Or else you could be smote. Smitened. Something like that. Smitten maybe. No, I guess not.

Hey, speaking of Smitten, hows the GF? . . .is she still smitten with you?

Supe' - Some of these fellows need a little fire and brimstone. Man, where does all the anger come from? This is not Hitler or Stalin on his deathbed..

I am not Catholic and I dont want to talk theology - but just what this man did to help free Eastern Europe should be enough to earn a little respect in this temporal world...

Interesting that you chose that term (or did I). It was used in this context two nights ago. It's going well, Island, thanks. But I'm convinced that the last thing I need right now is another relationship complexity and what's even more true is that the last thing someone else needs is a relationship with me. Humans are so complex, aren't they?

Well put.

Hmmm...I thought that was the common link with ALL religion.

Pictures are worth a thousand words:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/images/Bish...ute-Hitler.jpg
http://www.nobeliefs.com/images/Hitler-with-Muller.jpg
Please Please Please do not try to say the Catholic church is all about peace. I used ot be Catholic and I walked years ago upon discovering the facts about their involvement in WW2 with the Nazi's, plus my family had a huge falling out with a local priest, to this day I am unsure what happened my granfather would never say why we all stopped attending the Catholic church. Once I did some fact finding of my own I knew I wanted no part of it.

Need I remind you JP2 is Polish, and with delightful glee, he supported the LW's Solidarity movement with political aplomb as a slap back at Communisms abolishment of Catholicism.

Of course, politics and religion are so interrelated, when in bed together, it's incestuous.

Of course, I'm sure that'll just be another ignorant slam of Catholics.

I agree wholeheartedly with you, Jims5543, but I wouldn't use that as a blanket statement for all Catholics. It's strong, though. Very strong when you see those bishops and such shaking hands with Hitler or turning the other way when millions of Jews were being slaughtered.

Speaks volumes.

By the same logic, then all anglos are guilty of the slaughter of the first Americans. One cannot blame an entire religion for the actions of a few, and even less when taken out of historical context. Hindsight is perfect.

Heck..the human race is an organization from which I would like to resign, given its track rcord.

He's right of course. I mean we don't blame the music industry for Michaels Jacksons, ehhh, indiscresions.

. . .well, unless they helped cover them up. . . but that hasn't happened.http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/...ool_shades.gif

I'm not Catholic but doesn't he have to croak first? Has other Pope's stepped down?:confused:

Yeah, we just wait till he dies. I can wait - I mean, it appears inevitable (serious miracles aside) that it will happen sooner rather than later.

There are a number of Catholic accusing Christian denominations which may have some dirty laundry to air when their version of true Christianity is a couple of thousand years old.

For instance, if a denomination not only wasn't present in Nazi Germany, but wasn't even in existence, is it fair for them to assume that the same thing wouldn't have happened if the (jack) boot was on the other foot?

(big old edit) A quick Google suggests that those photos are basically anti-Catholic propoganda (no-where else to find them), and that the position of the Catholic and various Protestant churches in Nazi Germany was little different, especially as the war approached. For example:

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005206

playing with Nazis is one of the lesser transgressions of the church. Plenty of bad things done by bad humans over the years. As for JP2, I think his heart is in the right place, but to be honest, I think he set back Catholicism at least 50 years. Vatican II reforms lost almost all momentum, and his conservative dogmatism has fueled rifts with most of the church (especially north and southe america).

I think the next pope needs to make major reforms in Catholicism. No more celibacy for priests (that was all about land ownership anyway) and women should be ordained...that would be a good start.

Whatever a Catholic (or non-Catholic, of course) believes about whether priests should or should not remain celibate, purely from a money point of view, married priests doesn't work. A non-celibate priest = means a married priest - there isn't enough money floating around the NZ Catholic system to provide seminaries suited for couples, training etc, then a priests income which is enough for two. Maybe there is enough money in the US? I dunno.

It just won't work without fundamentally changing the entire way priesthood works - from start to finish.

Besides, having seen what they have to do, I honestly don't believe a priest could do a good job being a priest AND live up to a good Catholic ideal of being a father to a family. Not enough hours in the day - they already work pretty hard for their complete lack of money.

What is different in the mission of a Roman Catholic priest from that of a Lutheran pastor or a Baptist minister or a Moslem mullah or a Greek orthodox priest that he must be denied a family? It was originally imposed to eliminate legitimate heirs inheriting church property.

I think this and the ordination pf women priests as posted by Nostatic are the two key issues the church needs to address. I think the church position on birthcontrol is laughable but I don't believe it will change anytime soon.

Nostatic, I'll agree with the assertion that greater transgressions than playing briefly with Nazis have occurred. The Church has been run by humans. Humans are substantially more vicious and unethical, on the whole, than sharks or any other creatures. The Church has had some moments that are embarrasing.

But I disagree with the rest. Vatican II was arguably one of the most substantial policy shifts in TWO MILLENIA. Two thirds of the world's Christians are Catholic. It takes a long time to change the course of a ship that size. Vatican II was created in the '60's. I am very surprized at the amount of change that has already taken place, and am frankly not entirely comfortable with some of it. And I'm modern, progressive, educated. Think of how the rest of the world is reacting. The papacy is a truly heavy burden, IMHO.

And as far as married priests, and female priests....not only do I personally disagree with both those ideas, I am confident they will not occur in our lifetimes, or the lifetimes of our great grandchildren. For a variety of reason. You, Nostatic, are smart and learned. But many here cannot understand why the Pope does not condone the use of condoms. Folks who do not understand the "why" of that are not in a position to evaluate Vatican II reforms or any other aspect of the role of the Pope or the teachings of the Church.

Not trying to be argumentative or insulting, so I hope no one takes me that way. It's just that concepts like birth control are slam-dunk issues, unless you are so confused as to think the papacy is a secular position. It is most assuredly not. Just as the Pope can depend on the Surgeon General of the United States of America to refrain from ordaining priests, consecrating hosts and saying mass, so the Surgeon General can rely on the Pope to not dispense health advice.

Okay, one more attempt, and I said part of this before: In a perfect world, God and the Pope would be happy if abortion were no longer an issue because there are no unwanted babies. That's the Church's goal. Not health. Not financial security. And condoning abortions or birth control is not going to get us closer to Heaven. Indeed, human misery here on Earth is a product of our distance from God, not a failure of medicine or science. To relieve the world from this misery, the Surgeon General cannot get us there, but the Pope's teachings could. And his condoning gratuitous sex, and abortions for our mistakes, is not the Pope's role. Same with birth control. What's really surprizing is the number of folks calling themselves Christians who do not grok this concept.

step down? would there be a banana peel there?