It’s on: Modern atheism “has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice,” declares Pope
posted at 7:05 pm on November 30, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Commenter Peski sends the link and sniffs, “Maybe he only reads the New Testament.”
Actually, the Pope’s after more than just the atheists. You’ll find the encyclical here; our Protestant readers will note with interest (or not) what he has to say about individual salvation. As for the godless, his argument will be familiar as it’s been made in the comments of this blog many times.
The atheism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is—in its origins and aims—a type of moralism: a protest against the injustices of the world and of world history. A world marked by so much injustice, innocent suffering, and cynicism of power cannot be the work of a good God. A God with responsibility for such a world would not be a just God, much less a good God. It is for the sake of morality that this God has to be contested. Since there is no God to create justice, it seems man himself is now called to establish justice. If in the face of this world’s suffering, protest against God is understandable, the claim that humanity can and must do what no God actually does or is able to do is both presumptuous and intrinsically false. It is no accident that this idea has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice; rather, it is grounded in the intrinsic falsity of the claim. A world which has to create its own justice is a world without hope. No one and nothing can answer for centuries of suffering. No one and nothing can guarantee that the cynicism of power—whatever beguiling ideological mask it adopts—will cease to dominate the world.
He’s referring to communism (and refers to Marx by name earlier on), of which atheism is of course a component. To read this, you’d think it was communism that was a component of atheism — that the root of the problem is godlessness, not an economic system based on state coercion and compulsory compliance. It’d be like arguing that the problem with white-power churches in the midwest isn’t their racist ideology, it’s their Christianity. The difference, perhaps, is that while you don’t need racial theory to practice Christianity effectively, you may well need atheism to practice communism effectively, to clear the way for the state to be installed in the role of God. That makes the link between the two rather more problematic, although it also politely neglects to consider atheism within the context of other economic systems. Would a libertarian atheist state lead to the “greatest forms of cruelty”? I’m skeptical. But then, I would be.
Exit quotation: “We secretly resonate with the atheists — thank God he is absent!”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 [2] 3 »
Quite possibly. What if the inhabitants of this hypothetical state decided not to look after disabled people or left old people to rot and die in their flats? I do not mean the state refusing to look after them, I mean the state and their closest family members. That’s all I an think of at the moment.
aengus on November 30, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Don’t feel bad, doesn’t sound like Madison could either.
What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy.
- James Madison
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:42 PM
Ooh, that’s a good one. I’m going to steal that. There seems to be a resurgence in support for Christian theocracy these days. Thanks.
Killgore Trout on November 30, 2007 at 8:45 PM
I don’t give a damn for a man who can only spell a word one way. Shows lack of imagination!
- Mark Twain
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:46 PM
No.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:47 PM
TJ had many libertarian ideals that I admire. The best government is the least government. Defender of states rights. He hated the Supreme Court. He was a gifted writer.
Other the other hand, as TR pointed out, he wimped out to the pirates of the Barbary coast (Muslims that were paid money for hostages), he wore frilly clothes, and (**gasp**) he LIKED all things French.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:53 PM
At least Jefferson didn’t have someone catch a bear for him and tie it up to a tree so he could shoot it like TR did.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:57 PM
Insanity is doing the same things over and over and expecting different results.
TheBigOldDog on November 30, 2007 at 8:59 PM
Let ‘em have it, Benedict!
corona on November 30, 2007 at 9:05 PM
Show me the slightest evidence that they’re doing anything but cover it up. And your evidence needs to explain LA Arch-d**khead Mahone.
As for your statistical hypotheses, I suspect the revers is true, although I’d love to see some hard numbers. Too bad that’s impossible due to the cover-up tactics referenced above.
peski on November 30, 2007 at 9:05 PM
Rumble in the Vatican…
You don’t need to be a Pope to know this.
I mean, look how many hospitals have been built by atheists. And we all have seen those atheist care packages going to people that have been devastated by some disaster. Then they are the great institutions of learning that have been build by atheists.
And at night, I am always warmed by the generosity of the atheists that feed the poor, and take in the homeless when extreme weather hits.
Although here is one:
right2bright on November 30, 2007 at 9:31 PM
With the Roman Catholic Church there was almost no Galileo.
I wonder how many other men and woman of advanced scientific thinking were killed to keep them silent.
