5. Pope Francis

[Spade_Cooley 9,536]

Fucking hell

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

Diana who?

 

Dors of course. who else could it be?

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

 

 

 

 

 

Announces that Mother Theresa will become a Saint on September 4th

*all the leftists who were dumb enough to think Francis would be some kind of liberal even though he's an 80 year old fucking priest start freaking out*

 

I don't know about that. I do know that she was intended to become Saint Witch well before Francis became pope.

 

Normally I'm the one savvy to Catholic machinations but I have to ask what has Theresa done to earn the epithet "Saint Witch"? I know Christopher Hitchens critiqued her heavily but is there anything else?

 

 

For me she is, and will be forever, the Witch of Calcutta. Extracting large sums of money, quite a bit of it gained through crime, ostentatioously to help dying poor people but rather let them rot and use the money for private expense is such an evil that witch is a relatively mild appellation. It´s a shame there´s no hell, it should be invented for her.

 

 

I have deeply religious members of my family who met her, and came to exactly the same opinions as yourself and Hitchens. She would deliberately help exacerbate health issues from people who came to see, for example, as she believed that "suffering = Godliness".

 

Thanks guys. I will do some research on her. As I said, I was aware Hitchens criticised her but I was never sure if his complaints had a firm foundation or if he was just having a bit of a whinge.

 

Do you think many people will speak out/protest against her canonisation?

[Magere Hein 1,400]

Thanks guys. I will do some research on her. As I said, I was aware Hitchens criticised her but I was never sure if his complaints had a firm foundation or if he was just having a bit of a whinge.

 

Do you think many people will speak out/protest against her canonisation?

The Missionary Position is well researched and documents the dark side of Teresa and her supporters in full colour, but it's not a particularly good read. Hitchens' anger shines through and gives the book a rant-like taste. I'm not fond of that, nor of Hitchens' writing,

[Magere Hein 1,400]

Forgot that I had something to say about her canonisation: I think it would be wise for the Roman-Catholic church to stick that file in a drawer and sleep on it for a century, but I suppose that'll be difficult to explain after the previous hurry. It's also good to remember that Saints are for internal church use only. I have no obligation to believe anything the church asserts. She won't be the first evil person to be canonised (Charles I, anyone? ) and she won't be the last.

[msc 18,476]

Over the centuries, the story will be simplified. No doubt its the same for all the saints.

 

eg

 

St Patrick

 

popular story - got rid of the snakes from Ireland.

what has been lost by history - got rid of the gypsies from Ireland.

 

Or something like that!

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

 

Thanks guys. I will do some research on her. As I said, I was aware Hitchens criticised her but I was never sure if his complaints had a firm foundation or if he was just having a bit of a whinge.

 

Do you think many people will speak out/protest against her canonisation?

The Missionary Position is well researched and documents the dark side of Teresa and her supporters in full colour, but it's not a particularly good read. Hitchens' anger shines through and gives the book a rant-like taste. I'm not fond of that, nor of Hitchens' writing,

 

Yes that kind of emotive, polemical stuff normally puts me off a writer, too. If it is well-researched though, I will give it a chance.

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

I have just had a glance at the Pope's new exhortation (as you do.) I think it is the closest we will ever get to having a pope admit that the Catholic Church has totally f*cked up:

 

 

.

.. It is true that there is no sense in
simply decrying present-day evils, as if this could
change things. Nor it is helpful to try to impose
rules by sheer authority. What we need is a more
responsible and generous effort to present the
reasons and motivations for choosing marriage
and the family, and in this way to help men and
women better to respond to the grace that God
offers them.

 

36. We also need to be humble and realistic,
acknowledging that at times the way we pres-
ent our Christian beliefs and treat other people
has helped contribute to today’s problematic
situation. We need a healthy dose of self-crit-
icism. Then too, we often present marriage in
such a way that its unitive meaning, its call to
grow in love and its ideal of mutual assistance are
overshadowed by an almost exclusive insistence
on the duty of procreation. Nor have we always
provided solid guidance to young married cou-
ples, understanding their timetables, their way of
thinking and their concrete concerns. At times
we have also proposed a far too abstract and al-
most artificial theological ideal of marriage, far
removed from the concrete situations and prac-
tical possibilities of real families. This excessive
idealization, especially when we have failed to
inspire trust in God’s grace, has not helped to
make marriage more desirable and attractive, but
quite the opposite.

 

37. We have long thought that simply by stress-
ing doctrinal, bioethical and moral issues, without
encouraging openness to grace, we were provid-
ing sufficient support to families, strengthening
the marriage bond and giving meaning to marital
life. We find it difficult to present marriage more
as a dynamic path to personal development and
fulfilment than as a lifelong burden. We also find
it hard to make room for the consciences of the
faithful, who very often respond as best they can
to the Gospel amid their limitations, and are ca-
pable of carrying out their own discernment in
complex situations. We have been called to form
consciences, not to replace them.

