I have to say it. And, yes, I'm donning the flame-proof suit.

[WhansaMi]

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've
held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness.
But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest:

There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light.
There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a
large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything
to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the
AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by
the church for distributing condoms.

I, personally, didn't respect the man's views. I didn't know the *man*, so
I can't say I feel one way about him, or the other. But, when people say
what a great advocate for the poor he was, I can't help but think that the
one act that he could have done to assist them, he refused to do.

Sheila

[JWB]

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light.

I'm catholic, but I don't see him in any light at all. The pope means as
much to me as, say, any national leader. Which means I don't give him much
thought.

[JWB]

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light.

I'm catholic, but I don't see him in any light at all. The pope means as
much to me as, say, any national leader. Which means I don't give him much
thought.

[Tracey]

WhansaMi wrote:

<snip>

Well, Sheila, no, you didn't *have* to say it.

Tracey

[Tracey]

WhansaMi wrote:

<snip>

Well, Sheila, no, you didn't *have* to say it.

Tracey

[WhansaMi]

"Tracey" <rbrancher2@aol.com> wrote in message
news:425811DB.6040104@aol.com...

WhansaMi wrote: <snip> Well, Sheila, no, you didn't *have* to say it. Tracey

I guess "have to" is one of those amorphous terms like "need". In this
case, I use it in the sense of "feel compelled to", which is
Mirriam-Webster's 13th definition.

Sheila

[WhansaMi]

"Tracey" <rbrancher2@aol.com> wrote in message
news:425811DB.6040104@aol.com...

WhansaMi wrote: <snip> Well, Sheila, no, you didn't *have* to say it. Tracey

I guess "have to" is one of those amorphous terms like "need". In this
case, I use it in the sense of "feel compelled to", which is
Mirriam-Webster's 13th definition.

Sheila

[Ellie]

WhansaMi wrote:

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms.

I am all with you there. But I see him as a multidimensional man,
leader, and politician. He did some good things in his time, and I don't
like to dismiss them because of the things that I, too, didn't like him for!

[Ellie]

WhansaMi wrote:

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms.

I am all with you there. But I see him as a multidimensional man,
leader, and politician. He did some good things in his time, and I don't
like to dismiss them because of the things that I, too, didn't like him for!

[Jack C Lipton]

WhansaMi wrote:

There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms.

And don't forget the money the hierarchy is
sitting on top of that could have actually
been used to address some of these issues.

No one knows for certain even the *magnitude*
of money the church is sitting on... and
this doesn't even count the art work stored
away... much less the real estate owned by
the church around the world.

It reminds me a lot of the announced and
laudatory accomplishments of Ronald Reagan...
(shakes head) I don't recall him having even
influence in more than maybe 10% of what he
got credit for.

The reality is that hagiography is with us
and it's a political mechanism that ignores
reality as best it can.

--
Jack C Lipton | cupasoup at pele dot cx | http://www.asstr.org/~CupaSoup/
Those people most incapable (or unwilling) to see themselves as being
sent to Hell are those most likely to become permanent residents. - me

[Jack C Lipton]

WhansaMi wrote:

There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms.

And don't forget the money the hierarchy is
sitting on top of that could have actually
been used to address some of these issues.

No one knows for certain even the *magnitude*
of money the church is sitting on... and
this doesn't even count the art work stored
away... much less the real estate owned by
the church around the world.

It reminds me a lot of the announced and
laudatory accomplishments of Ronald Reagan...
(shakes head) I don't recall him having even
influence in more than maybe 10% of what he
got credit for.

The reality is that hagiography is with us
and it's a political mechanism that ignores
reality as best it can.

--
Jack C Lipton | cupasoup at pele dot cx | http://www.asstr.org/~CupaSoup/
Those people most incapable (or unwilling) to see themselves as being
sent to Hell are those most likely to become permanent residents. - me

[rg]

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms. I, personally, didn't respect the man's views. I didn't know the *man*, so I can't say I feel one way about him, or the other. But, when people say what a great advocate for the poor he was, I can't help but think that the one act that he could have done to assist them, he refused to do. Sheila

I agree, Sheila. But I go much further.

Consider this; a report appeared about two weeks before his death, in
response to the Schiavo case, that he made the statement to the effect that
life should be sustained until the end. He said that feeding tubes were not
"unnatural means" of supporting life.

He elected (or someone else did) to not be taken to the hospital during his
last few days even though he was in critical condition. He ( or someone
else) did not want to be in a hospital room with life support equipment so
he remained in the papal apartment (where there is no life support
equipment).

If this is not "do as I say and not as I do" then I don't know what is.

