Well a big week for the Papists! Pope Francis....
..... when I heard Jesuit my first thought was zealot, passionate about his beliefs, possibly fanatical but on reflection devout seems better suited and, a first perhaps? A man who truly believes in his God!! On the plus side I am sure his appointment is striking fear into the hearts of those who feel their celibacy oath only applies to anybody over 16! Can one man clean up so much that is wrong? The child sex scandal cover ups that suggest acceptance? The unparalleled wealth? The hypocrisy?
On the other side of the coin, his doctrine is allegedly based on archaic beliefs better
suited to the Middle Ages or worse the Middle East 2,000 years ago! Surely such primitive views compound this apparent acceptance of child sex abuse? In Biblical times, child brides were accepted, as they still are in many under developed nations, isn't it time to move with the times? Allow priests to have normal relationships & families, accept same-sex relationships, acknowledge the need for abortion & encourage birth control?
Proof is in the media on a daily basis, the doctrine, as it is portrayed, doesn't change anything, rather it results in heartache, blackmail, illegal acts and God forbid!! [*sarcasm alert*] Priests holding gay sex parties or getting married in secret!
How many back street abortions still go on today? How many children are still being abused by "trusted" priests? How many unwanted babies are born every day? How many people have committed suicide in agony over their sexual feelings?
.... And how can our little planet continue to sustain the population growth encouraged by the Catholic church? Already over 7 billion!
... And so, back to Pope Francis, he certainly has his work cut out, at first glance it looks unlikely he will be sucked in by the power and luxury, but it will take a strong man to stand firm as he increasingly becomes the subject of worship. Early indications suggest he might even give away the riches of the Church to the poor! That will make him popular! I shall watch with interest!
Showing posts with label Catholic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Catholic. Show all posts
Sunday, 17 March 2013
Sunday, 3 March 2013
Vatican Secret Archives
How fascinating would it be to delve into The Vatican Secret Archives?
Hundreds of years of history and mystery and although the Church has apparently opened its doors, there is still so much it seeks to protect. Why? Surely if the Church is what it claims to be, there is no longer a need for such secrecy?
These documents are so incredibly valuable and special, they should be scanned and preserved for future generations - how tragic that in another few hundred years so many of them will probably be dust with their secrets lost forever.
Sunday, 24 February 2013
Controversy & Speculation
So much speculation in the media this week around the worst examples of behaviour of senior members of the Catholic Church. So for years, the Pope has managed to protect the reputation of the
Church from the worst of crimes - child abuse. Yet now we are all meant
to believe he has stepped down over a "gay network"... seriously? Do
people truly think that the Pope is more horrified by a group of priests
having a sex party (consenting adults) than he is about priests having
illegal sex with children?
This controversy apparently began with vatileaks - why are people surprised? The entire history of the Catholic church is rife with intrigue. It is simple - power corrupts and through generation of fear and amassing of a huge wealth, this Church has power beyond imagination.
The blatant hypocrisy on public display surely must be questioned? The opulence, the grandeur, the control by fear, the discrimination, the worship of a man who is not God but purports to be his vassal and worse has the nerve to claim he represents God!
This controversy apparently began with vatileaks - why are people surprised? The entire history of the Catholic church is rife with intrigue. It is simple - power corrupts and through generation of fear and amassing of a huge wealth, this Church has power beyond imagination.
The blatant hypocrisy on public display surely must be questioned? The opulence, the grandeur, the control by fear, the discrimination, the worship of a man who is not God but purports to be his vassal and worse has the nerve to claim he represents God!
Controversy Over Pope's Resignation
So firstly, let's agree, the Pope's resignation was (in part) a diversionary tactic that has backfired beyond all expectations. The world was meant to speculate on the incoming Pope; where the outgoing Pope might reside; how he might spend his time; and so on. While these events unfold we were not meant to wonder "what is the real news?". It would appear that quite the reverse has happened!
Controversy Over Pope's Resignation
So to the real story - what are the contents of the big red books? While they remain secret (and no doubt they will) the world will continue to speculate. Gay orgies? Is that really as bad as it gets? Hardly earth shattering stuff and certainly no surprise to those on the outside. I imagine it suits the Church to allow this speculation to continue - it is likely to be far less damaging in the long run than the truth that they will endeavour to continue hiding.
What could be so bad? Hmmmm .... let me think about that one..... a gay Pope? Nope! ... Proof that Dan Brown was right all along? Highly probable but would that be enough to stand down? Surely not - the theory that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and they had a daughter has been around forever... something worse?
It has to be something that would truly hurt the Church at its heart.... but what?
Controversy Over Pope's Resignation
So to the real story - what are the contents of the big red books? While they remain secret (and no doubt they will) the world will continue to speculate. Gay orgies? Is that really as bad as it gets? Hardly earth shattering stuff and certainly no surprise to those on the outside. I imagine it suits the Church to allow this speculation to continue - it is likely to be far less damaging in the long run than the truth that they will endeavour to continue hiding.
