The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Pope Benedict's recent mass in Paris, oh gimme a break.

2456

Posts

  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Is it really morally okay to dangle a food carrot over someone's head and make them run on the religion treadmill?

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.

    MikeMan on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »

    Please read up on their stance on evolution. They do not actually believe in evolution as a scientist would describe it. They believe God guided the evolution of humanity. That is not only not evolution, it is laughable as a concept and entirely unscientific. You might as well believe tropical storms are guided by God's hand instead of currents and climates. It doesn't explain anything, and it's indeed a slap in the face to honest science.

    Oh so we're going to make this an atheism thread.

    Have fun with that.

    Actually, we are talking about the state of the Catholic church and their views, good try though, I know that's your schtick and your cross to bear (lol).

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Oh so we're going to make this an atheism thread.

    Have fun with that.

    Are you going to be snarky or are you going to contribute? I was addressing a specific thing: namely, Tam's claim that they believe in evolution. They don't. They believe in guided evolution, which is a different thing. Do you dispute this?

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Living in the heart of the Bible Belt I have yet to hear of a church who has not at one time or another had a big chunk of parishioners leave because the pastor was a dick to his wife in one way or another.

    Most pastors are perfectly normal people and most have wives. Thus, having wives does not equal an inability to preach or carry out religious duties.

    Unless you want to argue that since they're protestants they are not carrying out religious duties at all.

    MikeMan on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.
    Yes, but do you realize how badly all Catholics and Italians would react if that happened? Much of it is heavily ties into the heritage of different states, and if it changed hands there would be a huge outcry.

    Fencingsax on
  • KatoKato Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Tam wrote: »
    Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P

    While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?

    The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.

    The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.

    The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.
    I've never understood how the church can believe in "intelligent design" while the first chapter of their sacred book tells a completely different story.

    Kato on
    Signature??
  • TamTam Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Tam wrote: »
    Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P

    While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?

    The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.

    The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.

    The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.

    OK, I'll take that, but I was referring to the Pope alone as far as the evolution statement. The point I was trying to get across is that if he can get his followers to at least stop impeding the teaching of evolution or make them more open to it, that counts for something.

    This is the thing I was referring to, btw:

    http://www.cathnews.com/news/704/52.php

    Tam on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.
    Yes, but do you realize how badly all Catholics and Italians would react if that happened? Much of it is heavily ties into the heritage of different states, and if it changed hands there would be a huge outcry.

    I agree, there would. I would hope the powers that be would be able to put aside things like "pride" and all that in order to enact good work throughout the world.

    It wouldn't even have to leave the country. Sell it to the major Italian museums.

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tam wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Tam wrote: »
    Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P

    While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?

    The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.

    The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.

    The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.

    OK, I'll take that, but I was referring to the Pope alone as far as the evolution statement. The point I was trying to get across is that if he can get his followers to at least stop impeding the teaching of evolution or make them more open to it, that counts for something.

    This is the thing I was referring to, btw:

    http://www.cathnews.com/news/704/52.php

    With that I will agree. Accepting that things evolve but sometimes God intervenes is better than the fundie position even if it is not scientific.

    MikeMan on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tam wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Tam wrote: »
    Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P

    While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?

    The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.

    The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.

    The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.

    OK, I'll take that, but I was referring to the Pope alone as far as the evolution statement. The point I was trying to get across is that if he can get his followers to at least stop impeding the teaching of evolution or make them more open to it, that counts for something.

    This is the thing I was referring to, btw:

    http://www.cathnews.com/news/704/52.php
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    But in terms of people who otherwise wouldn't think about that stuff at all, he's at least putting the idea of things evolving into the otherwise hopelessly ignorant. Not that most catholics are otherwise hopelessly ignorant. But many are, just like many people in general are. Any ground that can be gained is thus better than the alternative: namely, 6,000 year old earthers.

    MikeMan on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    But in terms of people who otherwise wouldn't think about that stuff at all, he's at least putting the idea of things evolving into the otherwise hopelessly ignorant. Not that catholics are otherwise hopelessly ignorant. But many are, just like many people in general are. Any ground that can be gained is thus better than the alternative: namely, 6,000 year old earthers.
    I understand the sentiment, but as a science-oriented person, it is still more of the same. To the layperson, it might be different, but the normal layperson has no idea what evolution even is. :P

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Oh so we're going to make this an atheism thread.

    Have fun with that.

    Are you going to be snarky or are you going to contribute? I was addressing a specific thing: namely, Tam's claim that they believe in evolution. They don't. They believe in guided evolution, which is a different thing. Do you dispute this?

