Is the Pope Catholic?????

[grantcart]

Given his various statements today this funny throwaway line now becomes a relevant question, lol.

[Autumn]

1. Does a bear shit in the woods?

[tblue]

2. Pretty cool, ain't he?

For a Pope! Never thought I'd hear words like they come out of a papal mouth.

[AlbertCat]

39. Never thought I'd hear words like they come out of a papal mouth.

Well, he could have said something useful...like "Use a condom"

[trotsky]

3. Let's see...

Opposes the equality and ordination of women? Check.
Opposes allowing people to make their own reproductive choices? Check.
Opposes human sexuality in any form other than between a married male and female? Check.

Yeah, he's Catholic - officially. And it ain't funny.

[grantcart]

6. Is Trotsky a Neo-Manichaeist?

Why Yes I guess he is.

Glossary of philosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_philosophy‎

Neo-Aristotelianism: A view of literature and criticism propagated by the ...... mostly extinct today, a revival has been attempted under the name of Neo-Manichaeism. ... Stalinism, Maoism, and Trotskyism, each hewing to the ideas of a particular ...

[trotsky]

9. Oh, I get it - you think my username has something to do with Leon Trotsky.

Common mistake.

So - got any factual dispute with what I said? Was I wrong on any point?

[grantcart]

10. No I actually was referring to you but was pretty confident that having missed the humor of the OP

that you would double down and miss the humor of the response was what I was counting on.

Now the fact that you continue to take umbrage every time someone associates your username with the 3rd most important Marxist of all time and not with Joe Trotsky the well known ultra fractal artist, well that is just a special treat. That you seem so surprised every time makes the association is just special, Leon, er Joe.

[trotsky]

13. I see. You have no response and would rather get personal.

You take care.

[grantcart]

22. a) no you don't see b) not personal

[trotsky]

24. OK. Prove it.

I'll give you another chance. Address what I asked instead of flinging attacks.

Here it is again so you don't have to scroll up:
So - got any factual dispute with what I said? Was I wrong on any point?

Let's keep things civil and discuss the topic.

[grantcart]

25. The fact that you don't see the humor in the original OP and the light response to your OP

is self evident.

To the point that you think it was 'personal', it could only be personal if there is something personally revealing about your taking the name "Trotsky" but there isn't.

My OP was civil and humorous, my responses were civil and humorous (Rug got the obscure reference to "Joe Trotsky&quot . My reference to Trotsky being Neo-Manichaeist was a metaphysical jab at Trotsky and my analysis to your rather black/white good/evil approach to all things religion, which is in fact, rather Manichaeist. I don't engage in your labored humorless desultory responses because I find them to be largely redundant rehash of your attacks on all things religious and find them tedious and soporific attacks on all things religious. In fact because of those responses by you and a couple of others with similar agendas I took the Religion forum off my subscription list and rarely come here despite having a graduate degree in Theology.

[trotsky]

32. 2nd chance given, and spat upon.

I wish you well anyway. Please note, I don't have to insult you to make a point.

[grantcart]

38. always hostile and beligerent and yet always the victim, how sad.

If you despise people who participate in religious traditions (and I don't consider myself in that group) then why do you post 73% of your posts in the Religion Group?

[trotsky]

41. Religion affects me and the people I care about.

Religious leaders - those of the RCC most notably - support and lobby for public policy changes that I believe are detrimental to the progressive agenda.

Religious thinking - believing things without evidence, or worse: believing things DESPITE evidence - leads us into dangerous territory, and empowers religious assaults on our secular liberties.

Because of this, I have opinions on religious topics and issues. I am sorry if you don't think I have a valid reason to post here. But I will anyway.

I initially posted a reply to your OP because I didn't think it was funny. What the pope said doesn't change or even announce a change in official church dogma, doctrine, or policy. Millions of gay Catholics are still not allowed to live a full human life and love the person they want but remain members of good standing in their church. I find this to be repulsive, and I'm going to comment on it, because again: it affects people I care about.

