Holy Father's latest message

r3nu4l

Well I was listening to BBC 4 this morning and they were discussing the comments made by the Pope yesterday.

The comments that saving the human condition is as important as saving the rainforest has been interpreted as an attack on homesexuality, transexuality and the idea that gender notions are not ingrained into the human species but are a product of societal pressure as well as an attack on gender theory.

See here for a better explanation of how it's being interpreted..

What do people think of the comments in regard to the Church's attitudes. Is this a hardening of attitude? Is it just reinforcing current teaching or is it paving the way for a call from the Church to reject the notion of gender theory entirely?

Phototoxin

in fairness he's just reiterating things. Its rare that they come out with anything that will make us think radically differently about something. Most of they time they just expand slightly or shift emphasis a little.

achtungbarry

r3nu4l wrote: »

Well I was listening to BBC 4 this morning and they were discussing the comments made by the Pope yesterday.

The comments that saving the human condition is as important as saving the rainforest has been interpreted as an attack on homesexuality, transexuality and the idea that gender notions are not ingrained into the human species but are a product of societal pressure as well as an attack on gender theory.

See here for a better explanation of how it's being interpreted..

What do people think of the comments in regard to the Church's attitudes. Is this a hardening of attitude? Is it just reinforcing current teaching or is it paving the way for a call from the Church to reject the notion of gender theory entirely?

No one wants to touch this one.....

Húrin

I think there's also a lot of anti-Catholic wishful thinking at play here, with armchair critics happy to casually twist the Pope's words in order to portray his church as more Neanderthal and intolerant than it is.

Nodin

Húrin wrote: »

I think there's also a lot of anti-Catholic wishful thinking at play here, with armchair critics happy to casually twist the Pope's words in order to portray his church as more Neanderthal and intolerant than it is.

No twisting nessecary here.

Benincasa

He did not mention the word "homosexual" once.

He did not mention the word "transexual" once.

The outrageously false news stories all originated from one journalist with a news agency and were spread by other journalists who were (1) too lazy or (2) too happy stirring controversy in order to actually correct the mistakes.

In essence what the Pope actually said (as opposed to what some sensationalists wish he said) was that men and women are different and that we must respect those differences; failure to do so is harmful for humanity. He also made a stirring cry for the protection of the environment. You'd imagine that might win him some media praise. But you'd have to live in a liberal society where mainstream journalists respect religion and treat it fairly for that to happen...

Run_to_da_hills

I would have been more concerned about the Christmas speech he made three years ago when he called for a "New World Order". :eek:

Pope Benedict calls for a "new world order" Sun, 25 Dec 2005 VATICAN CITY (Reuters) – Pope Benedict, in his first Christmas address, on Sunday urged humanity to unite against terrorism, poverty and environmental blight and called for a “new world order” to correct economic imbalances.

(4th paragraph from the end.)
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/urbi/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20051225_urbi_en.html

Húrin

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I would have been more concerned about the Christmas speech he made three years ago when he called for a "New World Order". :eek:

Pope Benedict calls for a "new world order" Sun, 25 Dec 2005 VATICAN CITY (Reuters) – Pope Benedict, in his first Christmas address, on Sunday urged humanity to unite against terrorism, poverty and environmental blight and called for a “new world order” to correct economic imbalances.

(4th paragraph from the end.)
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/urbi/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20051225_urbi_en.html

Leaders put that phrase in speeches to excite people like you.

CDfm

Nodin wrote: »

No twisting nessecary here.

So when do we rely on the BBC to report factually on Catholicism.

He didnt mention homosexuality or transexuality -yet nobody is criticiizing the BBCs biased reporting.Pure makey upey hatemongering.

Peace in the Palestine and condemning child abuse are thingswwhich he has also said outright this Christmas.

Run_to_da_hills

Húrin wrote: »

Leaders put that phrase in speeches to excite people like you.

The more the reason to be vigilant. Pope Benedict is nothing more than an ordinary man dressed up in a religious costume and I can see him no more different to any other predominant leader such as George Bush, Gordan Brown or Obama.

We have the "Charter of Compassion" in its infancy which will be used as an attempt to unite all the religions of the world together and no doubt this man will have some input into it. http://charterforcompassion.com/

The Mad Hatter

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The more the reason to be vigilant. Pope Benedict is nothing more than an ordinary man dressed up in a religious costume and I can see him no more different to any other predominant leader such as George Bush, Gordan Brown or Obama.

Doesn't Barack Obama deserve a forename?

Run_to_da_hills

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Doesn't Barack Obama deserve a forename?

I didn't give Benedict a forename. Real name Joseph Ratzinger.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Benincasa wrote: »

He did not mention the word "homosexual" once.

He did not mention the word "transexual" once.

The outrageously false news stories all originated from one journalist with a news agency and were spread by other journalists who were (1) too lazy or (2) too happy stirring controversy in order to actually correct the mistakes.