    Yes. You're wrong.
    We cannot say: creation or evolution, inasmuch as these two things respond to two different realities. The story of the dust of the earth and the breath of God, which we just heard, does not in fact explain how human persons come to be but rather what they are. It explains their inmost origin and casts light on the project that they are. And, vice versa, the theory of evolution seeks to understand and describe biological developments. But in so doing it cannot explain where the 'project' of human persons comes from, nor their inner origin, nor their particular nature. To that extent we are faced here with two complementary -- rather than mutually exclusive -- realities.

    The current doctrine states that God gave men souls, and that evolution basically took place in situ. They've basically stated that whatever the scientists determine regarding the origin of men is fine, but does not and cannot explain the spiritual component.

    Salvation122 on
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2008
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    Sheep on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    But in terms of people who otherwise wouldn't think about that stuff at all, he's at least putting the idea of things evolving into the otherwise hopelessly ignorant. Not that catholics are otherwise hopelessly ignorant. But many are, just like many people in general are. Any ground that can be gained is thus better than the alternative: namely, 6,000 year old earthers.
    I understand the sentiment, but as a science-oriented person, it is still more of the same. To the layperson, it might be different, but the normal layperson has no idea what evolution even is. :P

    Agreed. But that's a different fight.

    MikeMan on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Hurray we agree.
    Promotions for everyone!

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.
    Yes, but do you realize how badly all Catholics and Italians would react if that happened? Much of it is heavily ties into the heritage of different states, and if it changed hands there would be a huge outcry.

    I agree, there would. I would hope the powers that be would be able to put aside things like "pride" and all that in order to enact good work throughout the world.

    It wouldn't even have to leave the country. Sell it to the major Italian museums.
    Yes, because world powers have shown great humility, especially when it comes to nationalism like this. Keeping the works within the state might work, but the Museums would absolutely fight each other tooth and nail for everything. I do see what you're saying, it's just that anyone who suggested such a plan and anyone who supported would immediately be hated by the entire Catholic community, bar none.

    Fencingsax on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Sheep wrote: »
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    The car is required, the bling is traditional, and Vatican City is not really all that big.:P

    Fencingsax on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    The car is required, the bling is traditional, and Vatican City is not really all that big.:P
    You forgot gaudy as hell.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.
    Yes, but do you realize how badly all Catholics and Italians would react if that happened? Much of it is heavily ties into the heritage of different states, and if it changed hands there would be a huge outcry.

    I agree, there would. I would hope the powers that be would be able to put aside things like "pride" and all that in order to enact good work throughout the world.

    It wouldn't even have to leave the country. Sell it to the major Italian museums.
    Yes, because world powers have shown great humility, especially when it comes to nationalism like this. Keeping the works within the state might work, but the Museums would absolutely fight each other tooth and nail for everything. I do see what you're saying, it's just that anyone who suggested such a plan and anyone who supported would immediately be hated by the entire Catholic community, bar none.

    also, don't they currently rent out those artifacts to museums all over the world all the time?

    Daedalus on
  • captainzmancaptainzman Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.

    But those artifacts have cultural, historical and religious meaning to them, and Catholics around the world. So no, it's not that simple.

    captainzman on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.
    Yes, but do you realize how badly all Catholics and Italians would react if that happened? Much of it is heavily ties into the heritage of different states, and if it changed hands there would be a huge outcry.

    I agree, there would. I would hope the powers that be would be able to put aside things like "pride" and all that in order to enact good work throughout the world.

    It wouldn't even have to leave the country. Sell it to the major Italian museums.
    Yes, because world powers have shown great humility, especially when it comes to nationalism like this. Keeping the works within the state might work, but the Museums would absolutely fight each other tooth and nail for everything. I do see what you're saying, it's just that anyone who suggested such a plan and anyone who supported would immediately be hated by the entire Catholic community, bar none.

    Moreover, there's absolutely no compelling reason to do so. The Church is not, to the best of my knowledge, prevented from doing missionary and charity work due to lack of funds.

    Salvation122 on
  • TamTam Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tam wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Tam wrote: »
    Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P

    While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?

    The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.

    The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.

    The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.

    OK, I'll take that, but I was referring to the Pope alone as far as the evolution statement. The point I was trying to get across is that if he can get his followers to at least stop impeding the teaching of evolution or make them more open to it, that counts for something.

    This is the thing I was referring to, btw:

    http://www.cathnews.com/news/704/52.php
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    I didn't say the Pope was teaching evolution. I said it would at least be a step up to get his followers to stop impeding the teaching of it. Accepting evolution even partially is subversive to faith, pushing God further into the background and that is better, much better, than fundies wanting Creationism taught in school.

