Habemus Papam...

[Top Gun]

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of Germany was elected Pope Benedict XVI. From what little I've heard so far, he seems to be very much in line with John Paul II, having been appointed by him as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; this is a very favorable attribute for me personally. I'm amazed that the College of Cardinals chose him so swiftly; as far as I know, this was only their fourth or fifth ballot. I don't think many people were expecting that. I pray that God will give him the strength and wisdom to lead the Church into the twenty-first century.

[CDN_Merlin]

He was rumoured to be the best choice.

[Flabby Chick]

Rumoured to be the wrong choice as well.

[TheCops]

as far as i could tell he was using a shure SM58... great stage mics.

[Lothar]

FC, what about him makes him the wrong choice to lead the Roman Catholic church?

Forgive my cynicism, but I know there are many who wish the RCC would just go away, and to them, the only "right choice" is someone who'd weaken it (either politically, or theologically.) Is that where you're coming from?

[Gooberman]

heh, I doubt it. Many felt that John Paul was too conservative, especially Catholic femanists, and from what I hear this pope is pretty lock step and key in the direction John Paul was taking the Church.

[Top Wop]

Viva il Papa. He is a very excellent choice and he will take the church in the direction where it needs to go and not what a progressive few thinks it should go. I loved his sermon about the dangers or reletavism and im sure he will do a great job.

Lothar: RCC?

[Gooberman]

Roman Catholic Church

[El Ka Bong]

BaaaaaH ! BaaaHHHHh .. Sheep !

[Top Gun]

BaaaaaH ! BaaaHHHHh .. Sheep !

Real cute. Find some other thread to spam.

I'm in full agreement with you, Top Wop.

[woodchip]

The downside of the new pope...is his age. At 76 it won't be long before the church is looking for yet another leader. That ought to give the libs some hope.

[Gooberman]

Yes Woodchip, Hilary for Pope in 2012!

[Nightshade]

He's the first nazi pope. He was in the nazi youth in WWII.

heh

[Grendel]

Yeah, right He has connections to Opus Dei tho..

[woodchip]

No Goob, not like that. The new pope is as conservative as the pope prior. Some liberals would like a less conservative pope. Unlike Pope John Paul who was elected while still in his mid fifties, the new hun pope may not be around too long.

[Top Wop]

He's the first nazi pope. He was in the nazi youth in WWII.

heh

If you have studied your history, you would have realized that the Nazi Youth was compulsory to all German citizens. He even risked his life to escape Naziasm and became a POW to the Americans. Your troll-like attempt to draw a link to anti-semetism is stupid at best.

In regards to liberal vs conservatism in the church, such a concept should not exist in the first place. The church is not a democracy and Christ's teachings does not change depending on what one or a society thinks. If it was otherwise, where would you go if what they taught changed from time to time? There would be no constant and it would be quite confusing! A foundation does not move. If you do not agree with one or a few teachings of the Church then you are not a Catholic. Hey, no one said that following Catholicism would be easy.

[Lothar]

One reason they selected an older pope is that they didn't want another "guy in power for 30 years" scenario like with JP2. They actually *want* to be selecting a new pope in another decade or so.

[Top Gun]

In regards to liberal vs conservatism in the church, such a concept should not exist in the first place. The church is not a democracy and Christ's teachings does not change depending on what one or a society thinks. If it was otherwise, where would you go if what they taught changed from time to time? There would be no constant and it would be quite confusing! A foundation does not move. If you do not agree with one or a few teachings of the Church then you are not a Catholic. Hey, no one said that following Catholicism would be easy.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm sick and tired of people on the news complaining that John Paul II/Ratzinger are "too conservative" on social issues. That's "pseudo-Catholicese" for, "I don't feel like following what the Church teaches, so I'm just going to make my own decisions." People who contradict the Church's moral doctrines are not true Catholics. For example, the group that calls themselves "Catholics for a free choice" and supports abortion. Hate to tell you, but by supporting abortion, you've for all intents and purposes excommunicated yourselves. Christ himself said that following him would be extremely difficult; it seems like many people today, especially in the United States, want the easy way out and want the Church's teachings to reflect their laziness. Guess what: it won't, and shouldn't, change.

Lothar, another reason for the selection of an "interim" pope is to allow some time to look at the effects of John Paul II's long papacy on the global Church and to continue watching the areas of fastest growth, which are mostly in third world countries. It wouldn't surprise me if the next pope would hail from one of these areas of the world.

[Jeff250]

The downside of the new pope...is his age. At 76 it won't be long before the church is looking for yet another leader. That ought to give the libs some hope.

He's actually 78.

http://apnews.myway.com//article/200504 ... PV1G2.html

[Avder]

I was actually a little sad the conclave took so long...I was gonna entertain my self by laughing every time cnn went "OMGS!! BLACK SMOEK!!! OH NOES!!"