Another thing. It has been reported that he wanted his personal paper
burned after his death. I just wonder why. Is there something there that
could be embarrassing to the church?

He was just a man at the head of a very wealthy and powerful nation.

I think Bush made a grave mistake in having flags fly at half mast for him
in this country. Thomas Jefferson rolled over in his grave on that one.

rg

[rg]

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms. I, personally, didn't respect the man's views. I didn't know the *man*, so I can't say I feel one way about him, or the other. But, when people say what a great advocate for the poor he was, I can't help but think that the one act that he could have done to assist them, he refused to do. Sheila

I agree, Sheila. But I go much further.

Consider this; a report appeared about two weeks before his death, in
response to the Schiavo case, that he made the statement to the effect that
life should be sustained until the end. He said that feeding tubes were not
"unnatural means" of supporting life.

He elected (or someone else did) to not be taken to the hospital during his
last few days even though he was in critical condition. He ( or someone
else) did not want to be in a hospital room with life support equipment so
he remained in the papal apartment (where there is no life support
equipment).

If this is not "do as I say and not as I do" then I don't know what is.

Another thing. It has been reported that he wanted his personal paper
burned after his death. I just wonder why. Is there something there that
could be embarrassing to the church?

He was just a man at the head of a very wealthy and powerful nation.

I think Bush made a grave mistake in having flags fly at half mast for him
in this country. Thomas Jefferson rolled over in his grave on that one.

rg

[tracert]

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms. I, personally, didn't respect the man's views. I didn't know the *man*, so I can't say I feel one way about him, or the other. But, when people say what a great advocate for the poor he was, I can't help but think that the one act that he could have done to assist them, he refused to do. Sheila

John 12:8

12:1 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus
was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

12:2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of
them that sat at the table with him.

12:3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and
anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house
was filled with the odour of the ointment.

12:4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], which
should betray him,

12:5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to
the poor?

12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a
thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

12:7 Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she
kept this.

12:8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

[tracert]

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms. I, personally, didn't respect the man's views. I didn't know the *man*, so I can't say I feel one way about him, or the other. But, when people say what a great advocate for the poor he was, I can't help but think that the one act that he could have done to assist them, he refused to do. Sheila

John 12:8

12:1 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus
was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

12:2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of
them that sat at the table with him.

12:3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and
anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house
was filled with the odour of the ointment.

12:4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], which
should betray him,

12:5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to
the poor?

12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a
thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

12:7 Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she
kept this.

12:8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

[Doug Laidlaw]

I am not a Catholic and I don't profess to speak for them. I disagree with
them on some things as well. And I don't flame people for your attitude.

The issue of contraceptives is as I understand it, a moral issue for
Catholics. Certainly they would help, but so would for example, permitting
bank robberies below a certain figure. (Yes, I know that the example is
ridiculous, but the issue is the same for them.) It is not an issue that
my wife and I accept, but we respect others, Some denominations consider
blood transfusions to be immoral. A man in Swan Hill was supportive of a
Protestant school there because he could see that the best workers and
citizens were being turned out by the Catholic Parish schools and College.
And the Pope couldn't have unilaterally allowed contraceptives without
alienating a large proportion of his Church, including, most likely, many
of the cardinals forming his Council. Like any other leader, he has to
deal with political realities.

Only so much can be done for the poor. If contraception is left out. there
is the possibility of more aid. At a youth public speaking contest, one
speaker wanted to bypass the governments and deliver aid directly to their
needy. Apart from the impracticality of doing this without passports and
the country's infrastructure, transport and social statistics, massive
dumping of aid can upset their economy, and make things even worse. Even
contraceptives would have to be a form of aid for the really needy, who
can't afford them, after buying (if they can afford even that) enough to
stay alive on.

The Taliban got rid of all the opium poppy plantations in Afghanistan. Very
moral, but most of the people depended on them for their income. It
created massive unemployment. Here, we have to accept the lesser of two
evils. The contraception issue could be seen the same way, but it is one
thing to live with an inherited evil, and quite another to allow a new one
(accepting their assessment.)

Whether the Pope was really a great man, only historians can judge. He was
certainly a break with tradition. And he was there for a long time during
a periond of political change. Whether Poland would have become free
without his influence is also unknown. Other Communist states were throwing
off Communism.

Isaac Azimov said: "Don't let your sense of morality get in the way of doing
what's right."

Doug L.