What could be so bad? Hmmmm .... let me think about that one..... a gay Pope? Nope! ... Proof that Dan Brown was right all along? Highly probable but would that be enough to stand down? Surely not - the theory that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and they had a daughter has been around forever... something worse?
It has to be something that would truly hurt the Church at its heart.... but what?
Sunday, 17 February 2013
This is Democracy
What the!!!
Death threats to UK's top Muslim MP who voted for gay marriage
I hope Mr Khan does not fall victim to the pressures brought about by his religious choices. He is clearly somebody able to separate blind religious belief from political independent choice. Britain cannot allow Islam, Christianity or any other religious institution, large or small to mandate how people live and Church and State must remain separate.
Issuing a ruling against Mr Khan in the name of his religion attempts to remove his independence when attending Parliament. I would suggest Mr Bandhalevi should take some lessons in understanding the culture and society he has chosen to be a part of. If he prefers a society where his fatwa is acceptable, then he must relocate to a country that operates under religious law. Britain does not, it is a democracy and his attempt to change it through fear is simply unacceptable. It has taken many hundreds of years and a lot of suffering for Britain to evolve her political systems independent of religious influence. It is vital that this independence is retained.
What Mr Bandhalevi apparently fails to appreciate is that it is the very nature of British culture that allows extremist websites such as the one quoted in the article to exist and him to speak out. If I try to imagine a scenario where an atheist, agnostic or even a Christian expressed similar views, in a country governed by Islamic law I can't help but believe it would result in a quick beheading!
Bigoted views and sinister death threats contribute to racism.
Multi-cultural societies are the next phase for the human race and the only way this can be achieved is to learn to respect each others ways, not try and force others to live as you do. Threatening to kill somebody if they don't see things your way is, quite frankly, out dated, antediluvian nonsense and it has no place in the future of the UK or any other Western nation.
Death threats to UK's top Muslim MP who voted for gay marriage
I hope Mr Khan does not fall victim to the pressures brought about by his religious choices. He is clearly somebody able to separate blind religious belief from political independent choice. Britain cannot allow Islam, Christianity or any other religious institution, large or small to mandate how people live and Church and State must remain separate.
Issuing a ruling against Mr Khan in the name of his religion attempts to remove his independence when attending Parliament. I would suggest Mr Bandhalevi should take some lessons in understanding the culture and society he has chosen to be a part of. If he prefers a society where his fatwa is acceptable, then he must relocate to a country that operates under religious law. Britain does not, it is a democracy and his attempt to change it through fear is simply unacceptable. It has taken many hundreds of years and a lot of suffering for Britain to evolve her political systems independent of religious influence. It is vital that this independence is retained.
What Mr Bandhalevi apparently fails to appreciate is that it is the very nature of British culture that allows extremist websites such as the one quoted in the article to exist and him to speak out. If I try to imagine a scenario where an atheist, agnostic or even a Christian expressed similar views, in a country governed by Islamic law I can't help but believe it would result in a quick beheading!
Bigoted views and sinister death threats contribute to racism.
Multi-cultural societies are the next phase for the human race and the only way this can be achieved is to learn to respect each others ways, not try and force others to live as you do. Threatening to kill somebody if they don't see things your way is, quite frankly, out dated, antediluvian nonsense and it has no place in the future of the UK or any other Western nation.
Saturday, 9 February 2013
Religion, Faith and Morality
Defined in the Oxford dictionary as "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods", religion is thought provoking, controversial, inspires strong emotions and at its worst moves people to perform terrible acts of violence and war in its name.
Faith is defined as "complete trust or confidence in someone or something" or "strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof".
For me, faith is distinctly different from religion. Religion furnishes religious institutions with the power to control by fear. Faith on the other hand allows for the pure belief in an entity without the need for fear and worship. Faith allows freedom of thought, will and speech where religion does not.
Organised religion has a part to play in society, it provides a social network and a safe haven in times of personal trouble or hardship. In times of conflict it appears that more people turn to religion for reassurance so it becomes self feeding, especially when you consider how many wars are fought in the name of religion.
Do we need religion to tell us right from wrong? Do we need religion to tell us how to think? Does religion have a place in Politics? No to all of these things
Does religion hold us back and stop society from evolving? Does religion tell people how to think and judge? Are morals better today than previously? Yes to all!
The mainstream religions were founded thousands of years ago and while I don't claim to be an expert on founding dates, my research suggests Hinduism beliefs were founded some 6000 years ago, Judaism 3800-5000 years, Buddhism around 2500 years, Christianity ~2000 and Islam ~1400 years ago.
Can the teachings of ancient times still be relevant today or do they hold us back and stop society from evolving. We are still fighting the same wars hundreds and even thousands of years on, where is the sense?
From what I can see, religion is about power and control, not just of those who embrace a particular doctrine but also about dictating the lifestyles and thinking of those who share the planet.