[TheCops]

In regards to liberal vs conservatism in the church, such a concept should not exist in the first place. The church is not a democracy and Christ's teachings does not change depending on what one or a society thinks. If it was otherwise, where would you go if what they taught changed from time to time? There would be no constant and it would be quite confusing! A foundation does not move. If you do not agree with one or a few teachings of the Church then you are not a Catholic. Hey, no one said that following Catholicism would be easy.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm sick and tired of people on the news complaining that John Paul II/Ratzinger are "too conservative" on social issues. That's "pseudo-Catholicese" for, "I don't feel like following what the Church teaches, so I'm just going to make my own decisions." People who contradict the Church's moral doctrines are not true Catholics.

I was baptized Catholic so don't rail me. I just want an accountants perspective...

I keep reading that Benedict XVI is the herder of 1.1 billion people. If, as you claim, there are so many 'Non-Catholics" what's the real number?

[Gooberman]

couldn't have said it better myself. I'm sick and tired of people on the news complaining that John Paul II/Ratzinger are "too conservative" on social issues. That's "pseudo-Catholicese" for, "I don't feel like following what the Church teaches, so I'm just going to make my own decisions."

Um, no. Take female deacons for example, show me where in the Bible it says they can't be. Show me where the Catholic Church has laid out an argument against them.

Then why don't we have them allready?

This is the liberal/conservative type of issue that people are talking about within the realm of the RCC, having an opposing viewpoint does not make you a pseudo-Catholicese.

[CUDA]

Um, no. Take female deacons for example, show me where in the Bible it says they can't be. Show me where the Catholic Church has laid out an argument against them.

NIV Version

1 Timothy 3
Overseers and Deacons

8Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

11In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

12A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus


Amplified Bible

1 Timothy 3

12Let deacons be the husbands of but one wife, and let them manage [their] children and their own households well.



King James

1 Timothy 3

Qualifications of Deacons
8Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, 9holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience. 10But let these also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons, being found blameless. 11Likewise, their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. 12Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a good standing and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.


Sorry Goob your wrong women are not to be deacons in the church it is QUITE clear in the scriptures. I can pull up more translations if you like

[Gooberman]

Then why did the early Church allow them?

There is no Greek word that specifically means "wives," it is debatable wether or not 11 means women deacons or wives of men deacons, you chose the translation that best makes your case.

Even John Paul II, and Ratzinger as a Cardnial said that the door is still open, that the debate still needs to take place on this issue, "quite clear" is quite wrong.

[Flabby Chick]

Is that where you're coming from?

Nope. I think he'll make a bad leader of an old boys club, but i'll write more later when i finish my daily toil.

[CUDA]

it says what it says Goob, every translation says the same thing, you asked me to show you in the Bible where is says women cannot be deacon's, I did so. now you come up with there is no greek word that "specifically" means wives. then what does if mean? implied wives?, so whats the next step. when you ask us to point out something else in the Bible and we do. do you say well thats not what it meant?

1 Timothy

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearingâ??if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

I dont always like what the Bible tells me I need to do, but just as I tell my children, there are rules in life no matter what you do, and if I choose to follow Christ's teaching then I need to follow those requierments. NOT make up my own because I dont like what they say, or say well thats not what he meant and make up my own Scriptures

[Gooberman]

Again, its not clearly in the Bible to the point where no dessention can be formed. This was my responce to Top. I've been out of the Church for several years now, I did remember the debate but didn't remember that quote.

The dessention has existed over this issue for quite some time, its not a new topic that is clearly cut, it is still being studied (pigeon holed?). You have your translation, but it is that translation that is in debate. The Bible does not say "women can't be deacons," (which is what I asked for) it is debateable that it says that the deacons have to be men (especially since we know that they havn't always been). It's the "In the same way," that have lead many to question the translation, "In the same way" is more nessesary if you then substitute "deaconess", then it is when you use the word wives. Again, the entire point is that dessention does exist, and there is such a thing as a liberal and conservative pope and Catholics.

"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."

I know no Catholics that would refuse to take a class from a female professor. Interpretation, is real. Perhaps the Death Penalty is a better example, Catholics are suppose to be against it, I know many who arn't. Does that make them psuedoCatholics?

[Top Gun]

Gooberman, I'll try to get into the whole women deacons idea tomorrow, but I can at least respond to the last part of your post. The Church's official stance on the death penalty is that, under certain circumstances, it can be viewed as a necessary action for the protection of society. Whether or not the majority of capital cases in the US should be viewed in this fashion is a matter of opinion. As such, a Catholic who feels that the death penalty is a legitimate form of punishment is not going against Church doctrine.