I wonder how many others took their secrets to the grave rather than be persecuted or killed.
I wonder how much we lost because of that.
We will never know.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 9:52 PM
Among whom? If someone is trying to set up a Christian theocracy I think we might have heard about it. Can you provide some links?
Like fun he did. He initiated and won the First Barbary War. Incidentally he sent the Navy off to the North coast of Africa without informing Congress, totally illegal by any standard. JEFFERSON LIED! PEOPLE DIED!
aengus on November 30, 2007 at 9:56 PM
The age of unreason.
aengus on November 30, 2007 at 10:00 PM
aengus on November 30, 2007 at 10:01 PM
I warn you that I am a well-earned slap in the face of every speedreader. I warn you again, in case you breezed past the first warning.
The atheists of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries worshipped the same god that anyone ever has or ever will. Their worship was marred, in the worst cases, by their low aims, self-defeating public dogma, clumsy and disastrous deeds, and above all, by their ignorance of their ignorance. However, their worship was not marred by love of this life and the next world, for they aimed, however badly, at the next life and this world. One may consider whom to hold in greater and less contempt: these whom I have described and those who hold, without evidence, that this life will last forever and this world will soon end. The divine service requires that one consider well.
Kralizec on November 30, 2007 at 10:02 PM
Interesting, is freedom and refusal of servility no matter the consequences, forever, a God?
Faith or lack thereof is not and never has been the cause of death and oppression, the people who use any form of governance to take advantage of apathy, lies and cowardice are the death dealers.
If we could flip a magic switch and tomorrow the oppressed citizens of North Korea woke up as Spartans, Thracians and Trojans, just how long would Kim Jong Il remain in power?
Haven’t we seen the results of apathy in this Republic enough to understand the decrease of freedom for a lack of involvement.
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 10:06 PM
People, the encyclical is entitled “Spe Salve”…”Salvation by Hope.”
Perhaps you have heard of the phrase “immanentizing the eschaton”? Of course, it means to seek to bring heaven on earth. The Pope has written before on how hope is one of the most important aspects of our religion: hope for Christ– hope for salvation. We cannot bring about this heaven on earth, only God can. Hope is what sustains us until Christ’s coming.
But the atheists or those who in Christ’s name (I am reminded in particular of Dostoevesky’s Grand Inquisitor–indeed, The Brothers Karamazov is about as a profound a statement on the subject as anyone is likely to make…it is also one of the Pope’s favorite books) think that they can bring about this paradise on earth are (the argument goes) fooling themselves…doomed to cause misery and pain.
Personally, I don’t like the whole “well look how many deaths atheism caused” or “look how many deaths religion caused” arguments. They are unlikely to convince anyone who has already made up his mind on the subject. But to me, this is the fundamental question/assumption/whatever that separates the Christian and the atheist: Is paradise possible on this earth, with our own hands? Given the overwhelming presence of evil and suffering in the world (and considering the evil that is in everyone of us), I think not.
But let Dawkins and Hitchens and Harris and Dennett have their way. We shall see how many are killed in the name of “reason” and “rationality”…
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 10:07 PM
Google “Huckabee” maybe?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 10:22 PM
From the link:
Disturbing indeed. But where Dawkins goes wrong is to assume this is all as irrational as believing in God. The truth is that it is the collapse of religious faith that has prompted the rise of such irrationality.
By moving some of it from one place to another?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 10:27 PM
The Greek Republic and Ancient Egypt, while they worshiped Gods and valued piety, managed to construct a moral society without a moral code passed to these societies by their Gods equivocal to the Talmud or Ten Commandments. They managed to not devolve into anarchy. The Romans managed to create a Republic that lasted more than twice as long as the United States. All without the benefit of a Christian God. They legislated their moral code and were very successful wouldn’t you say?
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:27 PM
Funny, I always thought you actually had an education. Galileo’s problems with the church weren’t because the church was trying to silence him, but because Galileo was actually quite the pompous ass.
Galileo was an arrogant outspoken man who felt that because of his superior intellect he had the right and privilege to go around saying the crudest most vulgar and obscene things about anyone he wanted to.
When he insinuated that the Pope was a insane drunken old homosexual pedophile the Pope was not amused and that was what caused Galileo’s problems, not his theories.
doriangrey on November 30, 2007 at 10:29 PM
Not quite.