I have so much more to discuss on this topic but will save for another day. Have morals declined or improved over time? Has anybody else noticed how religion is heavily male dominated? Is any religious institution female dominated? Oppression....?
Faith is defined as "complete trust or confidence in someone or something" or "strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof".
For me, faith is distinctly different from religion. Religion furnishes religious institutions with the power to control by fear. Faith on the other hand allows for the pure belief in an entity without the need for fear and worship. Faith allows freedom of thought, will and speech where religion does not.
Organised religion has a part to play in society, it provides a social network and a safe haven in times of personal trouble or hardship. In times of conflict it appears that more people turn to religion for reassurance so it becomes self feeding, especially when you consider how many wars are fought in the name of religion.
Do we need religion to tell us right from wrong? Do we need religion to tell us how to think? Does religion have a place in Politics? No to all of these things
Does religion hold us back and stop society from evolving? Does religion tell people how to think and judge? Are morals better today than previously? Yes to all!
The mainstream religions were founded thousands of years ago and while I don't claim to be an expert on founding dates, my research suggests Hinduism beliefs were founded some 6000 years ago, Judaism 3800-5000 years, Buddhism around 2500 years, Christianity ~2000 and Islam ~1400 years ago.
Can the teachings of ancient times still be relevant today or do they hold us back and stop society from evolving. We are still fighting the same wars hundreds and even thousands of years on, where is the sense?
From what I can see, religion is about power and control, not just of those who embrace a particular doctrine but also about dictating the lifestyles and thinking of those who share the planet.
I have so much more to discuss on this topic but will save for another day. Have morals declined or improved over time? Has anybody else noticed how religion is heavily male dominated? Is any religious institution female dominated? Oppression....?
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Planting Seeds!
After mulling over the article about "more than a thousand Roman Catholic priests voicing opposition to
same-sex marriage legislation in an open letter to the Daily Telegraph" I suddenly twigged! This is not only about their fight against gay marriage..
After hundreds and even thousands of years of persecuting others, the Catholic Church has started planting seeds in the media (and no doubt other forums) indicating they are the victims of persecution. How incredibly and amazingly clever! I was distracted by the gay marriage debate and didn't realise the primary underlying purpose of their article, which in my opinion is to lay down the seeds for future generations to become confused about exactly who was persecuted and who was not.
The letter stated: “After centuries of persecution, Catholics have, in recent times, been able to be members of the professions and participate fully in the life of this country"
What complete and utter dross!!!
The institution of the Catholic Church is not the victim, it is the perpetrator of persecution!!! From the inquisitions of the middle ages to the alleged collaboration with Nazi Germany. I struggle to accept that the institution of the Catholic Church can ever be classed as victimised.
I have no argument with those who follow the Catholic doctrine only an exceedingly strong distaste for an institution that manipulates and attempts to control by fear.
After hundreds and even thousands of years of persecuting others, the Catholic Church has started planting seeds in the media (and no doubt other forums) indicating they are the victims of persecution. How incredibly and amazingly clever! I was distracted by the gay marriage debate and didn't realise the primary underlying purpose of their article, which in my opinion is to lay down the seeds for future generations to become confused about exactly who was persecuted and who was not.
The letter stated: “After centuries of persecution, Catholics have, in recent times, been able to be members of the professions and participate fully in the life of this country"
What complete and utter dross!!!
The institution of the Catholic Church is not the victim, it is the perpetrator of persecution!!! From the inquisitions of the middle ages to the alleged collaboration with Nazi Germany. I struggle to accept that the institution of the Catholic Church can ever be classed as victimised.
I have no argument with those who follow the Catholic doctrine only an exceedingly strong distaste for an institution that manipulates and attempts to control by fear.
Sunday, 13 January 2013
The Church on Gay Marriage
This post was prompted by apparent opinion of a news article about more than a thousand Roman Catholic priests voicing opposition to same-sex marriage legislation in an open letter to the Daily Telegraph.
Here is my theory!! In my first hand experience there is minimal enthusiasm in Britain for the church and yet the UK sentiment against gay-marriage has a very strong religious feel to it. The pews are empty on all but the major festivals (OK, so people like to sing Christmas carols) and so where is all this religious fanaticism come from? Why are so many comments in favour of religion and so much negativity against anybody who even hints that the church should mind their own? My theory is that religious institutions are paying people to work full time writing comments and voting accordingly! In modern society it is NOT appropriate for any religious denomination to have a say in how our countries are governed!
Here is my theory!! In my first hand experience there is minimal enthusiasm in Britain for the church and yet the UK sentiment against gay-marriage has a very strong religious feel to it. The pews are empty on all but the major festivals (OK, so people like to sing Christmas carols) and so where is all this religious fanaticism come from? Why are so many comments in favour of religion and so much negativity against anybody who even hints that the church should mind their own? My theory is that religious institutions are paying people to work full time writing comments and voting accordingly! In modern society it is NOT appropriate for any religious denomination to have a say in how our countries are governed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)