And no, I don't "despise people who participate in religious traditions." That is a vicious, unwarranted smear. I haven't personally attacked or insulted you once in this thread, yet you have done nothing but that to me. Does it make you feel better?

[mr blur]

35. "..a graduate degree in Theology", eh? Bully for you.

Couldn't you find anything useful to do with your time?

[grantcart]

36. Not in 1978, beside they offerred a completely paid ticket.

For someone who grew up in a backwater conservative area it was a ticket out, and a chance to live on the East Coast and I leveraged it into a ticket to Asia. It was actually quite interesting as well as the professors were not particularly sympathetic to pedestrian Sunday School "Jesus loves me" approach that most Seminarians brought with them on the first day. If you ever say "Paper Chase" it was actually very similar to that.

[rug]

17. I wish Joe Trotsky would post here.

[grantcart]

23. I thought his avatar was pretty 'Trotskiesk'

So glad you got my little joke.



Access to his gallery here:

http://www.wack.ch/artis/

[okasha]

44. I wish Joe Trotsky would post that

on my living room wall.

[longship]

28. Please argue to the point, not the person.

And certainly not the person's DU nom de plume.

Let's make DU a good place to have reasonable discussion.

[grantcart]

37. Everytime I have come to this group this poster pursues and stalks a thread.

I have received many DUmails from others complaining of the same thing.

In fact a number started the Interfaith Group where they could discuss religious views without having certain folks stalk them down with hostility and anger.

I stopped posting in this group altogether but thought that this Pope's recent statements gave life to the funny throw aside line "Is the Pope Catholic".

As to the nom de plume the poster uses one of the most famous names in political history and yet if you make a reference to that he patronizingly remarks that you must be crazy if you think that it had anything to do with THAT Trotsky then there must be something wrong with you.

The only point of the OP is that the Pope's statements are such a change that the phrase "Is the Pope Catholic" which is usually followed by "does the bear shit in the woods?" has a completely different meaning.

As to the remark on the nom de plume, there is nothing mean or degrading about anything I said. In fact making a remark about assuming that he was referring to "Joe Trotsky" rather than "Leon Trotsky" is nothing more than light ribbing. But, not surprisingly, the person replying responds with bitterness and outrage. If you take the name "Abraham Lincoln" then you should expect people are going to make a response to it, and I agree it shouldn't be mean, but if you put it out there then you should expect a response. This fellow is always on maximum outrage and antagonism. He absolutely despises everything religious and yet 73% of his posts are in the Religion group. It has turned the group into a barren island without humor or thoughtful exchange as if some grand metaphysical battle is at stake.

I do find it interesting that those that are so hostile to religiously observant folk (and I don't consider myself to be one of them) have a much more rigid Manaecheistic view of the world than those that participate in religious traditions that have established canons of belief. If you want to have reasonable discussions about religious traditions then you may be interested in the Interfaith Group because I haven't seen any in the dry desert of the Religious Group where combat and scoring points is the raison d'etre.

[cbayer]

42. Have you looked at the posts of the person he is responding to here?

Talk about needing to argue to the point and not the person.

[trotsky]

43. Heed your own advice, cbayer.

Be consistent in its application. And you might just find people respond more positively to you.

Yeah, I know, you'll continue to completely shun me for whatever crime you think I've committed, but if you're going to judge me, I'm going to defend myself. You are in no position to judge.

[cbayer]

4. Hilarious, and I bet some of the higher ups in the Vatican are asking the

same question.

I hope he continues in this direction.

While he's not going to get much internal support, he is definitely going to get some from the outside.

Nice to see you here, grantcart!

[grantcart]

7. I expect that he is going to get a lot more institutional support than people may expect.

Anything that allows ordinary Catholics to get away from the scandal and litigation issues by a few will be embraced by millions of hard working Catholics who want to be proud of their Church again.

[cbayer]

8. I can forsee that happening as well.

He is certainly resonating with a log of catholics and non-catholics alike.

