to be based on the Bible are, in reality, cultural manifestations. You can read more about it here: http://www.godswordtowomen.org/Lee_Grady.htm

We are obliged to point out poor behavior when we see it--and misogyny is very poor behavior, indeed. Religions set the pace for moral perceptions in our society; a church that promotes the poor treatment of women based on a faulty,perhaps self-serving, interpretation of the Bible are using a falsehood to promote faulty morality. And that faulty morality has an impact on all of us in this society.

Nobody gets off the hook if they're willingly promoting bad ideas--not even the revered.

[JNelson6563]

67. Really?

Ok, you stand by your view that the bible doesn't really put patriarchal view of things. I will stand by my view that it does.

In fact, I think the bible contains some of the most wretched writings known to man but hey, that's what I get for simply reading the words in front of me and not supplementing them with the writings that justify and "explain" them properly. I saw one "incorrect translation on the page you list, the rest were basically "explanations". The old well yess it DOES say this but it really means this....Oy!!

Out of curiousity, got any sites that properly explain the genocides and other heinous crimes in the bible that supposedly were ordered and/or condoned by God?

I mean a homicidal maniac of a God is a lot easier to stomach if he doesn't condone women being treated as 2nd class citizens. ;-)


Julie

[Crowdance]

70. J, I'm not DEFENDING the bible

I, personally, think if the Divine Being wanted us to live by a book, it would write it itself and attach it to our umbilical cords!

What I'm saying is that the Pope is responsible for his own misogyny--he made the decision to interpret the bible in that way. He could just as easily have adopted an interpretation that didn't result in oppression. The Bible can't be used as his excuse. Similarly, I think folks have interpreted the bible in ways that allow them to justify all kinds of nastiness--as you point out genocides, crimes, etc.

So, don't blame the book itself (heck, it's an innocent bunch of paper)--blame those who use it to justify their own bad actions.

[Wednesdays]

52. He's never been the same since he was shot...

Some say the same thing about Reagan...that he never really recovered from the assassination attempt. I hope he doesn't have to go through needless suffering...just as I pray that no one on earth has to go through any needless suffering.

[Rich Hunt]

58. one thing about this pope

I am an ex-Catholic. I simply no longer have belief, and I disagree with the "moral" teachings of the Church.

However, I respect this pope more than I respect about 95% of humanity for one reason and one reason alone :

He visited his would-be assassin in jail and forgave him.

It is one thing to take noble political stances - there are many people who do so but who remain petty, thoughtless human beings in their personal lives. Forgiving someone who has personally harmed you is the utmost in humility, understanding and grace. So is recognizing the humanity in a murderer. My disagreements with the pope have not prevented me from recognizing this.

I think the pope's detractors ought to ask themselves if they would do the same, because I think that many of them would not.

[Mairead]

90. "Forgiving someone who has harmed you is the utmost in humility"

Not to be cynical or anything, but it's good politics, too, wasn't it?

[incapsulated]

59. Meh.

You know how many Catholics have been waiting for this rather radical back-to-fundementals dictatorial Pope to die?

I was born and raised Catholic, and I'm no atheist now.

But this "mourning" over his passing is a little over the top for me. Yes, he spoke out against war. He also defended fascist regimes because he was so rabidly anti-communist. He sold out and did not protect the priests and nuns working for justice in latin america as traitors, possible "commies". He defended the abuse of women in Catholic countries as their own particular "tradition". I don't go after him on religious issues, he's the Pope, for Jebus sake. But on politics...that's another matter. And that doesn't even touch the outrageous coverup and excuses for the decades of child abuse and molestation that came straight from the top.

I'll bet you dollars to wafers that they replace him with an old guy who won't be around that long so they have a breather. This was an extrememly ideological regime.

[ronnykmarshall]

86. My prayers to John Paul.

I may not agree with him on many issues, but he stood up for peace before the war so he's in my heart.

God bless you, holy father.

[karlschneider]

93. I stick with my prediction: 10/16/03 (as posted a couple weeks ago)

(2003 c.e. to be precise)

[UTUSN]

94. So, We Can Hve John XXIII Liberal now? n/t

[youngred]

96. Not with the way JPII has been stacking the College of Cardinals

I think we'll have another ideological arch conservative. x(

[nemo137]

106. i wish.

i just hope the new pope doesn't undo all the good thigns that have happend relatively recently.

[jsw_81]

99. The Pope

Aging Pope Just Blessing Everything In Sight Say Concerned Handlers

[whirlygigspin]

100. I took this pic of him two weeks ago

http://www.pbase.com/image/21765659/original

[sujan]

101. be gone soon

I wont be crying thats for sure.

[youngred]

103. and the point of that was?

?

[kayleybeth]

107. I am not Catholic

but my prayers go out to Pope John Paul and his followers. Peace be with them.

Kayeleigh

[Loyal]

108. God bless ya,

Pope.

[ramblin_dave]

109. Pope quells death rumours

Pope John Paul II has been celebrating mass on the steps of St Peter's Basilica in Rome, looking well and alert - in contrast to reports last week that he was near to death.

Although hampered by the effects of Parkinson's disease, the Pontiff was able to lead the congregation in a canonisation service that is part of a month of events marking his 25th year as head of the Roman Catholic Church.

The BBC's Rome correspondent David Willey says that recent reports of the Pope's imminent demise, notably from two of the Vatican's own cardinals last week, have been premature - and that while the 83-year-old is frail he is determined to go on.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3165390.stm

[the_real_38]

110. Will they finally have a gay pope?

It's about time - and there's plenty of candidates in the American clergy.