Should the Pope visit Ireland, north and south, to improve relations?

Wolfe Tone

I was watching some UTV coverage yesterday and one of the heads they had on giving analysis(name escapes me) said that the visit of the Brit Queen would do wonders to improve cross community relations in the north. He went on to say that the next logical step would be for the Pope to visit Ireland, and unlike when Pope John Paul visited, he should cross the border and be received in the north.

Opinions? I'm in two minds myself.

It would be a great sign that the institutionalized discrimination and hatred of the past was on the way out.

But then you have the elephant in the room which makes me think that a visit from the pope shouldn't happen.

orourkeda

No.

Why preach to the converted

sensibleken

no. their time is over

trad

The Queen, Obamha, the Pope Lets just invite the all the world leaders here for one big party.

RachaelVO

Ehhh, NO!!!

I can't see how it would improve north south relations in anyway shape or form. Not only that, but given the catholic churches record in relation to children and their care in this country, both north and south of the border he would have some neck on him. Until they release all the records of those scumbag priests who were moved around because they were sexually abusing kids, he has no business or right to come here!!!!

ancapailldorcha

Only if we don't spend a cent on security.

Dravokivich

He should visit if he want's to. I see no reason to not allow it. Weither or not it will "improve relations," depends on who acknowledges him in a positive manner for what he represents.

In saying that, his presence could backfire as well with hostile Unionists as much as the Queens presence has with hostile Republicans / Nationalists here.

Biggins

No. as others have said, won't change a thing. In fact I would say it would dig up more protests, etc.
Whats gonna change if he stood on our soil versus his own in Rome?
Is his out of date thinking going to suddenly change?
Is his methods going to change?
Is he going to say something different than from the crap he's been rabbiting off before?

No, nothing is going to change.
There should be a sign at every entrance to Ireland for him saying "Keep Away".

ejmaztec

He's probably as popular with the majority in the North as he is with the majority down here, so he should give it a miss.

Wolfe Tone

RachaelVO wrote: »

Ehhh, NO!!!

I can't see how it would improve north south relations in anyway shape or form. Not only that, but given the catholic churches record in relation to children and their care in this country, both north and south of the border he would have some neck on him. Until they release all the records of those scumbag priests who were moved around because they were sexually abusing kids, he has no business or right to come here!!!!

For one if he was received in the north it would show that sectarianism was a thing of the past and that both communities are now working together respectfully. I think it could be very healing.

But then again you have the abuse scandal. What people need to do is weigh up the positives and negatives of the visit much like the Queens. Its very similar actually because the relationship has not always been good and the church has committed terrible acts on this island. Should we be bound by them?


I have not come to a conclusion myself, my gut feeling says no, but my head says it may be good. I can't decide. (I really should have put "I can't decide" as a third option)

Laois_Man

I think the next pope will probably come here - but not Benadict XVI. He's not able for it - the only relatively long journey he's made was to the UK - I never understood why that trip was more important. He won't come here...and shouldn't...and I think you'd probably see a much greater number of protesters to that visit than what we've seen this week.

bad2dabone

I don't want that evil old relic coming here.

Rabidlamb

I don't care if he dances a jig across the border.
A leader of grown ups with the same collective imaginary friend will never bother me.
No one cares anymore.

sdanseo

No

No problem with it myself. I think a visit of that nature (remember he is a head of state) can only be a good thing. An awful lot of people on this island are practising catholics whatever anyone says and while I'm kinda on the fence religiously (or lack thereof) speaking, I think there would be huge numbers out to see him especially down the country. Whether or not you agree with it he could have huge influence.

ancapailldorcha

If I was a Garda I'd have a massive problem protecting the head of an international paedophile ring.

SEPT 23 1989

We want this country looking forward not backwards to a time where they had a dark grip on the people

dsmythy

The Pope doesn't represent Ireland so no need.

Dravokivich

dsmythy wrote: »

The Pope doesn't represent Ireland so no need.

Nor does the Queen of England or the President of the USA.

So they shouldn't be here?