I wish him the best of luck.

[Humanist_Activist]

11. Sounds like he is playing them for a pack of fools...

his message is shit, sorry, its true, its homophobic and misogynistic, remember this is the same guy who condemned the current president of Argentina while she was a candidate because she's a woman, and they shouldn't lead.

I don't understand this at all, this asshole condemns the "gay lobby" and people on DU cheer him for it? Why?

[cbayer]

12. Yes, of course. All those who see this as a positive message and a reason

for hope are fools.

Thus spake Humanist_Activist.

[Humanist_Activist]

15. I see a bunch of people, mostly progressives and liberals, who project their hopes...

onto this guy, setting themselves up for bitter disappointment. He is not changing any church teaching or doctrine on this, that much is clear, hell he hasn't even changed the message of the Catholic Church, just prettied up the words, but just because you can call a lump of shit a candy bar doesn't make it so, and it will still taste like shit.

Not to mention, in the SAME DAMN ARTICLE, he condemns the "gay lobby" I'm assuming he means those who advocate for equal rights. Yet people laud him.

[cbayer]

18. Well, that's what you see.

I wouldn't call your POV foolish, though I may call it only your POV.

There was a possibility that the church would take another lurch to the right. I think there are many catholics and non-catholics who are very glad to see something else.

He is changing the tone. While that may not be enough or may not be happening fast enough for some, it is happening.

His gay lobby remark was made previously and it was never clear to many what he was talking about, but it had something to do with internal workings at the vatican.

You can hate on him all you want. That's your right and you are certainly not alone.

But attacking everyone else who may be seeing this differently as fools is, well, foolish.

[trotsky]

19. "But attacking everyone else who may be seeing this differently as fools is, well, foolish."

This is mind-numbingly hypocritical coming from you, cbayer. Would you like a link?

[Humanist_Activist]

20. I'm just pissed off that people are lionizing a hateful asshole like the Pope...

he and his church should be MARGINALIZED. Just because the current Pope is a good politician doesn't change the hateful nature of church teaching he supports.

To be honest, I don't care what the fuck he believes, but what he's going to do with those beliefs, generally speaking, his church should have no more influence on public policy than any other church, and all of them, including his, should stick to keeping their shit in their churches, and leave the rest of us alone.

[cbayer]

21. Lionizing might go a bit too far. I see some guarded optimism, at least here,

but not much more.

Since it is highly unlikely that the RCC is going to be marginalized, perhaps we need to look at other possible solutions.

Maybe he is no more than a good politician, but if he is making noise that indicates a potential change in attitude in the church, I see that as a good thing.

Nothing about his recent remarks are intended to influence public policy, imo. They appear to be targeted at catholics and the catholic church.

If you want him to leave you alone, there is the option of hiding each and every thread here that refers to him.

[Dorian Gray]

30. Life without hope for change

is a stagnant cesspool of despair.

Of course people are hoping for change. Some are working actively for it.

I don't know that millions of people are pinning their hopes on him, but some change in rhetoric is much appreciated. Hopefully it is a sign of truly internal changes with the Vatican hierarchy.

[trotsky]

34. I think that I speak for others as well as myself when I say that...

of COURSE we hope for change. I think it is unfair and totally inaccurate to portray this as a black-or-white either you think this is a great, wonderful, positive sign OR you are stuck in a "stagnant cesspool of despair."

So far, we haven't seen actual change. This isn't change, it's just better PR.

[Humanist_Activist]

45. The Catholic Church by its nature, is a hindrance to progress...

hell, its an organization whose primary argumentation when faced with challenges are logical fallacies(argument from tradition and/or age) and whose structure doesn't allow for "changing with the times" in a manner that will be acceptable in the future. I definitely foresee a time when the Catholic Church, in regards to some teachings, is viewed as being as extremist as Westboro Baptist Church is regarded today. Probably before I have kids entering high school, given the rapidly changing attitudes of society.