WhansaMi wrote:

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms. I, personally, didn't respect the man's views. I didn't know the *man*, so I can't say I feel one way about him, or the other. But, when people say what a great advocate for the poor he was, I can't help but think that the one act that he could have done to assist them, he refused to do. Sheila

--
ICQ Number 178748389. Registered Linux User No. 277548.
Drama is life with the dull bits cut out.
-- Alfred Hitchcock.

[Doug Laidlaw]

I am not a Catholic and I don't profess to speak for them. I disagree with
them on some things as well. And I don't flame people for your attitude.

The issue of contraceptives is as I understand it, a moral issue for
Catholics. Certainly they would help, but so would for example, permitting
bank robberies below a certain figure. (Yes, I know that the example is
ridiculous, but the issue is the same for them.) It is not an issue that
my wife and I accept, but we respect others, Some denominations consider
blood transfusions to be immoral. A man in Swan Hill was supportive of a
Protestant school there because he could see that the best workers and
citizens were being turned out by the Catholic Parish schools and College.
And the Pope couldn't have unilaterally allowed contraceptives without
alienating a large proportion of his Church, including, most likely, many
of the cardinals forming his Council. Like any other leader, he has to
deal with political realities.

Only so much can be done for the poor. If contraception is left out. there
is the possibility of more aid. At a youth public speaking contest, one
speaker wanted to bypass the governments and deliver aid directly to their
needy. Apart from the impracticality of doing this without passports and
the country's infrastructure, transport and social statistics, massive
dumping of aid can upset their economy, and make things even worse. Even
contraceptives would have to be a form of aid for the really needy, who
can't afford them, after buying (if they can afford even that) enough to
stay alive on.

The Taliban got rid of all the opium poppy plantations in Afghanistan. Very
moral, but most of the people depended on them for their income. It
created massive unemployment. Here, we have to accept the lesser of two
evils. The contraception issue could be seen the same way, but it is one
thing to live with an inherited evil, and quite another to allow a new one
(accepting their assessment.)

Whether the Pope was really a great man, only historians can judge. He was
certainly a break with tradition. And he was there for a long time during
a periond of political change. Whether Poland would have become free
without his influence is also unknown. Other Communist states were throwing
off Communism.

Isaac Azimov said: "Don't let your sense of morality get in the way of doing
what's right."

Doug L.

WhansaMi wrote:

During this week, as the world watched the pope be mourned and buried, I've held my tongue through all the accolades and proclamations of greatness. But, I'm just going to say it, to get it off my chest: There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light. There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries with a large Roman Catholic presence, and wonder why the pope didn't say anything to allow contraceptives to be used. There are those of us who look at the AIDS/HIV epidemic is Uganda, and wonder how bishops are being sanctioned by the church for distributing condoms. I, personally, didn't respect the man's views. I didn't know the *man*, so I can't say I feel one way about him, or the other. But, when people say what a great advocate for the poor he was, I can't help but think that the one act that he could have done to assist them, he refused to do. Sheila

--
ICQ Number 178748389. Registered Linux User No. 277548.
Drama is life with the dull bits cut out.
-- Alfred Hitchcock.

[Doug Laidlaw]

tracert wrote:

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

John 12:8 12:1 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. 12:2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. 12:3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. 12:4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], which should betray him, 12:5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? 12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. 12:7 Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. 12:8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

But we don't just leave them to be poor. Jesus said that while He was
around, He was entitled to respect. But with Jesus no longer on Earth to
spend the money on, we can get on with helping the poor. Personally, I
don't see the relevance of your quotation. He was saying: you will always
find some poor to help. It says nothing about how we help them, which is
WhansaMi's argument.

Doug L.
--
ICQ Number 178748389. Registered Linux User No. 277548.
Some men see things as they are and say why? I dream things that never were
and say: Why not?
- Robert Kennedy.

[Doug Laidlaw]

tracert wrote:

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message news:%mS5e.5354$0c2.999@trnddc08...

John 12:8 12:1 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. 12:2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. 12:3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. 12:4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], which should betray him, 12:5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? 12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. 12:7 Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. 12:8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

But we don't just leave them to be poor. Jesus said that while He was
around, He was entitled to respect. But with Jesus no longer on Earth to
spend the money on, we can get on with helping the poor. Personally, I
don't see the relevance of your quotation. He was saying: you will always
find some poor to help. It says nothing about how we help them, which is
WhansaMi's argument.

Doug L.
--
ICQ Number 178748389. Registered Linux User No. 277548.
Some men see things as they are and say why? I dream things that never were
and say: Why not?
- Robert Kennedy.

[Tai]

WhansaMi wrote:

"Tracey" <rbrancher2@aol.com> wrote in message news:425811DB.6040104@aol.com...

