His Eminence, The Pope.

[Trackdayguy]

Age old objection really. Nonetheless in vogue for sure.

Say I concede your point. That the entire leadership of the RC is rotten to the core. When people defend the RC, what exactly do you think they are defending? The rottenness?

Hear - hear. People defend things they get value from. So if you speak out against any system and people listening to your complaints are getting value and self worth from the system your criticizing they become offended as its perceived as an attack on them. They wont admit it of course, but that's the psychology behind it.

In the end those who question its legitimacy and morality and are asking a different question then those who defend it because they get worth from being in. Never the 2 shall meet

 

[metis]

Wow. Actually I left institutional religion 25 years ago.

Let me just mention that Jesus started a church (congregation), appointed the Twelve to run it-- warts and all-- and that Jesus and the Twelve commanded that one meet in communion with a local congregation but as "one body" in conjunction with other local churches. The Church was never intended to be a "do your own thing" thingy, which is also made quite clear in Paul's letters.

My suggestion is to find a local church of which ever denomination that you may prefer, while at the same time realizing that there is not likely to be any denomination that you 100% agree with. Needless to say, there's a lot more to being in assembly with others than just praying, singing hymns, and listening to sermons.

 

[metis]

Hear - hear. People defend things they get value from. So if you speak out against any system and people listening to your complaints are getting value and self worth from the system your criticizing they become offended as its perceived as an attack on them. They wont admit it of course, but that's the psychology behind it.

In the end those who question its legitimacy and morality and are asking a different question then those who defend it because they get worth from being in. Never the 2 shall meet

It seems to me that the above is just called "projection".

OTOH, there are quite a few here at RF that actually do believe that basic morals count regardless as to whether it pertains to or defends their own faith, or lack thereof.

 

[Trackdayguy]

As I understand it the word church means 'the called out people" so if we are talking about being part of the church then one cant join it, one is born into it through baptism. The institutional church is a system of belief, its a structure and has a life force all of its own. It has little to do with people gathering together.

As I said Im happy for you to believe whatever you want. If your happy then Im happy for you, whether I agree is irrelevant. We are clearly asking 2 different questions.

 

[Trackdayguy]

It seems to me that the above is just called "projection".

OTOH, there are quite a few here at RF that actually do believe that basic morals count regardless as to whether it pertains to or defends their own faith, or lack thereof.

I would agree on your comments regarding morals. I thought this post was about the Pope. I would have thought that the Catholic church would be last group to be preaching morals.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I was brought up in a fundamentalist Protestant church that taught the kind of hatred-filled rhetoric and bigotry that I have seen here with some people. I was taught that the pope was the anti-Christ; that Catholics were basically ignorant people who could only blindly follow what the pope and the church taught; that they made up all sorts of teachings that are not found in the Bible; etc. I remember being told to read an anti-Catholic book recommended by the pastor, which I did while still in high school.

And my parents chimed in on this as well, with my own father telling me that if he ever heard that I even visited a Catholic church that he'd kick my "a**". I was also taught that Jews were ignorant since they didn't believe that Jesus was "the messiah", and also that they were corrupt and money-hungry.

Now, imagine my parents' reaction when I decided to marry a very devout Italian Catholic woman-- the same very devout Catholic woman that I have been married to for 51 years now. I heard through my sister that they thought I was so stupid to marry her, and my own father pretty much avoided us when visiting them, sometimes even finding an excuse to leave to work in the garage or whatever. My mother, otoh, was much more reserved.

But something changed all that. Within months, they fell in love with my wife as well since she is so compassionate and loving, plus she doesn't go around bad-mouthing people. When our kids went through their baptism and confirmation services, they came and saw that it's actually a church we go to, not some sort of hell-hole.

Not only did their anti-Catholic bigotry come to an end, so did their anti-Jewish bigotry. When I started going to synagogue and mosque and Hindu services, they didn't object one bit. Matter of fact, not too long before my mother passed away from cancer 25 years ago, she said to me "You sure do get around", and that was said in a complimentary manner that she never would have said a few decades earlier.