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 10:33 PM
I have heard, rightly or wrongly, that Galileo was confined to his villa, where his visitors came and went freely. Why, O Lord, why hast Thou thus punished Galileo and spared me?
Kralizec on November 30, 2007 at 10:37 PM
Pope Benedict is a very powerfull and smart theologian. He has been the one who help Pope John Paul through all the years of his papacy. They both worked as a team and Benedict has some powerfull knowledge of the church and how it should be sharing what he knows with the world and he is doing that.
Hitch wouldn’t have a chance to debate the Pope but I am sure the Pope would love the fun of seeing Hitch try to keep up to all Benedicts vast knowledge of the many launguages he speaks and the history of not only the Catholic church but many religions and thier meanings in the whole big picture. I feel our world is blessed today to have him at the helm and he won’t back down over anything that conflicts whith what should and hsall be said by what our faith teaches.
bones47 on November 30, 2007 at 10:39 PM
It was said that Pope John XII (955-64) invented sins that had not been known since the beginning of the world and whole monasteries spent days and nights praying for his death. He turned his home, the Lateran Palace, into a brothel. He used the papal treasury to pay off his gambling debts. He died on May 14th 964 aged twenty-four, after he was caught in bed by the husband of one of his mistresses in ‘the very act of adultery.
Pope Innocent VIII (1484-92) sired eight illegitimate sons and probably as many daughters, of whom he openly acknowledged. His reign as Pope was known as ‘The Golden Age of Bastards’. He authorised an inquisition against those thought to be witches. On his death bed a wet nurse was found for his final craving - woman’s milk.
Pope John XXII (1316-34) excommunicated fellow clergymen for not paying their taxes.
In 1932, Pope Pius XI (1922-39) as well as condemning contraception, ordered German Catholics to drop their hostility towards Hitler. He also backed Mussolini’s invasion of Abyssinia.
Pope Celastine II (1143-44) had a certain Count Jordan condemned to a horrible death, he was strapped naked to a scalding iron chair while a red-hot crown was nailed to his head.
Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) instituted the approved method of interrogation of suspected sodomites. In order to make them confess, suspects were lowered naked onto a red-hot spike. This method was kept until the year 1816.
Robert of Geneva was well known for his ability to decapitate a man with a pike. He became Pope Clement VII (1378-94) and was ‘much given to fleshy pleasure’. He surrounded himself with page boys, whose jackets, it was noted, shrunk from being knee length, to mid-buttock ‘or even worse’.
Pope Benedict XIII (1394-1417) gave a dispensation to the twenty-nine-year-old Richard II of England to marry Isabella, the seven-year-old daughter of the King of France.
The child-pope Benedict IX (who became Pope at the age of 12!) was bi-sexual, sodomised animals, ordered murders and dabbled in witchcraft and Satanism. He loved to throw wild, bi-sexual orgies. Benedict IX held the post of Pope in the years 1032-44, 1045 and 1047-48. He was described as “A demon from hell in the disguise of a priest…”, and St Peter Damian said of him: “That wretch, from the beginning of his pontificate to the end of his life, feasted on immorality”. Dante estimated that under Benedict IX the papacy reached an all-time low in immorality and debauchery. When he was 23 he survived an assassination attempt (strangling at the altar during Mass). Benedict went on to marry his cousin and sell the papacy to his godfather, Gregory VI.
Pope Boniface VII (974; 984-85) was described as: “a horrid monster” and “a man who in criminality surpasssed all the rest of mankind”.
In the year 440 Pope Sixtus III (432-40) was tried for the seduction of a nun.
Pope Leo I (440-61) was a warped and sadistic torturer. He made his victims confess that they mixed semen with the sacrament and used young girls at the altar for the purpose. He was the first Pope to claim the right to put anyone who disagreed with him to death.
Pope Pius VII (1800-23) comdemned bible societies as “a most abominable invention that destroyed the very foundation of religion”.
It was widely rumoured that the ex-pirate Pope John XXIII (1410-15) was an Atheist. He tortured his own cardinals and was said to have “had wicked company with two of his own sisters”. Robert Hallum, Bishop of Salisbury said that he: “ought to be burnt at the stake”.
The homosexual Pope Paul II (1464-71) liked to see naked men being racked and tortured. Alledgedly, he died of a heart attack whilst being sodomized by one of his favourite boys.