In essence what the Pope actually said (as opposed to what some sensationalists wish he said) was that men and women are different and that we must respect those differences; failure to do so is harmful for humanity. He also made a stirring cry for the protection of the environment. You'd imagine that might win him some media praise. But you'd have to live in a liberal society where mainstream journalists respect religion and treat it fairly for that to happen...

If it were a liberal society, the first thing to go would be religion.

CDfm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

If it were a liberal society, the first thing to go would be religion.

IkkyPoo2- just for clarity.

Lots of comments in the media are anti Catholic and come from say atheist or homosexual groups.

Is it too much too ask what you are? I hope thats not prying- but for clarity with reference to your comments.

It seems that comments are stereotypical in response to anything the Pope says- that irrespective of the content of a speech we get an attack on the Catholic position(on homosexuality -pun intended).Is this fair comment?

BTW -happy christmas and new year!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

CDfm wrote: »

IkkyPoo2- just for clarity.

Lots of comments in the media are anti Catholic and come from say atheist or homosexual groups.

Is it too much too ask what you are? I hope thats not prying- but for clarity with reference to your comments.

It seems that comments are stereotypical in response to anything the Pope says- that irrespective of the content of a speech we get an attack on the Catholic position(on homosexuality -pun intended).Is this fair comment?

BTW -happy christmas and new year!

Not really anything - more into spirituality than religion.

The Pope, as far as I'm concerned, is just another human being. One who's been appointed leader of his tribe, admittedly, but not a tribe I indentify with. I neither attack nor defend. Anyone, though, who puts themselves (or is placed) upon a pedestal, especially one based on morality, is always going to be attacked.

A liberal media, though, is not going to pay a lot of attention to any religious leader any some will see religion as dangerous, irrespective of what is preached.

Happy Chrimbo and new year to you as well!

Phototoxin

We have the "Charter of Compassion" in its infancy which will be used as an attempt to unite all the religions of the world together and no doubt this man will have some input into it. http://charterforcompassion.com/ __________________

I am seeing a deus ex 2 style unified relgion wiht 'her holyness' as the pope!

Cantab.

Phototoxin wrote: »

I am seeing a deus ex 2 style unified relgion wiht 'her holyness' as the pope!

Truly shocking.

Relativism at its very worst.

Is this the anti-Christ? :pac:

Otaku Girl

r3nu4l wrote: »

Well I was listening to BBC 4 this morning and they were discussing the comments made by the Pope yesterday.

The comments that saving the human condition is as important as saving the rainforest has been interpreted as an attack on homesexuality, transexuality and the idea that gender notions are not ingrained into the human species but are a product of societal pressure as well as an attack on gender theory.

See here for a better explanation of how it's being interpreted..

What do people think of the comments in regard to the Church's attitudes. Is this a hardening of attitude? Is it just reinforcing current teaching or is it paving the way for a call from the Church to reject the notion of gender theory entirely?

I'm not one of these hardcore anti religious people,I say this as a disclaimer to avoid being flamed. The evidence contradicts what the pope has said.It's hard enough for LGBT people as it is,without these sort of opinions.


Evidence Gender Identity IS Genetic!
Mon October 20, 2003

California researchers at UCLA have published important new finding in the Journal Molecular Brain Research which repudiates the concept that homosexuality and transgender identity are a choice.

"Our findings may help answer an important question -- why do we feel male or female?" Dr. Eric Vilain, a genetics professor at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine, said in a statement. "Sexual identity is rooted in every person's biology before birth and springs from a variation in our individual genome."

Since the 1970s, scientists have believed that estrogen and testosterone were completely responsible for sexual differentiation of brain structures. Recent evidence, however, indicates that hormones alone cannot explain everything about the differences between male and female brains.

The experiments were carried out on laboratory mice using two genetic testing methods. The researchers compared the production of genes in male and female brains in the embryonic mice which occurs in gestation long before the animals develop sex organs. The basic genetic principles are so fundamental to the process of sex differentiation that the results are believed to be directly applicable to human beings. The research team identified 54 genes produced in different amounts in male and female mouse brains, prior to hormonal influence. Eighteen of the genes were produced at higher levels in the male brains; 36 were produced at higher levels in the female brains.
http://www.hemingways.org/GIDinfo/research.htm

CDfm

Otaku Girl wrote: »

I'm not one of these hardcore anti religious people,I say this as a disclaimer to avoid being flamed. The evidence contradicts what the pope has said.It's hard enough for LGBT people as it is,without these sort of opinions.


Evidence Gender Identity IS Genetic!

Well its not hereditary then.

I dont get this argument ever.

The bible is the Catholic source book for morals etc and the Pope relies on that and gives his interpretations. Science is science. As individuals LGBT people have free will to accept it or not as a lifestyle choice.

Its accepted that judgement and forgiveness is Gods gig,function etc not the Popes. LGBT people should live life in accordance with their own consciences. No one can judge but God.

If you look at it historically the viking culture frowned on homosexuality and they werent Christian.

The Pope cant just choose to edit stuff out of the Bible - if its in -its in. He personally might feel its a bit harsh but he cant very well change it. He doesnt have the power of sub-editor and has to accept it too.