 

38. We must be grateful that most people do
value family relationships that are permanent
and marked by mutual respect. They appreciate
the Church’s efforts to offer guidance and coun-
selling in areas related to growth in love, over-
coming conflict and raising children. Many are
touched by the power of grace experienced in
sacramental Reconciliation and in the Eucharist,
grace that helps them face the challenges of mar-
riage and the family. In some countries, espe-
cially in various parts of Africa, secularism has
not weakened certain traditional values, and mar-
riages forge a strong bond between two wider
families, with clearly defined structures for deal-
ing with problems and conflicts. Nowadays we
are grateful too for the witness of marriages that
have not only proved lasting, but also fruitful and
loving. All these factors can inspire a positive and
welcoming pastoral approach capable of helping
couples to grow in appreciation of the demands
of the Gospel. Yet we have often been on the
defensive, wasting pastoral energy on denounc-
ing a decadent world without being proactive in
proposing ways of finding true happiness. Many
people feel that the Church’s message on mar-
riage and the family does not clearly reflect the
preaching and attitudes of Jesus, who set forth
a demanding ideal yet never failed to show com-
passion and closeness to the frailty of individuals
like the Samaritan woman or the woman caught
in adultery.

 

 

 

Source: http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf

 

 

Some in the Vatican must be fuming at that. Time to slip him some poison?

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

Before we get too excited, the Pope still hates Protestants, though: http://vaticanfiles.org/2014/06/83-what-francis-really-thinks-of-the-reformation-and-of-calvin-in-particular/

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

I have just had a glance at the Pope's new exhortation (as you do.) I think it is the closest we will ever get to having a pope admit that the Catholic Church has totally f*cked up:

 

 

.

.. It is true that there is no sense in

simply decrying present-day evils, as if this could

change things. Nor it is helpful to try to impose

rules by sheer authority. What we need is a more

responsible and generous effort to present the

reasons and motivations for choosing marriage

and the family, and in this way to help men and

women better to respond to the grace that God

offers them.

 

36. We also need to be humble and realistic,

acknowledging that at times the way we pres-

ent our Christian beliefs and treat other people

has helped contribute to today’s problematic

situation. We need a healthy dose of self-crit-

icism. Then too, we often present marriage in

such a way that its unitive meaning, its call to

grow in love and its ideal of mutual assistance are

overshadowed by an almost exclusive insistence

on the duty of procreation. Nor have we always

provided solid guidance to young married cou-

ples, understanding their timetables, their way of

thinking and their concrete concerns. At times

we have also proposed a far too abstract and al-

most artificial theological ideal of marriage, far

removed from the concrete situations and prac-

tical possibilities of real families. This excessive

idealization, especially when we have failed to

inspire trust in God’s grace, has not helped to

make marriage more desirable and attractive, but

quite the opposite.

 

37. We have long thought that simply by stress-

ing doctrinal, bioethical and moral issues, without

encouraging openness to grace, we were provid-

ing sufficient support to families, strengthening

the marriage bond and giving meaning to marital

life. We find it difficult to present marriage more

as a dynamic path to personal development and

fulfilment than as a lifelong burden. We also find

it hard to make room for the consciences of the

faithful, who very often respond as best they can

to the Gospel amid their limitations, and are ca-

pable of carrying out their own discernment in

complex situations. We have been called to form

consciences, not to replace them.

 

38. We must be grateful that most people do

value family relationships that are permanent

and marked by mutual respect. They appreciate

the Church’s efforts to offer guidance and coun-

selling in areas related to growth in love, over-

coming conflict and raising children. Many are

touched by the power of grace experienced in

sacramental Reconciliation and in the Eucharist,

grace that helps them face the challenges of mar-

riage and the family. In some countries, espe-

cially in various parts of Africa, secularism has

not weakened certain traditional values, and mar-

riages forge a strong bond between two wider

families, with clearly defined structures for deal-

ing with problems and conflicts. Nowadays we

are grateful too for the witness of marriages that

have not only proved lasting, but also fruitful and

loving. All these factors can inspire a positive and

welcoming pastoral approach capable of helping

couples to grow in appreciation of the demands

of the Gospel. Yet we have often been on the

defensive, wasting pastoral energy on denounc-

ing a decadent world without being proactive in

proposing ways of finding true happiness. Many

people feel that the Church’s message on mar-

riage and the family does not clearly reflect the

preaching and attitudes of Jesus, who set forth

a demanding ideal yet never failed to show com-

passion and closeness to the frailty of individuals

like the Samaritan woman or the woman caught

in adultery.

 

 

 

Source: http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf

 

 

Some in the Vatican must be fuming at that. Time to slip him some poison?

For anyone who is wondering, child abuse is mentioned a few times in the Encyclical but, in relation to the church scandals, only once:

 

 

 

The sexual

exploitation of children is yet another scandal-

ous and perverse reality in present-day society.