I guess "have to" is one of those amorphous terms like "need". In this case, I use it in the sense of "feel compelled to", which is Mirriam-Webster's 13th definition.

lol

I love it when you get all semantical, Sheila!

The way I see it is that the Pope did many good things in his life and I
believe he was a good man. I abhor the Roman Catholic Church's position on
birth control but people have free will. If they choose to accept that
doctrine then they have to take responsibility for it.

People aren't starving in poor countries because they have too many
children, they are starving because they can't grow enough food to feed
themselves. They can't feed themselves because they are too poor to improve
their techniques above subsistance farming and/or because they can't work
their land while they live with constant civil war.

We can't blame the Pope or the RC church any more than we can blame
ourselves for that and we each have to decide what kind of help we feel is
most appropriate to give, based on our own belief system. However, I also
find it hard to stomach when people who live in Palaces talk about charity
and working to fight poverty. Too much of parishioner's money goes into real
estate, imo. But, again, it's *their* choice and their church.


Tai

[Tai]

WhansaMi wrote:

"Tracey" <rbrancher2@aol.com> wrote in message news:425811DB.6040104@aol.com...

I guess "have to" is one of those amorphous terms like "need". In this case, I use it in the sense of "feel compelled to", which is Mirriam-Webster's 13th definition.

lol

I love it when you get all semantical, Sheila!

The way I see it is that the Pope did many good things in his life and I
believe he was a good man. I abhor the Roman Catholic Church's position on
birth control but people have free will. If they choose to accept that
doctrine then they have to take responsibility for it.

People aren't starving in poor countries because they have too many
children, they are starving because they can't grow enough food to feed
themselves. They can't feed themselves because they are too poor to improve
their techniques above subsistance farming and/or because they can't work
their land while they live with constant civil war.

We can't blame the Pope or the RC church any more than we can blame
ourselves for that and we each have to decide what kind of help we feel is
most appropriate to give, based on our own belief system. However, I also
find it hard to stomach when people who live in Palaces talk about charity
and working to fight poverty. Too much of parishioner's money goes into real
estate, imo. But, again, it's *their* choice and their church.


Tai

[WhansaMi]

"Dr Nancy's Sweetie" <kilroy@elvis.rowan.edu> wrote in message
news:d39pli$t03$1@pcls4.std.com...

Understand that I do not agree with the RCC's teachings on contraceptive technology. But it's not a good criticism to say "I'm upset that that guy acts according to his carefully thought-out convictions." (As I say, I disagree -- but I recognise that the Vatican's position is a thoughtful and reflective analysis of what they consider important moral issues. I believe they're wrong, but they're neither malicious nor stupid.)

Actually, I disagree with you. There are plenty of religious convictions
that I think are inherently wrong. Consider the subjugation of women in
fundamentalist Islamic traditions (shoot, in the LDS tradition, for that
matter). I don't have a problem saying that this is wrong, wrong,
wrongity-wrong, and that the leaders of those faiths are wrong, wrong,
wrongity-wrong either.

As far as the pope being a vehicle for change goes... well, religions are
not static. Even the RC church is not the same as it was 200 years ago
(thank goodness). The pope has tremendous power to shape the tenets of the
faith. He chose not to -- for whatever reason -- and I see this as a
problem. I recognize that *others* may see this as a good thing, I'm just
saying that I, as a member of society, cannot respect his unwillingness to
make changes that would improve the quality of life for all people.

Sheila

[WhansaMi]

"Dr Nancy's Sweetie" <kilroy@elvis.rowan.edu> wrote in message
news:d39pli$t03$1@pcls4.std.com...

Understand that I do not agree with the RCC's teachings on contraceptive technology. But it's not a good criticism to say "I'm upset that that guy acts according to his carefully thought-out convictions." (As I say, I disagree -- but I recognise that the Vatican's position is a thoughtful and reflective analysis of what they consider important moral issues. I believe they're wrong, but they're neither malicious nor stupid.)

Actually, I disagree with you. There are plenty of religious convictions
that I think are inherently wrong. Consider the subjugation of women in
fundamentalist Islamic traditions (shoot, in the LDS tradition, for that
matter). I don't have a problem saying that this is wrong, wrong,
wrongity-wrong, and that the leaders of those faiths are wrong, wrong,
wrongity-wrong either.

As far as the pope being a vehicle for change goes... well, religions are
not static. Even the RC church is not the same as it was 200 years ago
(thank goodness). The pope has tremendous power to shape the tenets of the
faith. He chose not to -- for whatever reason -- and I see this as a
problem. I recognize that *others* may see this as a good thing, I'm just
saying that I, as a member of society, cannot respect his unwillingness to
make changes that would improve the quality of life for all people.