Pope John XIII (965-72) { yes, I know there was more than one John XIII } was condemned as an adulterer who “defiled his father’s concubine and his own niece”. He was said to have died at the hands of an enraged husband, caught in the act of adultery - just like his dad, Pope John XII.
Pope Sergius III (904-11) enjoyed sex with underaged girls. According to the historian Baronius, Sergius III was “the slave of every vice”. When he was 45, Sergius took a 15- year-old mistress - the affair produced a son who went on to become Pope John XI.
Pope Stephen VI (896-97) had the body of his predecessor, Pope Formosus (891-96) dug up, dressed in papal vestments, set on a throne and tried for perjury and coveting the papacy
Pope Benedict XII (1334-42) was such a hardened drinker that the expression “drunk as a pope” became popular in his lifetime.
Pope Anacletus (1130-8) committed incest with his sister and several other female relatives. He enjoyed raping nuns.
Pope Clement VI (1342-52) was described by Petrarch as “an ecclesiastical Dionysus with his obscene and infamous artifaces”. Clement VI slept with prostitutes and had dozens of mistresses. When he died, fifty priests said Mass for the repose of his soul for nine consecutive days, but it was generally agreed that this was not going to be nearly enough to prevent the dead pope from going directly to hell.
Pope Pius II (1458-64) had been a well known author of erotic literature, and had fathered about 12 illegitimate children.
The Sistine Chapel was built by Pope Sixtus IV (1471-84). He had six illegitimate sons, of which one was the result of an incestuous relationship with his sister.
Pope Julius II (1503-13) who commissioned Michelangelo to paint the ceiling of the the Sistine Chapel, was a paedophile and spent much of his time with small boys and male prostitutes.
In the year 1095 Pope Urban II introduced the callagium, a sex tax which alllowed the clergy to keep mistresses, provided they paid an annual fee to the papacy. This had the immediate effect of reducing the use of concubines and hugely increasing clerical homosexuality
Pope Paul III (1534-49) enjoyed an incestuous relationship with his daughter. To gain control of his family inheritance, he poisoned several relatives, including his mother and neice. He killed two cardinals and a Polish bishop to settle an argument over a theological point. Paul III was probably Rome’s biggest ever pimp - he kept a roll of about 45,000 prostitutes, who paid him a monthly tribute.
Pope Julius III (1550-55) sodomized young boys, of which one was his own, illegitimate, son. He appointed several handsome teenage boys as cardinals. Cardinal della Casa’s famous poem In Praise of Sodomy was dedicated to Pope Julius III.
http://www.geocities.com/missus_gumby/papal.htm
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:40 PM
Vulgar and obscene things like the Earth not being the center of the Universe?
Well if Galileo actually said that, then I would have to go with him as he was a very observant man and he was there.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 10:45 PM
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9911fea4.asp
doriangrey on November 30, 2007 at 10:48 PM
Please. Might I suggest Plato’s Euthyphro written in the 4th century B.C.? Is something good because the gods command it, or do the gods command it because it is good? The point merely being that the notion that religion had nothing to do with morality in ancient Greece or Rome is simply absurd. With all due respect.
But even if you are right. Do you consider the Colosseum and imperial domination of others an example of a good “moral code”?
Ah, these are deep questions.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 10:49 PM
I was referring to the Roman Republic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Republic
Concerning the Greeks, Where is their god given cannon of law?
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:53 PM
Amen. It’s a shame so many on the Right salivate at the mere mention of Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens has written some good things on the War on Terror, but his book on religion was laughable. Him and Dawkins should stick to their respected fields (Hitchens, I suppose, is a pretty good literary critic). At least Dennett has a good grasp of philosophy. Sometimes I feel like Hitchens picked up the cliff notes to Bertrand Russell one day and decided to write a book.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 10:53 PM
Well if that MOAB does not finish off the Roman Catholic Church, nothing ever will.
If Hitler or Stalin or OBL had been born hundreds of years earlier any one of them might well have been a Pope.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 10:55 PM
Also “good” can be subjective. They didn’t have a problem with it. Christian Conquistadors didn’t either.
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:57 PM
Also “good” can be subjective. They didn’t have a problem with it. Christian Conquistadors didn’t either.