Now, maybe some here can understand why my emotions get ramped up when I see any denomination or religion being attacked, and some here at RF who have been around here for several years know that I have responded to attacks on other religions and on many occasions.

In closing, my "theology" is so very liberal that I can walk into any religious service and pretty much feel at home-- with one exception. That exception are those religious institutions that take the "my way or the highway" approach. Yes, they have the full right to having that opinion, including teaching it as such, but I also have the full right of having the opinion of feeling that this is not for me, thus preferring not to to their services if I can avoid them.

shalom

I don't personally think that the Catholic Church is intrinsically worse than other religions; I think that because of history and its structure - and its sheer size - more than its doctrine, it ends up getting implicated in a lot of religious abuses. My criticisms of the Church are mainly about criticisms of letting any religious group get special power or treatment. I don't think for a second that if a Baptist denomination - or a Buddhist group, or any other sect - would behave any better if they somehow got the sort of power and influence that the Catholic Church has.

When I say that I don't want to pay for Catholic schools with my tax dollars, it's because I don't want to pay for any religious schools... but right now only happen to be paying for Catholic ones.

When I say that Catholic dioceses shouldn't have been able to take over investigations from the police of criminal acts by its priests, it's because I think that no organization should be able to do that.

 

[JJ50]

Can anyone please let me know the job description for the role of the Pope.

The ability to turn a blind eye where paedophile priests are concerned.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If the catholic church for example liquidated its property assets across the world and distributed the wealth to all people it would make millionaires of every person on the planet. So as you can probably gather Im not a big fan of listening to people who are defending a system that's rotten to the core.

Quick math:

The combined GDP of the entire planet works out to about $16,100 a year. To have $1 million for every person, the Catholic Church would have to have a store of wealth work about 60 times more than the entire economic output of the planet in a given year. Do you think this is a reasonable assumption?

Out of curiosity: what's the net worth of your church/religious organization/etc.? How many people could it feed if it sold off its assets?

 

[Trackdayguy]

Stopped going to church 30 years ago. Im not talking about GDP Im talking about selling assets.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Stopped going to church 30 years ago. Im not talking about GDP Im talking about selling assets.

To have assets that could be sold, the Church would have to acquire them in the first place and then hold onto them. You're suggesting that when we subtract everything the Church has spent or given away from everything it's acquired, it's managed to hold onto more wealth than the entire planet would produce in more than 60 years.

Short version: you made up a claim that's not only unjustified; it's obviously false.

 

[Trackdayguy]

To have assets that could be sold, the Church would have to acquire them in the first place and then hold onto them. You're suggesting that when we subtract everything the Church has spent or given away from everything it's acquired, it's managed to hold onto more wealth than the entire planet would produce in more than 60 years.

Short version: you made up a claim that's not only unjustified; it's obviously false.

Buildings
Land
Stocks
Cash
Investments
Equipment
Vatican City

And you dont think that would add up to enough

 

[Trackdayguy]

The catholic church like all the other main denominations have become a life unto themselves, that's why they need faithful supporters to keep them going. In the end the people serve the system, heaven forbid we wouldn't want it to collapse.

Wasn't Jesus quoted as saying the Temple was going to crash, it seems that religious leaders have always been the same, seeking to protect the seat of power. Jesus had no time for it, nor would he if he was here today. Can you imagine for 1 second that he would have any interest in meeting the Pope and playing their religious games? not for s second.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Buildings
Land
Stocks
Cash
Investments
Equipment
Vatican City

And you dont think that would add up to enough

Not to $7.6 quadrillion dollars, no. Of course not.

Edit: FYI - How Much Wealth Does the Vatican Control?

 

[Trackdayguy]

Not to $7.6 quadrillion dollars, no. Of course not.

I think they'd be disappointed that you've under valued their assets. I fear you may have missed the point of my comments.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think they'd be disappointed that you've under valued their assets.

