Catholic church about to canonise a mass murderer

Brian Shanahan

I was reading my Gruaniad (yes, I am a left wing pinko. Why do you ask?;))this morning, and I saw the following article by George Monbiot, about the imminent canonisation of Junípero Serra, whose use of internment camps, forced imprisonment and forced labour at feeding levels below that of survival lead directly to the deaths of a third of the then Native population of California, and a vast cultural genocide. It actually reminds me of the actions of another catholic.

At first I was shocked and outraged at this behaviour by Pope Francis, but after a while I thought "how appropriate", both for him and the church he leads. Francis is little more than a more-softly spoken version of Benedict with better PR, and the honouring of genocidal maniacs is what the catholic church should be all about, seeing as it breeds so many of them.

PS to the mods, I thought to put this in Hazards of Belief, but I think it is important enough to highlight with its own thread. I won't mind though if you decide merging is better.

Sarky

I have long suspected that sainthood is really just a "Who is the Biggest ****ing Dick" competition.

Some day in the distant future, I just bet they'll canonise Hitler as well.

Kidchameleon

Why do people get their knickers in a twist over things like this? Its a meaningless title in a meaningless orgaization. Leave 'em to it.

Brian Shanahan

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why do people get their knickers in a twist over things like this? Its a meaningless title in a meaningless orgaization. Leave 'em to it.

Because it is promoting mass murder as an acceptable way of life.

kylith

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why do people get their knickers in a twist over things like this? Its a meaningless title in a meaningless orgaization. Leave 'em to it.

It's not meaningless to the average man on the street. Most people are under the impression that people are made saints because of their good work and care for other people when it is, in fact, because of their good work in spreading Catholicism and care for spreading Catholicism and protecting the RCC. Both of which this mass-murdering scumbag seems to have been good at.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Because it is promoting mass murder as an acceptable way of life.

Its alright though cause it frowns on condoms so there will be plenty of people to replace those that have been murdered. You just gotta but into the whole system here.

Delirium

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why do people get their knickers in a twist over things like this? Its a meaningless title in a meaningless orgaization. Leave 'em to it.

A global organisation wants to hold that guy up as an example of one of the best examples of humanity. What's the problem with people expressing their dismay that someone with such terrible things on their CV should be honoured in such a way?

Kidchameleon

koth wrote: »

A global organisation wants to hold that guy up as an example of one of the best examples of humanity. What's the problem with people expressing their dismay that someone with such terrible things on their CV should be honoured in such a way?

I see what your saying but I dont get how its an "honor" I personally couldnt give a toss if someone becomes a saint

Delirium

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I see what your saying but I dont get how its an "honor" I personally couldnt give a toss if someone becomes a saint

I'm the same but you can't ignore the symbolism and the message it sends to the faithful.

magicbastarder

i don't think blaming francis personally for this is potentially completely accurate - it sounds like the wheels in motion were set on this long before he became pope; so the proposal for the canonisation may not be his fault. but it will be interesting to see how or if he reacts to it.

Kidchameleon

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't think blaming francis personally for this is potentially completely accurate - it sounds like the wheels in motion were set on this long before he became pope; so the proposal for the canonisation may not be his fault. but it will be interesting to see how or if he reacts to it.

Can he stop it? I would imagine so. Does he have the balls? Maybe not

gaynorvader

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Can he stop it? I would imagine so. Does he have the balls? Maybe not

I hear they actually check before you become pope whether or not you have balls. Unless you're talking about spiritual balls or metaphorical balls, in which case I suspect you may be correct.

magicbastarder

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Can he stop it? I would imagine so. Does he have the balls? Maybe not

god knows what power structures there exist in the church. maybe he can't in a technical sense, in the way that obama can't order congressmen how to vote. but then obama is not infallible...

MagicMarker

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why do people get their knickers in a twist over things like this? Its a meaningless title in a meaningless orgaization. Leave 'em to it.

I find this highly ironic coming from someone who can't help but get their knickers in a twist over pretty much everything said on this forum ever.

Hotblack Desiato

gaynorvader wrote: »

I hear they actually check before you become pope whether or not you have balls

There is a disputed story/myth that this is the case, and because of a supposed female pope:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Joan

The sede stercoraria, the throne with a hole in the seat, now at St. John Lateran (the formal residence of the popes and center of Catholicism), is to be considered. This and other toilet-like chairs were used in the consecration of Pope Pascal II in 1099 (Boureau 1988). In fact, one is still in the Vatican Museums, another at the Musée du Louvre. The reason for the configuration of the chair is disputed. It has been speculated that they originally were Roman bidets or imperial birthing stools, which because of their age and imperial links were used in ceremonies by Popes intent on highlighting their own imperial claims (as they did also with their Latin title, Pontifex Maximus).[2]

Alain Boureau (Boureau 1988:23) quotes the humanist Jacopo d'Angelo de Scarparia, who visited Rome in 1406 for the enthronement of Gregory XII. The pope sat briefly on two "pierced chairs" at the Lateran: "... the vulgar tell the insane fable that he is touched to verify that he is indeed a man", a sign that this corollary of the Pope Joan legend was still current in the Roman street.

goose2005

I can see why the Vatican like him

MagicMarker

Well, in fairness, that kid statue is hot.

Brian Shanahan

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well, in fairness, that kid statue is hot.

From the looks of it he's a castrato

recedite

wikipedia wrote:

Serra's own views are documented. In 1780, Serra wrote: "that spiritual fathers should punish their sons, the Indians, with blows appears to be as old as the conquest of the Americas; so general in fact that the saints do not seem to be any exception to the rule."

Maybe he anticipated his own sainthood. He certainly knew he had complete control and power over those indians, and as we all know,
absolute power corrupts absolutely.
From my limited reading up on them in the past, I understand most of the native american indians in that region were peaceful family oriented people, living in very ancient pueblo communities (towns and villages of adobe mud houses) which made them easier prey than the more warlike and nomadic indians of the plains further north.

Hotblack Desiato

recedite wrote: »

(towns and villages of adobe mud houses) which made them easier prey than the more warlike and nomadic indians of the plains further north.

Adobe lacking in security. Nothing new there.

goose2005

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

From the looks of it he's a castrato

I think that's a loincloth. But he certainly doesn't look too happy to be there.