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:57 PM
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Respectfully, I’m not sure a “god-given cannon of law” has anything to do with it. If you are trying to argue that a society can order itself without referring to some myth/story about God/gods coming down and handing a tablet of laws, I’m not sure I would disagree with you. But the ancient Greeks clearly believed in the gods and their relationship to piety/morality…see the plays of Sophocles, for example. The Greek philosophers (Plato being the king) wrote a lot on the nature of the good, and how one justifies being good. And Christianity owes a great deal to Platonism (Nietszche even said that Christianity is Platonism for the masses). I can think of no particular myth in Greece or Rome that has a god handing over tablets (but then again, I am hardly knowledgeable on the subject) with laws on them, but I don’t see how that matters. The point is that the Greeks never sought a secular foundation for their morals. That is a decidedly modern phenomenon.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:10 PM
I could not help but notice that your link trashing Galileo starts out http://www.catholic.com
Real unbiased source when discussing Galileo and the Roman Catholic Church. They couldn’t have any motive for trashing him now could they. Perish the very thought!
For God sake, it would be like going to http://www.dailykos.com to discuss George W. Bush versus Democrats.
Could they possibly have any motive to cover things up or spin ?
Cover things up? Bite my touque and may I burn in hell.
When has the Roman Catholic Church ever tried to cover anything up or spin anything?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:10 PM
And this history was written by who?
Galileo’s life was held hostage by an all controlling church in a totalitarian society that was quite willing to use any violent means necessary to enforce its will on any that dared rock the boat.
For Galileo the intimidation was all it took.
I reiterate.
History written by this guy and others like him isn’t likely to be accurate.
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 11:11 PM
You’ll have to forgive me if I roll my eyes a little at your unsourced, amatuer website. But if you are merely trying to point out that some of the popes haven’t been perfect, then I say “fair enough.” But, of course, that doesn’t make what the Catholic Church preaches false.
“Good can be subjective.” Well, many would agree with you there. The Pope, and myself, would not. Of course, I am not a moral relativist.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:15 PM
Spare me, please, your ad hominem attacks. And your sources are completely “unbiased”? Wait, your only source is an unsourced website with an idiotic background template. People believe what they want to believe. I suspect that no amount of facts would ever convince you that the Church is not bad. That’s fine. Your loss.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:18 PM
I apologize Will but I think the point is that the Pope, as well as some commenters state that all morality comes from God in a divine manner and that without God, specifically the Christian God, civilization will devolve into debauched anarchy. Ironically, exactly what I see as the current state of civilization.
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 11:20 PM
ROFLMAO!!!
Grand prize hereby awarded for understatement of all time.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:21 PM
More ad hominem attacks. Sigh. Your arguments leave much to be desired. I take your Galileo and raise you a Descartes, Copernicus, Lemaitre, or Mendel. The Church has not always been resistent to scientific invention, it has often encouraged it. The Galileo was an unfortunate affair, but hardly indicative of the Church as it always was, or is now.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:25 PM
Which institution do you propose should replace the Christian morals as provided by the Christian church?
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 11:26 PM
No ad hominem attacks, you just can’t handle the truth that’s all. Much like the Roman Catholic Church couldn’t, and apparently still can’t(some in it anyway), handle Galileo’s truth.
The difference is you can’t put me on trial. Ha, ha, ha!!!
No. My gain.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:28 PM
The Roman Catholic Church is very much a mixed bag. It is at it best when it does not try to cover things up or trash dissenters.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Which ad hominem attacks are you exactly referring too?
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Be clearer. Are you saying that the current state of civilization is a “debauched anarchy”? Surely that is wrong. But it is America, and you are allowed to believe absurd things. As I have said, the Greeks and Romans clearly sought a metaphysical foundation for their morality. That is all the Pope is trying to do. He happens to think that the Christian God is the best foundation. I think the Pope’s main criticism is not so much the lack of a Christian God, but the lack of any metaphysical foundation whatsoever (i.e. atheism). The Greeks and Romans had this. Christian Europe did as well. The Soviets did not. Who was worse? I’m not sure, although I have an idea.
Laugh all you like. That’s about all you can do. And quote other people.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:34 PM
Dude. I am just a commenter on a website. The escapades of the Papacy are WELL DOCUMENTED and known to anyone who makes the most cursory of investigations. I think the website provides a good synopsis. If you think it is inaccurate and you want to play that game provide YOUR argument and sourcing. It is well known that those who have a weak argument resort to attacking the messenger. My argument is that there are many example, of both, cultures that create moral societies without divine law and cultures that create amoral societies that claim comes from the divine directly.