So the argument should be specifically against the Popes interpretation of particular scripture. Any other personalised argument just doesnt wash and is a bit of a nonsense.

Otaku Girl

CDfm wrote: »

If you look at it historically the viking culture frowned on homosexuality and they werent Christian.

The Pope cant just choose to edit stuff out of the Bible - if its in -its in. He personally might feel its a bit harsh but he cant very well change it. He doesnt have the power of sub-editor and has to accept it too.

So the argument should be specifically against the Popes interpretation of particular scripture. Any other personalised argument just doesnt wash and is a bit of a nonsense.

I think you make two very good points. Firstly about the Vikings frowning on homosexuality ect,it shows how outdated some Catholic social teachings are when you can compare it to the Viking culture.Secondly you make the interesting point that the Pope can't just erase what's written in the Bible. Well,there is a lot of pretty shocking stuff written in the old testament which has been interpreted in a more enligthned and humane way by various churches.Secondly,I think the various pontiffs re-interpret the Bible all the time. The Genesis creation story is no longer accepted as literally true,is the main example,the age of the Earth,Galleleo(sic?),evolution. And different sects of Christianity disagree all the time.Iconoclasm,the virgin birth,the status of the Saints and Mary.

To be fair the Catholic church has a fairly good record,recently, of re interpreting scripture to keep up with scientific evidence,but when it comes to anything to do with sex they seem to shy away. Well,I am an atheist.Not because of Catholic social teaching or biblical scripture,but because I see no reason to believe in God anymore than some Pagan God. Unlike some atheists,however,I don't have a problem with people believing in whatever they want,so long as it does'nt effect me.

AtomicHorror

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The more the reason to be vigilant. Pope Benedict is nothing more than an ordinary man dressed up in a religious costume and I can see him no more different to any other predominant leader such as George Bush, Gordan Brown or Obama.

We have the "Charter of Compassion" in its infancy which will be used as an attempt to unite all the religions of the world together and no doubt this man will have some input into it. http://charterforcompassion.com/

You're like a broken record RTDH. This thread is not about your conspiracy theory. It is not about the charter of whatever or even about the speech mentioning the new world order. It's about an entirely different speech that may or may not be an attack on sexual orientation. Discuss that with us or please just take the crazy to CT.

CDfm

Otaku Girl wrote: »

I think you make two very good points. Firstly about the Vikings frowning on homosexuality ect,it shows how outdated some Catholic social teachings are when you can compare it to the Viking culture.Secondly you make the interesting point that the Pope can't just erase what's written in the Bible. Well,there is a lot of pretty shocking stuff written in the old testament which has been interpreted in a more enligthned and humane way by various churches.

Someone I think it was Dades suggested I read around meme theory and memetics and its very interesting to look at culture and society that way. It takes away some of the misconceptions of the power of the church etc.

Secondly,I think the various pontiffs re-interpret the Bible all the time. The Genesis creation story is no longer accepted as literally true,is the main example,the age of the Earth,Galleleo(sic?),evolution. And different sects of Christianity disagree all the time.Iconoclasm,the virgin birth,the status of the Saints and Mary.

Im Catholic BTW and you are right. Popes can discuss matters but decisions and interpretations take decades or centuries unlike political discussions. You need to take that into account.

Popes are only infallable when the speak ex cathedra and which is rare. They are reputed not to do their own shopping,know nothing about cars and cant be relied on to get their own breakfast.

To be fair the Catholic church has a fairly good record,recently, of re interpreting scripture to keep up with scientific evidence,but when it comes to anything to do with sex they seem to shy away.

The Catholic Church does not reject science and I was taught abot evolution by a priest.They dont do the sex think well- its academic:)

Well,I am an atheist.Not because of Catholic social teaching or biblical scripture,but because I see no reason to believe in God anymore than some Pagan God. Unlike some atheists,however,I don't have a problem with people believing in whatever they want,so long as it does'nt effect me.

The over riding principles are that only God can judge -infinite wisdom and mercy etc -not man.

"Render to Caesar" as Christ said is not popular with some Christians or LGBT people -there is a difference between the secular and the spiritual.

Perhaps both camps should lighten up and just accept that they share the same planet (belief in God being optional) and should just accept that they will disagree on some issues.

BY the way I was really confused by the outcry over that particular speech because it ddidnt mention gays or lesbians but the rainforest. LOts of laughs at this extract though -

Rev Sharon Ferguson, chief executive of Britain's Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, described the Pope's remarks as "totally irresponsible and unacceptable".

"When you have religious leaders like that making that sort of statement then followers feel they are justified in behaving in an aggressive and violent way," she said.

I dont know who she is but she is with the competition that all started with Martin Luther .Henry VIII and all that. It should surprise no-one that her church have a long anti-catholic history. A bit of a self publicist I think.

Mickeroo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

If it were a liberal society, the first thing to go would be religion.

That sentence kinda contradicts the word 'Liberal' in my book.

wolfsbane

Mickeroo wrote: »

That sentence kinda contradicts the word 'Liberal' in my book.

So you don't use the Newspeak Dictionary then?