Given this, its likely the church will be left in the dust, able to hang on, worldwide, by trying to keep followers in nations that aren't as stable as those in Europe or the Americas, but once things improve there, then their numbers will fall. The Church is already a shadow of its former self in so many different countries, eventually the same will hold true worldwide.

[trotsky]

16. What's the positive message, cbayer?

That gay Catholics won't be "judged" as long as they aren't part of the "gay lobby" and don't engage in homosexual sex?

I'm glad you can take something positive out of it, but I just don't see it.

Or should I just say - "This is a positive message and reason for hope, and all who don't embrace it are fools." Thus spake cbayer.

[longship]

29. Come on, my friend.

This pope may not be the bastion of religious liberalism, but he certainly seems to be willing to stir the pot. That's a welcome situation, especially given the previous popes, and most especially the last one.

Rome wasn't built in a day, nor was the Vatican. I see both good and bad in this guy. But the good is better than we've seen in any recent prelate of the Catholic Church.

And I still do not like the whole Catholic thing. But let's see what this guy does before we condemn him. Reform is what the Catholics need. This pope may bring that about. One would hope.

And I agree wholeheartedly with your objections.

[trotsky]

31. I repeat: what's the positive message?

The Daily Show did a fantastic bit on this last night. They echoed my position - the policy hasn't changed, but there's a nicer "tone." They then compared it to the signs above segregated drinking fountains - "whites only" vs "coloreds." The "new tone" signs said "whites only - have a nice day " and "coloreds." Perfect analogy IMHO.

Positive message? Sorry, I'm going to laugh at that one.

[AlbertCat]

40. I repeat...

He could have said something useful...like "Use a condom".

[Humanist_Activist]

5. Yes, he reiterates bigoted Church teaching, and people seem to think it marks a change.

What the fuck is wrong with this picture?

[rug]

14. I don't know. He's not wearing the little red shoes either.

[Agnosticsherbet]

26. Does a bear shit in the woods?

if he's catholic?

[xfundy]

27. Just a PR move.

Just like the repigs. Change the packaging, keep putting the same old shit inside.

[n2doc]

33. Article along same lines

Is the Pope Catholic?

by STEVEN MAZIE JULY 31, 2013, 1:08 AM

Everyone is agog about the gay-friendly sentiment Pope Francis expressed on his flight home from Brazil. "If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will,” the pontiff said, “who am I to judge? They should not be marginalized. They are our brothers."

Three thoughts.

One: Believe the hype. This is a big deal. Cardinal Timothy Dolan can jump on “CBS This Morning” and insist that Pope Francis’s words represent no switch in Church doctrine that says homosexuals are to be tolerated while homosexual conduct is not. The pope’s message, says Dolan,

may be something people find new and refreshing. I for one don't think it is.

But Andrew Sullivan is on the money with his analysis of why Pope Francis’s line is both new and refreshing:

The Church does not teach that homosexuality is a choice, and so, to sustain the stigmatization of homosexuality in the face of new research and data, Benedict had to opine that gay people are intrinsically outside “the direction of creation” and our very nature is “somehow distorted.” Dolan can spin this any way he wants. But the proof of the malice was the blunt discrimination against gay priests regardless of their conduct in 2005, the absurdly brutal attacks on gay parents and gay people in the debate over civil marriage equality, and the obsessive-compulsive insistence on never hiring lay people who might conceivably be married to someone of the same gender (something never done with, say, re-married or divorced heterosexuals).

Dolan and Benedict have never, ever spoken of gay people the way Francis did.

Two: This is genuine. The “who am I to judge?” line appears to have come from Pope Francis in a sincere spirit of toleration for gays and lesbians. The message was delivered off the cuff. It was not a prepared speech. It was not vetted by advisers. Its language was not fussed over and tweaked to prevent misunderstanding. It was an in-the-moment expression of a moral principle: people who are good-faith followers of God are welcome in the Church. Catholic doctrine should not be interpreted to shun gays and lesbians.

more

http://bigthink.com/praxis/is-the-pope-catholic