The Papacy encompasses some of the most twisted disgusting individuals ever to grace the pages of history. Gods men in Gods own citadel on earth. To place an exclusive claim to goodness and morality strains credulity.
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Anything written by the Church isn’t likely to be accurate merely because they lived during that century or they are Catholic priests/bishops now? Yes, that seems like an attack “against the man” not “the argument.”
But do correct me if I’m wrong.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:37 PM
I think it is very clear that Jesus would weep, and profusely, over much that the Roman Catholic Church has done.
Many of it’s popes were as anti-Christs.
On the other had there have been such as Pope John Paul II whom I think, from what I know anyway, was a good and possibly a great man.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:38 PM
I googled “huckabee christian theocracy” and my search yielded a Youtube video of an indignant atheist claiming that Huckabee wants to set up a Christian theocracy.
Well I don’t know about you but I’m convinced.
aengus on November 30, 2007 at 11:39 PM
Sorry, DUDE. You brought up the argument against the popes, so you have the burden of proof. I will grant you that there have been some poor popes, but you provide a link to some crappy-looking site and you expect me to take you seriously? C’mon, dude, you must be joking. But seriously, dude, “some of the most disgusting individuals to ever grace the pages of history”? That’s a pretty strong claim. Nice if you could back it up with, oh, I don’t know, something other than a shitty geocities website.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:41 PM
Yes but then I live in Seattle.
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 11:44 PM
You will have to go quite a number of comments above this one of yours to find me quoting anyone. As to laughing, a little of that, not much for a wiseguy like me.
You just want to burn the messenger.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:45 PM
“Very clear,” eh? I’m glad you know what Jesus would or wouldn’t do. He’d probably aslo weep profusely over what some of the things the United States has done in the last two hundred years, but that doesn’t mean the United States still isn’t great.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:45 PM
LOL, MB4, I totally want to “burn” you. Because, you know, like, that’s what Catholics do. They burn people at the stake and stuff.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:48 PM
I live in Portland (near Portland anyway), so you are a small step ahead of us, I guess.
But we’ll catch ya!!!
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:48 PM
Ah, well then that makes sense. My condolences.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:49 PM
I don’t picture Jesus as a big weeper actually. In fact, the history of the Catholic Church is not all unlike that of the history of the Jews in the OT.
God commands.
Man acts like man tends to do.
God gets angry and threatens punishment (or actually metes it out).
Man repents.
God forgives.
It’s something of a repetitive theme actually.
Defense Guy on November 30, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Come on now, you can admit it.
I won’t get mad.
Isn’t there some part of you, maybe very small part in you sub conscience, that would at least like to put me on the rack?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:51 PM
Or for the atheists among us, let me translate.
hocus pocus.
party hearty.
harshing of mellows.
hangover.
hocus pocus.
Defense Guy on November 30, 2007 at 11:52 PM
I think he was probably a good guy, why wouldn’t I assume the best.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 11:53 PM
If you have an interest in being objective your going to have to be a bit thicker skinned than that.
Do you disagree that the Church was totalitarian, violent and that to be that way its the people who ran the church who were the necessary oppressors to achieve the dominance the church enjoyed for centuries?
“The Church” has a very long history of bias, bias doesn’t come from inanimate objects but from prejudiced people.
Your saying we should believe this guy?
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 11:53 PM
That’s an appalling statement and unworthy of you.
aengus on November 30, 2007 at 11:53 PM
Don’t flatter yourself. I live in NYC. I encounter people with unintelligent views everyday. You are nothing special (although slightly more annoying than most, because of your tendency to incessantly quote famous people). You asked.
WillBarrett on November 30, 2007 at 11:55 PM
No, not at all.
Maybe you missed the history lesson in:
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:40 PM
I could only make it about half way trough before my stomach turned too much, but that was more than enough for me.
You did realize that I purposely said “hundreds of years ago”, did you not?
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:01 AM
oops,
Maybe Benny should cease from speaking, wiht the obvious exception on Sundays and in Latin, for a spill.