Let's have a look at that:

In other words, estimates are all over the place, and contemporary reporting on this subject is rather slim. Another dimension to this is the sheer value of all of the priceless works of art housed in Vatican City. Estimating the value of all of this in terms of dollars is impossible, but looking at just one well-known prize, the Sistine Chapel, offers a look at how difficult it is to appraise all of this. Estimates range from $400 billion all the way up to $2 trillion for just this one masterpiece.

[...]

The Vatican’s cashflow is in the hundreds of millions a year, individual holdings in the Vatican Bank total perhaps $15 billion, property held by the Vatican may be worth over a billion dollars, and the Church owns the largest store of the world’s most priceless art.

How Much Wealth Does the Vatican Control?

So let's be generous and say $2 trillion for the Sistene Chapel, $15 billon for Vatican Bank assets, $1 billion for property, and assume $1 billion in the chequing account to cover everyday expenses. That's $2.017 trillion... $7.598 quadrillion short of the $7.6 quadrillion you claim they have.

I get the sense that you just don't appreciate the size of the numbers involved here.

I fear you may have missed the point of my comments.

The point you're trying to draw from falsehoods? Quite possibly... and I'm fine with that. If it was a point worth making, you could back it up with actual facts.

 

[Trackdayguy]

Yes you did. When the Bible talks about a mountains or foreskins, is that fact or a story trying to communicate a concept. Your Greek mind has eliminated you from seeing.

I guess your argument would be, how many foreskins, surely their weren't enough people on the planet at that time to make a mountain of foreskins, so it cant be true.

It appears that your struggling to read between the lines, not everything in life fits in the true of false box

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes you did. When the Bible talks about a mountains or foreskins, is that fact or a story trying to communicate a concept. Your Greek mind has eliminated you from seeing.

Not my "Greek mind" (whatever that's supposed to mean); your failure to communicate effectively.

I guess your argument would be, how many foreskins, surely their weren't enough people on the planet at that time to make a mountain of foreskins, so it cant be true.

If you're able to predict the future to say how I'd respond to arguments you haven't even made, then you don't need me for this conversation - just argue against the fantasy version of me that you've invented.

It appears that your struggling to read between the lines, not everything in life fits in the true of false box

Maybe not everything, but the claim that the Catholic Church has $7.6 quadrillion dollars in wealth certainly fits into the "false" box.

 

[Trackdayguy]

WOW

 

[metis]

I would have thought that the Catholic church would be last group to be preaching morals.

Just another bigoted slam, so I don't think you should be harping on anyone's lack of morals.

In my junior year during my undergrad years, I took two Catholic theology classes even though I wasn't Catholic, and the latter was entitled "Catholic Moral Theology", taught by a Jesuit priest that I believe is one of the brightest people I've ever met. Did I convert to Catholicism? No.

And to show how bigotry seems to also serve as a set of blinders for you, here's a link that can change your utter ignorance and/or dishonesty on the subject: Catechism of the Catholic Church

My hard copy is over 700 pages of fine print, and a great deal of the Catechism deal with issues of morality of one type or another. Matter of fact, the RCC is often accused of being too dogmatic.

Also, here's how the mass itself plays out in general every Sunday: Order of Mass Also, in most Catholic churches, there's mass on most weekdays as well.

Instead of spouting bigoted ignorance, why not actually visit a Catholic church at attend mass? What harm is there in doing that?

 

[metis]

I don't personally think that the Catholic Church is intrinsically worse than other religions; I think that because of history and its structure - and its sheer size - more than its doctrine, it ends up getting implicated in a lot of religious abuses. My criticisms of the Church are mainly about criticisms of letting any religious group get special power or treatment. I don't think for a second that if a Baptist denomination - or a Buddhist group, or any other sect - would behave any better if they somehow got the sort of power and influence that the Catholic Church has.

When I say that I don't want to pay for Catholic schools with my tax dollars, it's because I don't want to pay for any religious schools... but right now only happen to be paying for Catholic ones.

When I say that Catholic dioceses shouldn't have been able to take over investigations from the police of criminal acts by its priests, it's because I think that no organization should be able to do that.

There's nothing in the above that I disagree with.