Picking the next Pope

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Picking the next Pope
35
Sun, 03-10-2013 - 8:46am

I will be glued to my television next week, Lol.....  Do you think Tim Dolan has what it takes to be the next Pope?  Or any other American? 

Thoughts?

 

 

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sun, 03-17-2013 - 8:06am

Then don't explain yourself OMMY

ugh ... and once again Jams, why don't you explain your thoughts?? I am trying not to enter a battle with you. If you think it's more spiritual .... good ... why can't you explain why? I don't see much spirituality in the whole Church ... you really want to get into a heated discussion on that?

You're absolutely right I was defensive about your comments about devout before too, There was no basis for that either.

It's funny how when one disagrees it's because they have no basis for the opinions. And here, you bring up an old debate ... for what reason? Because I made a comment a long, long time ago that you didn't agree with?

It's ok Jams, I don't know many people, if any, who can explain how this church is more spiritual the political.

I believe those cardinals enter that conclave prepared for deep prayer, devotion and counsel through the holy spirit in chosing the next pontiff.

Sure, a lot of people "believe" ... the truth is no one knows. One believes and follows blindly (in a human being) .... gosh, didn't I just say this to mom?

Whatever Jams ... you come one here looking maybe for some support concerning your pope. You asked if we had any thoughts ... I say something about it being more political then spiritual ... and your response is ... I have no basis for this comment?? And your only explanation is you "believe"? OK .... you believe ... I don't and you've offered nothing to convince me otherwise.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sun, 03-17-2013 - 7:50am

Wow Mom, you have to spun this into quite a web off a simple statement. What on earth are you talking about?

You would be surprised how many people are not well-read and are ill-informed about their own religious beliefs and the origins of their religion.

Great, who said otherwise? Still really doesn't explain what you, being an atheist, has to do with anything.

She talkes about how celebracy is/was viewed in various cultures and religions.)

Who cares ... lol Now we are talking about celibacy??

I honestly do not believe that the selection of Francis was a political decision on the part of the cardinals.

That's good.

he talking heads on CNN and other news stations may talk like it was and that is why I brought that up.

I already addressed this. If you want to keep deabting what was said on CNN, I don't know what to tell you.

The cardinals picked a man that surprised everyone but I suspect the cardinals themselves. If their selection was political, there were other candiates that made more sense.

I honestly have no idea why you are still talking about this, but ok.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009
Sat, 03-16-2013 - 11:08am

You would be surprised how many people are not well-read and are ill-informed about their own religious beliefs and the origins of their religion. (By the way, if you are interested, there is an interesting book called the History of Celebacy by Elizabeth Abbott. She talkes about how celebracy is/was viewed in various cultures and religions.)

As for your original question, the church (or any other religious group) may try to intrude into the political debate of a country but it (and others) are increasingly less effective in their efforts. Just look what is happening in Isreal., how unsuccessful Francis was in stopping the passage of same-sex marriage act in Argentina..

I honestly do not believe that the selection of Francis was a political decision on the part of the cardinals. The talking heads on CNN and other news stations may talk like it was and that is why I brought that up.  Their constant assessment of the "election" and their interviewing of "experts" to find out their opinions would have been misleading to the viewer. They made it sound like it was a US primary! I can only imagine how bad the Italian press was! But, it was hard not to get caught up in the assessment of potential "candidates" etc.

Since the conclave is secret and there was no "campaign" prior to it, the news outlets had to find something to fill in the empty air.

The cardinals picked a man that surprised everyone but I suspect the cardinals themselves. If their selection was political, there were other candiates that made more sense. 

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Sat, 03-16-2013 - 9:53am

Then don't explain yourself OMMY.  I don't agree that chosing a new pope is more political "than" spiritual.  I believe those cardinals enter that conclave prepared for deep prayer, devotion and counsel through the holy spirit in chosing the next pontiff.  Of course it's political but that's not in exchange for spirituality. 

You're absolutely right I was defensive about your comments about devout before too, There was no basis for that either. 

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sat, 03-16-2013 - 8:20am

(I do remember an old debate in which you brought up how devout your upbringing was? I'm not sure if that plays a part here or not... Thanks).

:/ .... no Jams, that wasn't that debate, but I remember you became very defensive because I felt certain actions of others meant they were not devout in their beliefs.

I was raised Catholic (i don't know where you got devout out of that), left the Church and actually went back to the Church for some time ... but as you say, what does that have to do with anything? It appears people's religions origins or lack of, mean a great deal to this discussion.