Maybe he is reading HA and feels “empowered”.
awake on December 1, 2007 at 12:03 AM
Yes you’re right there.
No that’s extreme. You either don’t understand the concept of the anti-Christ or you consider the added layer of hypocrisy to the Pope’s various crimes to be extra-damning.
To compare even the worst Popes to Htiler/Stalin/OBL is perverse. The only way it can be squared is through a kind of moral Arabic zero, all bad is bad therefore all that is bad is equally bad.
aengus on December 1, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Are you still here ronsfi?
Speakup on December 1, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Incessantly?
I guess it depends on what the meaning of incessantly is, and what the meaning of is, is.
Count the number of comments that I have made on this thread.
Then count the number where I have quoted famous people.
Then compute the percentage and get back to me.
Besides, what do you want me to do, quote unfamous people?
Actually I have done more than a bit of that on other threads.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:07 AM
Where to begin where to begin? You’ve got be joking. You quote one stupid cardinal and you think that’s indicative of the entire Church, then and now? If you think that, I’m really not going to waste my time arguing with you.
As far as “bias”…everyone is biased. The Church has a long history of bias? What does that even mean? Yes, the Church has a particular position that it seeks to defend, as do you. But that doesn’t make what bishops say false or wrong. Surely you jest.
Proofreading is your friend. First of all, yes, I do disagree that the Church was “totalitarian” and “violent.” Second, I disagree that it achieved its “dominance” through “oppression.” The sad thing about it is that you treat 1500 years of the Christian history in some monolithic framework. There was a constant power struggle between the “Church” and the State (the many different kingdoms of Europe that came and went). In many ways, the Church was a check on the violence of the Dark and Middle Ages. For example, Pope Clement VI, during the Black Death demanded that people stop slaughtering Jews who they thought were responsible. Of course, they didn’t listen. But that’s because the Church was hardly a “totalitarian” regime that exerted absolute control over everybody and everything.
WillBarrett on December 1, 2007 at 12:08 AM
Ach du lieber Benedict!
Leave MB4 alone. He has a right to quote someone, or another, famous or not. You have the same right, or not to quote anyone at all.
Entelechy on December 1, 2007 at 12:10 AM
OK, so tell me Will, was the crucifixion of Jesus good or bad? One would say that the torture and killing of an innocent man would be bad. However, if Christ was not crucified, nobody would have known He is the Messiah. . . prophecy would not have been fulfilled, etc.
You and your Pope can absolutely not know what is good. If death brings you to heaven (near to God), then is that good or is it bad? After creation in the Garden of Eden man did not know the difference between good and evil - (mankind was not created with the knowledge of good and evil. Maybe you evolved it.)
ThackerAgency on December 1, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Absolutely. I read ronsfi’s entire post although I was familiar with most of it already. My favourite painting of all time, Haywain by Hieronymus Bosch, depicts hypocritical Cardinals and Popes (among others) marching towards hell. I think however that the comparisons between three of the most evil persons in human history and failed Popes who indulged their carnal desires is way off the chart.
aengus on December 1, 2007 at 12:12 AM
lol, MB4 gets their history lesson from geocities websites with “missus_gumby” in the URL. You must be really smart and did really well in school!
Good night all, I’m going to go read the Pope’s new encyclical. Why don’t you wannabe-historians/theologians do yourselves a favor and do the same? You know, so you don’t have to talk out of your rears all of the time about the Pope and the Church. Lata!
WillBarrett on December 1, 2007 at 12:12 AM
I thought MB4 was a woman.
ThackerAgency on December 1, 2007 at 12:13 AM
Look at the material in
ronsfi on November 30, 2007 at 10:40 PM
and tell me that you don’t see some strong similarities in personality type.
Don’t you think that Pope John Paul II, and Christ himself for that matter, was pretty much the polar opposite of those Popes?
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Good night WillBarrett. May you dream of a little modesty, and awake a new man. Sincerely,
Entelechy on December 1, 2007 at 12:15 AM
aw come on, leave MB4 alone. He/she is obviously trying his/her best.
awake on December 1, 2007 at 12:16 AM
Some people have come after me with scissors, but they have not been able to catch me.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:16 AM
If he is a she, then she must be lesbian, or you haven’t been very observant ThackerAgency.
Entelechy on December 1, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Unlike you, who never really seems to be trying at all.