Wolfe Tone

dsmythy wrote: »

The Pope doesn't represent Ireland so no need.

Would you disagree that having the Pope visit Ireland, and the north too, would be a sign of a maturity and respect for a religion that up until very recently(and still in some rare cases) was discriminated against?

conorhal

Biggins wrote: »

No. as others have said, won't change a thing. In fact I would say it would dig up more protests, etc.
Whats gonna change if he stood on our soil versus his own in Rome?
Is his out of date thinking going to suddenly change?
Is his methods going to change?
Is he going to say something different than from the crap he's been rabbiting off before?

No, nothing is going to change.
There should be a sign at every entrance to Ireland for him saying "Keep Away".

Pffft* I don't see a single objection that above that wasn't leveled at the queen's proposed visit. How blinkered.

Daegerty

No

The Pope is a salt of the earth lad.

Dravokivich

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I have not come to a conclusion myself, my gut feeling says no, but my head says it may be good. I can't decide. (I really should have put "I can't decide" as a third option)

Or a "It makes no odds to me."

Hookah

I'd say the Pope staying out of Ireland would improve community relations.

ancapailldorcha

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Would you disagree that having the Pope visit Ireland, and the north too, would be a sign of a maturity and respect for a religion that up until very recently(and still in some rare cases) was discriminated against?

What has the Catholic Church ever done to warrant respect?

sensibleken

Daegerty wrote: »

The Pope is a salt of the earth lad.

really? did he look back at sodom or something??

Wolfe Tone

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What has the Catholic Church ever done to warrant respect?

Its more to do with respecting catholic people. The Pope in Belfast, in Stormont? I think that would be a great sign that the bigotry and discrimination of the past was truly on the way out.

Cypher_sounds

No

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If I was a Garda I'd have a massive problem protecting the head of an international paedophile ring.

Pathetic comment.

sensibleken

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Its more to do with respecting catholic people. The Pope in Belfast, in Stormont? I think that would be a great sign that the bigotry and discrimination of the past was truly on the way out.

I dont think it will. It will prepetuate the stereotype amongst unionists that of the whole 'home rule, rome rule' thing.

Id say the demographics of nationalist people who gave a flying fook about the pope would be the same as down here

Biggins

Originally Posted by Biggins
No. as others have said, won't change a thing. In fact I would say it would dig up more protests, etc.
Whats gonna change if he stood on our soil versus his own in Rome?
Is his out of date thinking going to suddenly change?
Is his methods going to change?
Is he going to say something different than from the crap he's been rabbiting off before?

conorhal wrote: »

Pffft* I don't see a single objection that above that wasn't leveled at the queen's proposed visit. How blinkered.

Blinkered?

Well, modern Ireland, its aggressive methods and the thinking mentality behind it have move on for the vast majority of us!
Well, the English queen has actually said something different!
Well, The English thinking as regards our history has changed and been acknowledged!

..And I can even see that with my 'blinkered' view! Remarkable that!
..But hey, you carry on trying to stir up some out of date rubbish!
If you can't see the difference, it's not me thats wearing the blinkers!

ejmaztec

sensibleken wrote: »

I dont think it will. It will prepetuate the stereotype amongst unionists that of the whole 'home rule, rome rule' thing.

Id say the demographics of nationalist people who gave a flying fook about the pope would be the same as down here

Especially in that bastard Brendan Smyth's territory.

ancapailldorcha

Cypher_sounds wrote: »

Pathetic comment.

I imagine a lot of people would agree with me.

RachaelVO

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

For one if he was received in the north it would show that sectarianism was a thing of the past and that both communities are now working together respectfully. I think it could be very healing.

But then again you have the abuse scandal. What people need to do is weigh up the positives and negatives of the visit much like the Queens. Its very similar actually because the relationship has not always been good and the church has committed terrible acts on this island. Should we be bound by them?


I have not come to a conclusion myself, my gut feeling says no, but my head says it may be good. I can't decide. (I really should have put "I can't decide" as a third option)

Maybe you're right, but I can lots of protests from both sides in the North. Not just from the unionists, but from people who have a reason to have issue with the catholic church, and not just because they are catholic!