    "God started the Universe and the mechanisms described by science are his metaphorical invisible hands" is a whole bucket of better in practicality than "Gawd dun currated thar Universe an' made me outta mud"

    Tam on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    The car is required, the bling is traditional, and Vatican City is not really all that big.:P

    St. Peters is pretty fucking huge duder

    Like, if you haven't been in it, you really have absolutely no sense of scale

    Salvation122 on
  • captainzmancaptainzman Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Kato wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Tam wrote: »
    Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P

    While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?

    The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.

    The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.

    The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.
    I've never understood how the church can believe in "intelligent design" while the first chapter of their sacred book tells a completely different story.

    Because it's a metaphor?

    captainzman on
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Living in the heart of the Bible Belt I have yet to hear of a church who has not at one time or another had a big chunk of parishioners leave because the pastor was a dick to his wife in one way or another.
    I was born and raised in the Bible Belt, attended several different churches, had friends in still more churches, and I've not once seen this happen.

    the anecdote game is fun

    Bama on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Bama wrote: »
    Living in the heart of the Bible Belt I have yet to hear of a church who has not at one time or another had a big chunk of parishioners leave because the pastor was a dick to his wife in one way or another.
    I was born and raised in the Bible Belt, attended several different churches, had friends in still more churches, and I've not once seen this happen.

    the anecdote game is fun

    In fairness Memphis is pretty fucking insane

    Salvation122 on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.

    He says as he roams around in his expensive customized car, his bling, and then returns to his giant god damn city state castle back in Italy.

    Love how the highest ranking Catholic in the world, who presides over a facet of Christianity that forced people to bribe them to rid themselves of guilt, can even remotely assume that "greed" is a pagan institution.

    The car is required, the bling is traditional, and Vatican City is not really all that big.:P

    St. Peters is pretty fucking huge duder

    Like, if you haven't been in it, you really have absolutely no sense of scale
    Oh, I know. I missed the word "castle", I thought he was just talking about how big Vatican City was. Yeah, St. Peter's is massive.

    Fencingsax on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tam wrote: »
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    I didn't say the Pope was teaching evolution. I said it would at least be a step up to get his followers to stop impeding the teaching of it. Accepting evolution even partially is subversive to faith, pushing God further into the background and that is better, much better, than fundies wanting Creationism taught in school.

    "God started the Universe and the mechanisms described by science are his metaphorical invisible hands" is a whole bucket of better in practicality than "Gawd dun currated thar Universe and made me outta mud"
    This will be the last time I say this because it will inevitably become a derailment. The Pope is impeding the teaching of evolution by saying God has a hand in it. There is no variable for an omnipotent, unfalsifiable factor.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tam wrote: »
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    I didn't say the Pope was teaching evolution. I said it would at least be a step up to get his followers to stop impeding the teaching of it. Accepting evolution even partially is subversive to faith, pushing God further into the background and that is better, much better, than fundies wanting Creationism taught in school.

    "God started the Universe and the mechanisms described by science are his metaphorical invisible hands" is a whole bucket of better in practicality than "Gawd dun currated thar Universe and made me outta mud"
    This will be the last time I say this because it will inevitably become a derailment. The Pope is impeding the teaching of evolution by saying God has a hand in it. There is no variable for an omnipotent, unfalsifiable factor.

    Tell you what. Find me a Catholic (preferably Jesuit, but I'm cool with whatever) school that doesn't teach straight-up Darwinian evolution and I will concede the point. You won't find one, though.

    Salvation122 on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Oh so we're going to make this an atheism thread.

    Have fun with that.

    Are you going to be snarky or are you going to contribute? I was addressing a specific thing: namely, Tam's claim that they believe in evolution. They don't. They believe in guided evolution, which is a different thing. Do you dispute this?

    Yes. You're wrong.
    We cannot say: creation or evolution, inasmuch as these two things respond to two different realities. The story of the dust of the earth and the breath of God, which we just heard, does not in fact explain how human persons come to be but rather what they are. It explains their inmost origin and casts light on the project that they are. And, vice versa, the theory of evolution seeks to understand and describe biological developments. But in so doing it cannot explain where the 'project' of human persons comes from, nor their inner origin, nor their particular nature. To that extent we are faced here with two complementary -- rather than mutually exclusive -- realities.

    The current doctrine states that God gave men souls, and that evolution basically took place in situ. They've basically stated that whatever the scientists determine regarding the origin of men is fine, but does not and cannot explain the spiritual component.

    The realities are indeed mutually exclusive.