Sheila

[rg]

"Dr Nancy's Sweetie" <kilroy@elvis.rowan.edu> wrote in message
news:d39pli$t03$1@pcls4.std.com...

"Sheila WhansaMi <whansami@aol.com>" wrote, of JohnPaul2:

This is sort of the yin/yang of the Saints who did awful things: the people who didn't do things we think would be good -- but who did do other things. A number of Polish anti-communists give the man tremendous credit (as much as 50% in one interview I saw) for the fall of Communism in Poland, and, afterwards, across Europe.

Exactly what was it that he did to contribute to the fall of Communism in
Poland?



rg


snip,snip.

[rg]

"Dr Nancy's Sweetie" <kilroy@elvis.rowan.edu> wrote in message
news:d39pli$t03$1@pcls4.std.com...

"Sheila WhansaMi <whansami@aol.com>" wrote, of JohnPaul2:

This is sort of the yin/yang of the Saints who did awful things: the people who didn't do things we think would be good -- but who did do other things. A number of Polish anti-communists give the man tremendous credit (as much as 50% in one interview I saw) for the fall of Communism in Poland, and, afterwards, across Europe.

Exactly what was it that he did to contribute to the fall of Communism in
Poland?



rg


snip,snip.

[George Prager]

This is sort of the yin/yang of the Saints who did awful things: the people who didn't do things we think would be good -- but who did do other things. A number of Polish anti-communists give the man tremendous credit (as much as 50% in one interview I saw) for the fall of Communism in Poland, and, afterwards, across Europe. Whatever else he might not have done, surely even 1% of the credit for ridding the world of the Soviet Union qualifies him for greatness on any secular scale of accomplishments.

[rest snipped]

amen to that!

An excellent post, thank you

G.P.

[George Prager]

This is sort of the yin/yang of the Saints who did awful things: the people who didn't do things we think would be good -- but who did do other things. A number of Polish anti-communists give the man tremendous credit (as much as 50% in one interview I saw) for the fall of Communism in Poland, and, afterwards, across Europe. Whatever else he might not have done, surely even 1% of the credit for ridding the world of the Soviet Union qualifies him for greatness on any secular scale of accomplishments.

[rest snipped]

amen to that!

An excellent post, thank you

G.P.

[Dave in Lake Villa]

'There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light.
There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries
with a large Roman Catholic presence.....'

I personally feel that there is something very wrong with Popes living
in opulence , having 17 bedroom summer homes, wearing the finest of Silk
Robes, being waited on hand and foot, and, expecting the masses to bow
to kiss his ring in worship (and it IS worship) . Somehow, i dont
think Christ would live like this if he were here today.

[Dave in Lake Villa]

'There are those of us who do not see the pope in that favorable light.
There are those of us who look at children starving in poor countries
with a large Roman Catholic presence.....'

I personally feel that there is something very wrong with Popes living
in opulence , having 17 bedroom summer homes, wearing the finest of Silk
Robes, being waited on hand and foot, and, expecting the masses to bow
to kiss his ring in worship (and it IS worship) . Somehow, i dont
think Christ would live like this if he were here today.

[Doug Laidlaw]

rg wrote:

"Dr Nancy's Sweetie" <kilroy@elvis.rowan.edu> wrote in message news:d39pli$t03$1@pcls4.std.com...

Exactly what was it that he did to contribute to the fall of Communism in Poland? rg snip,snip.

No saint is perfect. They are still human beings, liable to the same faults
as all of us. Not being a Catholic, I am not sure what makes a saint in
their sense. In the Bible, it means Christians generally. A paperback
"Dictionary of Saints" I have, denies that saints are in any way special
people, yet concedes that they are called on as intercessors. The whole
point of Luther's break was that he - and we - are in direct communion with
God, and we don't need the Virgin Mary or a saint to put in a good word on
our behalf. The idea that God may act more favourably towards us if we can
get a saint on our side seems to me, to be fundamentally wrong.

But plainly, there are some people whose personality or something makes them
able to live better lives. Someone said of Peter Marshall: "He talked with
God." That is beyond the reach of most of us.

The Pope still has tremendous political influence. The Catholic Church, as
I understand it, claims the right to direct the political activities of its
faithful according to what it conceives as the true path. But I am getting
beyond the limits of my knowledge here. Whether they should or shouldn't
have that right, there are arguments both ways.

Doug L.
--
ICQ Number 178748389. Registered Linux User No. 277548.
The best car safety device is a rear-view mirror with a cop in it.
- Dudley Moore.