Not so as anyone would notice anyway.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:18 AM
I don’t see the Greeks looking to Zeus for moral direction. Unless as an example of what not to do. The Greeks seemed to look to their gods for favors more than moral rectitude. The focus of Greek piety was a fortunate marriage, long life, a good harvest. The Romans as well. I am not aware of moral laws dictated by the gods for the average person. They had moral laws for the “Clergy” if I can stretch the meaning. For example, The Vestals. Now, I am no historian and so am open to the possibility that I may be shown to be in error however if I was so shown then we must examine the fact that these “Moralities” are from arcane gods that are considered mythological by modern religions and so the resulting “Morality” that informs their society is not actually divine in nature after all and so indeed was created by mankind after all.
ronsfi on December 1, 2007 at 12:19 AM
No 1193 was ever a woman.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:20 AM
Aww come on MB4, I was making a joke based off of thacker’s post. Shall we add a complete lack of a sense of humor to your well-documented aversion to facts and reality in general as personality traits?
That would be unfortunate.
P.S. When I woke the other day, I enjoyed reading your comments debating yourself.
Cheers
awake on December 1, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Vietnam-era MOS codes: Army
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I’m sorry but for all the desire I have that I were wrong the Church brought on the reformation because it was so totalitarian even Kings were under its control.
The Church controlled food stores and rations, collected taxes and controlled education and communication.
After long enough the Protest-ants had enough and then fought and died in huge numbers in order to follow Martin Luther.
Atheists didn’t have much to do with the 30 years war, the 100 years war or the war of the roses.
Over the course of a century more people died to change denomination under the same Jesus than died from the Plague.
“Organized religion” has already killed more people than any atom bomb ever will.
From above:
Speakup on December 1, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I have no sense of humor whatsoever.
Can’t help it as I was born that way and will surely never ever develope one now.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Effin’ Griefers! I’m outy!
ronsfi on December 1, 2007 at 12:30 AM
Understood.
awake on December 1, 2007 at 12:34 AM
As I said I read the post, knew most of it already and no I don’t see some strong similarities in personality type. The personality type would seem to be similar to Chirac or some of his monarchical predecessors.
Indulging yourself to live out earthly pleasures (however perverse) would make you at worst amoral, self-serving scum interested merely in your own desires.
Slaughtering millions of people and trying to reduce the entire world to slavery is an evil that personal self-satisfaction could not account for.
The names “Hitler” and “Stalin” are thrown around like curse words. Anyone in a position of power who succumbs to corruption and vice should not be automatically compared to two of the most grotesque monsters of human history.
aengus on December 1, 2007 at 12:36 AM
It is of the highest importance in the art of detection to be able to recognize out of a number of facts which are incidental and which vital. Otherwise your energy and attention must be dissipated instead of being concentrated.
- Holmes
Oh no, now I am probably going to get into dutch with the quote polizei again.
Oh my.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:36 AM
I don’t look like Dana Perino either.
Entelechy on December 1, 2007 at 12:38 AM
No 1193 was ever a woman.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:38 AM
Like that matters here.
Speakup on December 1, 2007 at 12:39 AM
Speakup, quiet down. The gods know, and the atheists don’t care.
Entelechy on December 1, 2007 at 12:41 AM
LOL, Speakup-hello. Of course they care.
Speakup on December 1, 2007 at 12:44 AM
It is of the highest importance in the art of detection to be able to recognize out of a number of facts which are incidental and which vital. Otherwise your energy and attention must be dissipated instead of being concentrated.
- Holmes
Oh no, now I am probably going to get into dutch with the quote polizei again.
Oh my.
Who’s Dana Perino?
BTW way gal, my comments are being censored because I used $esbian when referencing you comment that had an ‘L” instead of a “$”.
MB4 on December 1, 2007 at 12:44 AM
If you’re so above “organised religion” then why are you claiming knowledge of the future? The atom bomb could kill billions of people, in your lifetime or eight centuries from now. Who knows?
aengus on December 1, 2007 at 12:46 AM
They loved their Jewish slaves, in fact they loved their slaves…to death.
That collosium, that was a fun place…did the Roman’s have slaves? Naw, they were to moral.
Some moral code, one that you are proud to worship?
right2bright on December 1, 2007 at 12:48 AM
Comment pages: « 1 [2] 3 »