    I am an honest man and will admit when I am wrong. I invite you to give me the official church position on evolution that contradicts my understanding of the position as a (until several years ago) lifelong catholic.

    http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0401bt.asp is an interesting read.

    MikeMan on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tell you what. Find me a Catholic (preferably Jesuit, but I'm cool with whatever) school that doesn't teach straight-up Darwinian evolution and I will concede the point. You won't find one, though.
    That's cute but most "Catholic" schools are just damn near secular private schools. They separate religion into a class called religion and generally don't even have a mandatory mass. Once again, anecodotal. This is my last post on this subject.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tam wrote: »
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    I didn't say the Pope was teaching evolution. I said it would at least be a step up to get his followers to stop impeding the teaching of it. Accepting evolution even partially is subversive to faith, pushing God further into the background and that is better, much better, than fundies wanting Creationism taught in school.

    "God started the Universe and the mechanisms described by science are his metaphorical invisible hands" is a whole bucket of better in practicality than "Gawd dun currated thar Universe and made me outta mud"
    This will be the last time I say this because it will inevitably become a derailment. The Pope is impeding the teaching of evolution by saying God has a hand in it. There is no variable for an omnipotent, unfalsifiable factor.

    Tell you what. Find me a Catholic (preferably Jesuit, but I'm cool with whatever) school that doesn't teach straight-up Darwinian evolution and I will concede the point. You won't find one, though.

    You absolutely cannot teach "straight-up Darwinian evolution" and involve souls created by God. Sorry.

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.

    But those artifacts have cultural, historical and religious meaning to them, and Catholics around the world. So no, it's not that simple.

    Oh wow that's awesome! I didn't realize "cultural, historical and religious meaning" trumped someone else's ability to fucking feed themselves and raise themselves out of poverty and not die of AIDS in some New Delhi ditch!

    MikeMan on
  • TamTam Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tam wrote: »
    The pope isn't impeding the teaching of evolution, he's warping the perception and essence of evolution to fit his Catholic dogma. It doesn't count for anything. We call this a manipulative tactic, the thing Moms are really good at.

    I didn't say the Pope was teaching evolution. I said it would at least be a step up to get his followers to stop impeding the teaching of it. Accepting evolution even partially is subversive to faith, pushing God further into the background and that is better, much better, than fundies wanting Creationism taught in school.

    "God started the Universe and the mechanisms described by science are his metaphorical invisible hands" is a whole bucket of better in practicality than "Gawd dun currated thar Universe and made me outta mud"
    This will be the last time I say this because it will inevitably become a derailment. The Pope is impeding the teaching of evolution by saying God has a hand in it. There is no variable for an omnipotent, unfalsifiable factor.

    Yeah no shit. I'll say this for the last time: I'm not talking about pure science, I'm saying it's a benefit to get people to believe more in science bit by bit.

    They believed the Sun orbits the Earth, now they don't.

    It's subversive.

    Tam on
  • AntihippyAntihippy Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)

    How does this have to do with what I said?

    Look, there are two possible states here.

    State A: The catholic church has X funds that it donates to charity and Y tied up in priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    State B: The catholic church has X + Y funds that it donates to charity because it sells off the priceless artifacts sitting around in their chapels and storage rooms. They receive donations and investments from companies and individuals that fund their charitable work.

    X + Y is more than X alone. More money than otherwise would thus be donated to charity.

    It's very simple.

    But those artifacts have cultural, historical and religious meaning to them, and Catholics around the world. So no, it's not that simple.

    Oh wow that's awesome! I didn't realize "cultural, historical and religious meaning" trumped someone else's ability to fucking feed themselves and raise themselves out of poverty and not die of AIDS in some New Delhi ditch!

    ?

    You could also put that same argument for the insane US defense budget. Or countless other things.

    Antihippy on
    10454_nujabes2.pngPSN: Antiwhippy
  • MulysaSemproniusMulysaSempronius but also susie nyRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    So, you can teach that evolution occurs in your school, have an official church position that evolution was how mankind came into being, but be anti-evolution because you mention that God created the soul.

    MulysaSempronius on
    If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Moreover, there's absolutely no compelling reason to do so. The Church is not, to the best of my knowledge, prevented from doing missionary and charity work due to lack of funds.

    Any amount of missionary work they could do would be increased by an amount X should they sell off X amount of their possessions.

    Are people still dying in poverty around the world? Yeah? Then there's still room for them to donate more money to charity, isn't there?

    MikeMan on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Antihippy wrote: »
    ?

    You could also put that same argument for the insane US defense budget. Or countless other things.

    The United States Government is not a religious organization devoted to the betterment of mankind.

    MikeMan on
Sign In or Register to comment.