If one is atheist and supports the Church, you are right behind them, but if one actually has experiences with the Church, that don't align with yours, then it appears to be problematic.

What about the selection of the pope is more political than spiritual Ommy.. What are your experiences with the church?

Oh boy, really, you want all my experiences with the church and religion, in general? That could take some time and a lot of space. Maybe Jams, you could explain how this process is more spiritual in nature?

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sat, 03-16-2013 - 8:03am

Sorry Mom, I do not understand your reaction and defense now of atheism. You are the one that brought up the fact you are atheist and still have no problem with the concept of the Catholic Pope .... I was simply asking you what this had to do with anything? Is as if being atheist and still supportive of this religion means something's special.

You keep going any about not having problems with this or that. I am just wondering who said you should have a problem with it? I never even said I had a problem with the Pope. But ... ok.

Sorry, you shared this point, being atheist, as if it should mean something to the discussion and I don't see that as connection. Are you suggesting because you are atheist and support religion, that somehow means something?

Being an athesist also does not mean that you are ignorant of religious beliefs.

Again, who said this? Do you believe this means ignorance?

Most athesists I know (including myself) are extremely well-read. I have read the bible, many of the gnostic texts, the Dead Sea Scrolls as well the Koran (well parts of it, it is hard going), the Mormon texts as well as non-religious texts (like those by Dawkins and other athesists).

That's nice. So, do you think people who are not atheist are not well read?? What is your point? Other people, other non atheists can be well read and have a different opinion.

Of course, I do not have any problems with the Pope or any other leader of a religion.

Who said you should have a problem with the Pope??

If that leader is actually trying to make this world a better place, if he is trying to adher to the "core" of his religion why should I have a problem with him.

Seriously, who said you should have a problem? If you believe this, fine and dandy, no one mentioned having a problem with anything ... other then yourself. I actually just said I don't understand the concept ... and truthfully, I don't.

Oh, when one states they do not agree with something, this does not mean they feel others should have a problem with it.

He is a human being, like everyone else

Exactly, he is a human being, however, many with follow him, put their faith in him, blindly .... that I do not understand, agree with or feel is somehow making the world a better place. JMO

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009
Fri, 03-15-2013 - 4:59pm
Thanks.
Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Fri, 03-15-2013 - 2:39pm

mom_iteadrinker wrote:
<p>Being an athesist does not mean that you do not understand WHY people believe in a specific religion. </p><p>It does not mean that you are not interested in the cultural and religious ramifications that the various faiths have on this world. You just do not accept those beliefs; there's a big difference. It also does not mean that you do not acknowledge the impact faith can have on human beings. I actually understand why the Catholic Church has taken the stand it has on various issues; understanding does not mean I agree.</p><p>Being an athesist also does not mean that you are ignorant of religious beliefs. </p><p>Most athesists I know (including myself) are extremely well-read.  I have read the bible, many of the gnostic texts, the Dead Sea Scrolls as well the Koran (well parts of it, it is hard going), the Mormon texts as well as non-religious texts (like those by Dawkins and other athesists).</p><p>Of course, I do not have any problems with the Pope or any other leader of a religion. If that leader is actually trying to make this world a better place, if he is trying to adher to the "core" of his religion why should I have a problem with him. He is a human being, like everyone else. I respect him for that, although I do not agree with him.</p>

Well written. 

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009
Fri, 03-15-2013 - 1:42pm

Being an athesist does not mean that you do not understand WHY people believe in a specific religion.

It does not mean that you are not interested in the cultural and religious ramifications that the various faiths have on this world. You just do not accept those beliefs; there's a big difference. It also does not mean that you do not acknowledge the impact faith can have on human beings. I actually understand why the Catholic Church has taken the stand it has on various issues; understanding does not mean I agree.

Being an athesist also does not mean that you are ignorant of religious beliefs.

Most athesists I know (including myself) are extremely well-read.  I have read the bible, many of the gnostic texts, the Dead Sea Scrolls as well the Koran (well parts of it, it is hard going), the Mormon texts as well as non-religious texts (like those by Dawkins and other athesists).

Of course, I do not have any problems with the Pope or any other leader of a religion. If that leader is actually trying to make this world a better place, if he is trying to adher to the "core" of his religion why should I have a problem with him. He is a human being, like everyone else. I respect him for that, although I do not agree with him.

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Fri, 03-15-2013 - 8:30am

What about the selection of the pope is more political than spiritual Ommy.. What are your experiences with the church?

(I do remember an old debate in which you brought up how devout your upbringing was?   I'm not sure if that plays a part here or not... Thanks).

 

 

Pages