Havok wrote:Does it even fucking matter? Has there ever been a new Pope that made such drastic changes so as to make anyone outside of Catholics even notice or care?
The one who started the Crusades probably had an impact.
Honestly, is there ever going to be a guy come in and say, "Hey guys, lets lay off gay people. God thinks they are A-OK." or "Contraceptives? Hell yeah." how about, "Let's get some more chicks in this gig." or even the most basic "If a child gets molested by one of our priests, we are going Inquisition on his ass."? Fucking of course not so who cares?
Probably, but I would think that "media friendly" might be a keyword for the next Pope. JPII was the Tom Baker of Popes; he was around forever and everyone liked him. Then apparently they selected Sylvester McCoy; crap but somewhat circumstantial problems. Now they need to find a David Tennant; someone who can make it into new markets.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"
- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist
"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
Man comparing the Pope to Doctor Who is fucking hilarious.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it. Blank Yellow (NSFW)
Actually, I can do more with the Ecclestone analogy:
Acknowledge a 20yr gap in production and just go: "Remember when we fought those daleks and wiped them out solved child abuse and allowed offenders to be prosecuted rather than hide them."
And then like 4 episodes in they suddenly have to deal with one last pedophile priest who fell through time has been hidden away by George Pell or somesuch.
Man if I knew how, I would totally make a Pope regenerating gif.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it. Blank Yellow (NSFW)
Well, his speeches on the impact of Catholicism on the New World were pretty abominable. That being said, he is also the only pope to not appoint a single European Cardinal and he was a great scholar. All in all, he could have been worse and he could have been better.
He also was quite infirm over the last few months - for example he was unable to move without assitance, mixed up speech pages etc. So that might be the truest reason there is.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------ My LPs
Havok wrote:Does it even fucking matter? Has there ever been a new Pope that made such drastic changes so as to make anyone outside of Catholics even notice or care?
Honestly, is there ever going to be a guy come in and say, "Hey guys, lets lay off gay people. God thinks they are A-OK." or "Contraceptives? Hell yeah." how about, "Let's get some more chicks in this gig." or even the most basic "If a child gets molested by one of our priests, we are going Inquisition on his ass."? Fucking of course not so who cares?
Albino Luciani, known liberal who reportedly said "yes" to at least two above, was elected Pope John Paul I in 1978. He is also known for his suspicious death after 33 days in office after announcing some of the proposed reforms in private, reforms totally reversed by Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Seeing he is only what, third most recent Pope, he surely wasn't too hard to look up before making such broad statements?
Havok wrote:Does it even fucking matter? Has there ever been a new Pope that made such drastic changes so as to make anyone outside of Catholics even notice or care?
Honestly, is there ever going to be a guy come in and say, "Hey guys, lets lay off gay people. God thinks they are A-OK." or "Contraceptives? Hell yeah." how about, "Let's get some more chicks in this gig." or even the most basic "If a child gets molested by one of our priests, we are going Inquisition on his ass."? Fucking of course not so who cares?
Cardinal Christoph Schonborn, Archbishop of Vienna is actually a very good prospect for the next Pope, this is a man who recently personally intervened to re-install an openly homosexual man to his parish council humiliating one of his own priests.
Hmmm....I wonder if Pope Rat's resignation has anything to do with this investigation coming to its conclusion. It would be hilarious if the Pope personally ran/received kickbacks from a gay prositution ring. Just like old times when they had massive orgies in the papal palace
fgalkin wrote: It would be hilarious if the Pope personally ran/received kickbacks from a gay prositution ring.
What could he even do with money? Redecorate? I found him deeply irritating politically, but despite the extravant luxury of the Vatican being the pope means being a virtual prisoner of ancient ritual and political necessity.
Havok wrote:Does it even fucking matter? Has there ever been a new Pope that made such drastic changes so as to make anyone outside of Catholics even notice or care?
Honestly, is there ever going to be a guy come in and say, "Hey guys, lets lay off gay people. God thinks they are A-OK." or "Contraceptives? Hell yeah." how about, "Let's get some more chicks in this gig." or even the most basic "If a child gets molested by one of our priests, we are going Inquisition on his ass."? Fucking of course not so who cares?