I know that the Queens visit will help heal old wounds so to speak, and that in NI the violence (with some notable exceptions by pillocks who want to continue to wallow in the mire of history). With the Pope I just think that too much stuff is too recent, and could for all we know, and how history may reflect is still ongoing! I don't think he has a place in "modern" Ireland until the catholic church come totally clean about all the abuse, and how many times specific priests were moved. Then he can come an apologise in person.

That's what I think anyway...

Taltos

If he does arrive I would ideally like to see him arrested for being the head of an organization that hid and protected paedo's and abusers for years. Something that happens once is a mistake - something that repeatedly happens, is hidden and happens again is an indication of a corrupt organization. Suggest we charge him and lock him up for the abuse his representatives have been guilty of.

Not sure if that is possible as he may have diplomatic immunity - but I believe the state can repeal it or deny him access to our country.

Agricola

No not really. As pointless as a monarch is, I think the queen's words hold alot more weight in Ireland than the Pope. The Catholic/Protestant divide is at its heart a Nationalist/Unionist divide. The queen is a much more divisive figure because of what she represents to people North and South.

Liam Byrne

Ironic....but I think I know the thinking behind this thread.

An apology from the Pope re crimes committed?

The difference is that those abused on his directive didn't murder anyone.

Rabidlamb

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If I was a Garda I'd have a massive problem protecting the head of an international paedophile ring.

Cypher_sounds wrote: »

Pathetic comment.

Remove your clouding reverence to the institution & he's not far wrong.
What if a private welfare service company had carried out the same atrocities & covered it up internally.

Lando Griffin

No way.
And I would be first to protest.
Just get my Bayern Munich shirt and stand there with a banner saying
“Nazi Youth Conscription person go home”

c_man

Nah, sure we do fu(k all trade with the Vatican :pac:


Seriously though, isn't there a visit being planned for 2012? Doubt he'd cross the border though. Whatever about the frosty reception he'd be likely to get here, I think that Pope mobile would be tested to its limits up North.

AudreyHepburn

No

I don't see why not tbh.

I know the Church has done terrible things but you could say that about the USA and UK to if you wanted to yet Her Majesty is being greeted with warmth and joy.

Actually now that I think about it isn't he coming next year for Eucharistic Congress or something to that effect?

Liam Byrne

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don't see why not tbh.

I know the Church has done terrible things but you could say that about the USA and UK to if you wanted to yet Her Majesty is being greeted with warmth and joy.

Actually now that I think about it isn't he coming next year for Eucharistic Congress or something to that effect?

The Queen of England is welcomed because it draws a line under the crap of the past; no-one's welcoming her as a representative of the country that illegally invaded Iraq. She also wasn't directly involved.

The current Pope, on the other hand, is the one who personally issued a directive to priests and bishops to keep their mouths shut re abuse and not report it to the authorities.

So a different Pope, maybe - he'd be the head of a church which I abhor but he'd represent people of that persuasion and maybe improve matters in a Bertie vs Enda kinda way.

But the current sickening excuse for a human being? No way!

LeeHoffmann

The Queen, Obamha, the Pope Lets just invite the all the world leaders here for one big party.

this quote from page 1 is one of the funniest little quips I've read all week. Thanks for that!

And to answer the question, no I don't think he should visit or that it would help.

The Queen of England is welcomed because it draws a line under the crap of the past; no-one's welcoming her as a representative of the country that illegally invaded Iraq. She also wasn't directly involved.

The current Pope, on the other hand, is the one who personally issued a directive to priests and bishops to keep their mouths shut re abuse and not report it to the authorities.

I agree with the above. Plus, he refused to sack any of the senior bishops/archbishops involved in moving abusers from parish to parish, but saw fit to sack a priest in America who said that women should be permitted to become priests. How can you see the latter as worse than the former? I can't trust a person with those kind of priorities and wuldn't want to see them acting as a moral authority to bridge the gap between divided communities