That being said, there is a clear emphasis toward the preservation of life when at all possible. Pope John Paul II himself felt that the death penalty was immoral. So, even though the Catholics who support the death penalty are not "pseudo" in the definition I was using above, they may be in various levels of discord of the opinion of many Church leaders.

As for myself, I was once pretty much a death penalty supporter, but over time, I have reconsidered this position; at present, I'm still trying to work it out for myself.

[snoopy]

Ultimately, I think this is the point: The Catholic church has a given official stance on a lot of different things. People who claim to be Catholics, and lobby as such for something that the Catholic church officially disagrees with misrepresent the Catholic church. Any opinionated person out there can say that Benedict XVI is this or that, but obviously they are stating an opinion other that which the Catholic church officially has. If they claim to be Catholics and don't like an official position that the church has, they should move to get a hearing with the leaders and try to get it changed, or part company with the church and go find another group that more nearly agrees with their opinions.

[Flabby Chick]

FC, what about him makes him the wrong choice to lead the Roman Catholic church?

He has to unify his people. The ever increasing liberalism of the Europeans and the conservatism of the Africans is going to fragmentate the religion leaving it farcical. All his statements leading up to being pope show that he's pretty incapable of bringing these two groups; as well as others, together.

He has to accept other faiths. Once again leading up to being pope he's put his name to documentation that Catholicism is the one true faith. Not very tactful.

He's branded rock n Roll an instrument of the devil for goodness sake.

Now i'm talking about him as a leader of the RCC, and how this man will affect-as a leader- his people. I'm not talking about the religion of Catholicism which is quite seperate. So don't y'all get yer cassocks in a twist.

I also think he's got really beady eyes.

[woodchip]

I also think he's got really beady eyes.

Funny FC, I thought something similar. He has the look of a fanatic with a insipid smile.

[CDN_Merlin]

1 Timothy

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearingâ??if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

I'm not religious in any sense but I was raised Catholic. I just have a question. Is this quote taken directly from the Bible?

[CUDA]

1 Timothy

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearingâ??if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

I'm not religious in any sense but I was raised Catholic. I just have a question. Is this quote taken directly from the Bible?

yes Merlin,

1 Timothy 2:11 NIV Version
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?bo ... version=31

King James Version

9In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

10But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.


New American Standard

Women Instructed
9Likewise, I want (U)women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments,
10but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.

11(V)A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.

12(W)But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.

13(X)For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but (Y)the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

15But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in (Z)faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

[TheCops]

Gee, I can't imagine why a woman (read: human being) would have a gripe about being totally submissive to someone based on their genitals.

[Top Wop]

This is the liberal/conservative type of issue that people are talking about within the realm of the RCC, having an opposing viewpoint does not make you a pseudo-Catholicese.

Yes, it does. An opposing viewpoint is opposing the teachings of the Church. Teachings do not change. Truth can be clarified, doctrine can be expanded to clarify or to make more holy, but they do not CHANGE. To not accept a few or all of the teachings does not make you a Catholic. You are something else. Thats why liberal vs conservative in the church does not make any sense at all. If you do not agree, then stop calling yourself a Catholic and move on, but dont try to bastardize an institution because you want to shape it according to your own personal viewpoint. You have to adapt to the church, and not the other way around. You yourself have been out of the church for several years so why do you care, or better yet, what do you know at all?

[Flabby Chick]

Top. As society changes shouldn't a religion change, or at least try to understand/accomodate the changes? If not, wouldn't the religion (or body of worship if you will) cease to become relevent.

[CDN_Merlin]

1 Timothy

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearingâ??if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

I'm not religious in any sense but I was raised Catholic. I just have a question. Is this quote taken directly from the Bible?

yes Merlin,

1 Timothy 2:11 NIV Version
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?bo ... version=31

King James Version

9In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

10But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.


New American Standard

Women Instructed
9Likewise, I want (U)women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments,
10but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.

11(V)A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.

12(W)But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.

13(X)For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but (Y)the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

15But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in (Z)faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

Wow, I'm freaking out here. Why in the world would ANYONE with any amount of self-worth want to believe in this crap(sorry if this offends some). I mean, come on, this is bascially saying that women have no rights, are not persons and should be slaves to men. It hasn't even been a century since women have had the right to vote and people still want to live like we're in the 1st century?

Ok, enough ranting, going back to studying for finals.

[Vander]

With due respect to any Catholics in the house, isn't the new pope scary looking? He's got a serious Zell Miller/Emperor Palpatine vibe going.

[CUDA]

Ephesians 5:28 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society


In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.

if you love your wife are you going to treat her like a slave? my point was that in a family there must be a heiarchy, and the man is generally considered the head of the household the same is so in the church

[bash]

Hmm... scarey... nazi... bent on world domination... Seems like a vaguely familiar allegation but I just can't put my finger on where I've heard it before.