Albino Luciani, known liberal who reportedly said "yes" to at least two above, was elected Pope John Paul I in 1978. He is also known for his suspicious death after 33 days in office after announcing some of the proposed reforms in private, reforms totally reversed by Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Seeing he is only what, third most recent Pope, he surely wasn't too hard to look up before making such broad statements?
Hey you know why I DIDN'T have to look that up before making such broad statements? Because they were never enacted publicly so who cares? I talk about saying fuck it and moving to L.A. to be an actor about once a year in private. That doesn't mean it is going to happen.
Oh and P.S. They killed the last guy that mentioned those changes even in private you say? Hahaha my point stands.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it. Blank Yellow (NSFW)
Thanas wrote:Well, his speeches on the impact of Catholicism on the New World were pretty abominable. That being said, he is also the only pope to not appoint a single European Cardinal and he was a great scholar. All in all, he could have been worse and he could have been better.
He also was quite infirm over the last few months - for example he was unable to move without assitance, mixed up speech pages etc. So that might be the truest reason there is.
Can you clarify what was abominable about them, please? I'm kindof curious.
According to him, the native americans who had their culture exterminated and where millions perished from disease and slave labor had an "inner yearning for christianity" (which the Spanish fullfilled).
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------ My LPs
Stark wrote:Isn't that just the Catholic way of saying they weren't bad people?
On its own, perhaps. But the whole speech reeked of the "bring christianity to the wild savages" ideology. (Which crazy enough started out as a moderating influence on the Spanish but obviously became the mission to civilize all africans later on).
EDIT: And if you speak to the descendants of a culture which had its temples destroyed by the spanish it kinda takes the cake.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------ My LPs
Yeah but once you have Catholic disease, I don't think its possible to be theologically consistent and still accept that it was bad. You can say it was bad, but in order for people who never heard of Christ to not be bad people you have to backhandedly say they, deep down, wanted it.
Its a pretty tragic example of the doublethink required to not be hopelessly callous, really.
Stark wrote:Isn't that just the Catholic way of saying they weren't bad people?
On its own, perhaps. But the whole speech reeked of the "bring christianity to the wild savages" ideology. (Which crazy enough started out as a moderating influence on the Spanish but obviously became the mission to civilize all africans later on).
EDIT: And if you speak to the descendants of a culture which had its temples destroyed by the spanish it kinda takes the cake.
In a historical sense, its hopelessly callous, but the way I had read that at the time it came out was him dancing the theological dance necessary to reach the conclusion that they all ended up in Heaven whether they converted or not.
German media reports that the pope lost hearing in his left ear last year. Coupled with his other ailments, it really sounds like his health is the reason.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------ My LPs
Some interesting claims have been made, now, by La Repubblica and the Irish Times, somewhat reinforced by an earlier Corriere della Sera report. The Pope himself then confused matters with a reference to "internal divisions" suggesting the reports have a grain of truth, and his official spokesman refused to confirm or deny them.
Was the pope under the influence of a secretive "gay lobby" within the Vatican itself?
That's the claim put forth by Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica.
On Thursday, the popular paper published an article alleging that Pope Benedict XVI's decision to resign this month was partly prompted by a report that accused Vatican officials of being under the influence of several internal lobbies, reportedly including a gay one.
The Irish Times reports that Benedict commissioned the report after the Vatileaks scandal broke last year. The report, written by a trio of cardinals, concluded that "various lobbies within the Holy See were consistently breaking" the sixth and seventh commandments, "thou shalt not commit adultery" and "thou shalt not steal."
The paper also claims the report details information about sexual meetings organized by members of a gay underground network, who got together in venues across Rome and Vatican City.
(The sixth commandment referencing adultery has historically been tied to the Catholic Church's doctrine banning homosexuality.)
The nearly 300-page dossier would be passed on to pope's successor, the report added.
Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, released an arguably vague statement about the accusations.
"Neither the cardinals' commission nor I will make comments to confirm or deny the things that are said about this matter," he said, according to the Guardian. "Let each one assume his or her own responsibilities. We shall not be following up on the observations that are made about this."
And continuing after that with the Corriere della Sera report.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------ My LPs
Wait... how do they tie the Sixth Commandment to homosexuality?
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.
Hit it. Blank Yellow (NSFW)
The point is, regardless of theological minutiae, that gays cannot legally marry so each intercourse they have, no matter where and when, is by definition adultery in the eyes of the Roman Church.