Societies experiencing violence due to war, ter-

rorism or the presence of organized crime are

witnessing the deterioration of the family, above

all in large cities, where, on their outskirts, the

so-called phenomenon of ‘street-children’ is on

the rise”. The sexual abuse of children is all the

more scandalous when it occurs in places where

they ought to be most safe, particularly in fami-

lies, schools, communities and Christian institu-

tions.

 

Not exactly an all-guns blazing attack on what has been happening in the Church. He could have written a whole encyclical on that alone! Weird how he also seems to be trying to link child abuse to only those societies with other major social problems like war and organised crime from that quote he has chosen. So still trying to cover their rumps...

 

Bizarrely, he also seems to be an out-and-out feminist:

 

 

History is burdened

by the excesses of patriarchal cultures that con-

sidered women inferior, yet in our own day, we

cannot overlook the use of surrogate mothers

and “the exploitation and commercialization of

the female body in the current media culture”.

There are those who believe that many of today’s

problems have arisen because of feminine eman-

cipation. This argument, however, is not valid,

“it is false, untrue, a form of male chauvinism”.

The equal dignity of men and women makes us

rejoice to see old forms of discrimination dis-

appear, and within families there is a growing

reciprocity.

 

If certain forms of feminism have

arisen which we must consider inadequate, we

must nonetheless see in the women’s movement

the working of the Spirit for a clearer recognition

of the dignity and rights of women.

 

 

[drol 11,954]

Pope wants us to be invaded by islamic immigrants... he's not so good. He will die in 2040 when he will become Emire of Italy. Evil guys last forever.

[charon 4,943]

 

 

Listening at the moment to R4 to 'more or less' and they are doing bits on 'the curse of the Olympics ' which was mentioned in another thread, and....the life expectancy of Pope Francis

 

 

They studied 62 popes and given his age when elected , come up with it being at 86 where his life chances hit 50/50. Ie seven more years.

 

Also, an Argentinian male of 79 can expect to live until.....a bawhair short of 86.

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

Listening at the moment to R4 to 'more or less' and they are doing bits on 'the curse of the Olympics ' which was mentioned in another thread, and....the life expectancy of Pope Francis

 

 

They studied 62 popes and given his age when elected , come up with it being at 86 where his life chances hit 50/50. Ie seven more years.

 

Also, an Argentinian male of 79 can expect to live until.....a bawhair short of 86.

 

On Friday they also did a bit on whether more celebs are dying in 2016. Can catch it on I-Player.

 

The answer is yes because of the boom in television and pop music in the fifties. (Bigger pool to draw from)

[msc 18,476]

 

Listening at the moment to R4 to 'more or less' and they are doing bits on 'the curse of the Olympics ' which was mentioned in another thread, and....the life expectancy of Pope Francis

 

 

They studied 62 popes and given his age when elected , come up with it being at 86 where his life chances hit 50/50. Ie seven more years.

 

Also, an Argentinian male of 79 can expect to live until.....a bawhair short of 86.

 

On Friday they also did a bit on whether more celebs are dying in 2016. Can catch it on I-Player.

 

The answer is yes because of the boom in television and pop music in the fifties. (Bigger pool to draw from)

 

 

Plus the internet lets people's fame travel further than it might have done before.

[charon 4,943]

Yeh, posted in death links.

 

But there was two slightly different versions on Sunday, and 2012 5 obits, 2016 24, in the first quarter on the main beeb page , is to close a timeframe for that.

 

Ergo, Year of Death.

[ImNotHades 207]

80.

[Joey Russ 7,228]

80.

80 what?

[ImNotHades 207]

 

80.

80 what?

 

Really? Do I need to say Happy birthday or do I say 80% dead?

[Cat O'Falk 3,290]

 

 

80.

80 what?

 

Really? Do I need to say Happy birthday or do I say 80% dead?

 

80 more shags 'til he dies.

[Youwanticewiththat 611]

Or 40 Cormorants.

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

Interesting article on this pope's dark, autocratic side:  http://www.afr.com/news/world/europe/pope-francis-the-dictator-of-the-vatican-20160411-go3k2t

[Zsa Zsa's leg 884]

https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/04/09/pope-francis-hints-may-not-around-2019/

Pope Francis says he may not be around in 2019, hinting at his own mortality multiple times in a matter of minutes.

[The Mad Hatter 1,092]

1 hour ago, jackschlotter said:

https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/04/09/pope-francis-hints-may-not-around-2019/

Pope Francis says he may not be around in 2019, hinting at his own mortality multiple times in a matter of minutes.

Sounds like he received some bad news medically.

[gcreptile 10,978]

6 minutes ago, The Mad Hatter said:

Sounds like he received some bad news medically.

In fact, I saw him on the evening news today and thought to myself that something is wrong health-wise.

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

It would be ironic if Pope Benedict outlived him.  FWIW, for  you newbies, When I first joined this blog, one of my chief interests on here was Pope-health watching. Time for me to switch back into full alert mode....

 

As noted in the article, the comments are fairly self-deprecating so whether he is trying to hint at something, I don't know.  Maybe he will even set his predecessor's precedent in stone by retiring before then.