News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

OK, 90% of the people in Europe (Germany) in this case were raised with religious beliefs (I will accept that statement for the sake of argument), so I would expect that person with psychopathic tenancies would be Christian would be 90% (or 9 to 1). Of course he was not a practicing Christian, at least I cannot find anything that leads me to that conclusion. Maybe it is the fact that he was raised Catholic, and deviated from the Church that lead him to that position, or maybe etc. Basically, all of this is just what you believe based on your prejudices (I have mine, and I am sure they influence me).

Now, there are a large number of that are Catholic, Protestant, etc. Why did this not happen elsewhere the same way. Taking the end result of one extreme example, then drawing a line backwards to what you want to be the cause is not a good way of determining that that was the cause of all this evil.

A psychopath will use anything (without remorse) to serve his goals.... religion or no religion.

i never said he was a sane catholic. religion is the best way for someone to serve their goals and push their agendas. hitlers (internal) religious beliefs as an adult aren't known for sure, weather he was faking it or truly believed but that still doesn't ignore the fact that he used religion and religion complied. nazism didn't rise entirely out of brute force, it was a popularity contest. had the religious institutions not thrown their support behind hitler, maybe he wouldn't have got as far as he did.


and it didn't happen elsewhere because the conditions weren't there.
 
hitlers (internal) religious beliefs as an adult aren't known for sure, weather he was faking it or truly believed but that still doesn't ignore the fact that he used religion and religion complied.

So if we don't know his religious thoughts for sure, then how can blame be placed on his Catholic beliefs? Anyone can use religion for their own ends (which is still a big problem to this day), but "religion" did not comply; people complied. While some of those who followed Hitler were Catholic, hundreds of thousands of Catholics died trying to kill the bastard.
 
So if we don't know his religious thoughts for sure, then how can blame be placed on his Catholic beliefs? Anyone can use religion for their own ends (which is still a big problem to this day), but "religion" did not comply; people complied. While some of those who followed Hitler were Catholic, hundreds of thousands of Catholics died trying to kill the bastard.

hitler was essentially an opportunist - by this nature, he had to appeal to his population. his population was essentially depressed due to economic & political factors. he used the jews as a scapegoat for all the ills of germany. he knew that his population was in massive majority, a religious one. he resurrected and brought to surface all text that could connect with peoples core religious beliefs and put the jews in a negative light. tie in the fact that martin luther was german & add some nationalism to the pot and you got a serious brew cooking. he tried to prove to the people that hating the jews was accepted as a christian way of life by using those texts and examples.

you see, religion has some serious baggage. the protestant religion was founded by an anti-semite & the catholic religion has been deeply anti-semitic throughout history.


of course catholic and protestant troops (from the good side) put an end to nazism. those people didn't live in an environment with the same influences. there was some anti-semitism back in america but it didn't have the same influence.

if you notice, germany was the homeland of the protestant founder & italy was the homeland of the catholic church. (geographic of course. i know italy didn't exist back then when the catholic church was formed) in these countries, religion was easily exploited and mixed with nationalism.


this is exactly why political figures should not endorse religions and religions should not get involved with political figures. there is way too much that can go wrong. the baggage of the past can be easily recalled when needed.

but let me state this, nationalism alone is not enough to drive people to do such horrendous acts and neither is fear of prosecution. any normal person who had the least shred of decency and whose mind wasn't distorted by selected religious beliefs would rather have died that participated.

and remember, bad beliefs don't have to sound negative. passive aggressiveness is just as bad. saying to forgive the jews for killing jesus or not accepting jesus, forgiving the gays because of their supposed choice or praying for sinners or even praying for jews to accept jesus which is what the latin mass might contain looks harmless but these views dictate that the mentioned people are wrong, did and/or are doing bad things.
 
Look, no offense, but your analysis is a little superificial, and chunks of it are opinion - which is fine - but please state it as such.

but let me state this, nationalism alone is not enough to drive people to do such horrendous acts and neither is fear of prosecution. any normal person who had the least shred of decency and whose mind wasn't distorted by selected religious beliefs would rather have died that participated.

Really? Can you speak for all people on this issue?

you see, religion has some serious baggage. the protestant religion was founded by an anti-semite & the catholic religion has been deeply anti-semitic throughout history.

Sure, there has been a strain of anti-semitism in Christianity, but one can't relate back every aspect of Chritianity to anti-semitism. There is a little more to do with it than just that.

this is exactly why political figures should not endorse religions and religions should not get involved with political figures. there is way too much that can go wrong. the baggage of the past can be easily recalled when needed.

Yet many successful and humane politicians have been religious.
 
when i started this thread, i didn't expect some sort of spanish inquisition...
 
Don't worry. Everything will be all right if you simply renounce all your previous beliefs and state for the record that the earth does not move. Things will be just fine after that.


Oh, did I mention the small weekly fee?
 
Lol !
 
Latin Mass may revive prayer for Jews


Jul 05, 2007 09:58 AM
Phil Stewart
Reuters

VATICAN CITY – A prayer for the conversion of the Jews sidelined from Roman Catholic liturgy in the 1960s may stage a surprise comeback on Saturday, when Pope Benedict is expected to allow broader use of the old Latin Mass.

Church reforms in the 1960s replaced Latin with local languages in the liturgy, reached out to other religions and struck texts that Jews found particularly offensive, such as a Good Friday prayer referring to "perfidious Jews".

Benedict's decree is due to revive a 1962 Latin prayer book that removed the word "perfidious" but left standing prayers for their conversion that ask God to "take the veil" off Jewish hearts and show mercy "even for the Jews," Church sources said.

The decree aims to woo back traditionalists devoted to the old Latin rite. The move is controversial among Catholics, since many traditionalists reject the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) including the opening to other faiths.

Abraham Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a United States-based Jewish civil rights group, was cautious ahead of the publication of the document.

"From second-hand sources, my understanding is they understand our concern, our sensitivity, our distress," Foxman said in Rome. "And I think they're not about to add to that distress after all the efforts we've made with reconciliation."

The Pontiff's "motu proprio" decree is expected to allow priests greater freedom to opt for the Latin mass. Currently, priests have to seek authorisation from bishops to use the so-called Tridentine mass and many refuse to give it.

Some Catholics are worried that this nod to traditionalists may undermine the liberal reforms of the Second Vatican Council, known as "Vatican II."

"Inevitably it will be read by some people as a victory for those who felt that Vatican II was a mistake," said Father Keith Pecklers, a Rome-based Jesuit liturgical expert, adding this "of course is not the intention."

When Pope Benedict met a group of cardinals last month to explain his decision, he told them he was trying to draw in many of an estimated 600,000 Catholics who left the Church after Vatican II to attend Latin masses said by traditionalist priests.

"By making the Latin Mass more available, the Holy Father is hoping to convince those disaffected Catholics that it is time for them to return to full union with the Catholic Church," Boston Cardinal Sean O'Malley wrote in his blog after the meeting.

The traditionalists are strongest in France and bishops there have openly criticised the return to Latin, saying it could encourage traditionalists to continue challenging the Vatican II reforms and result in deeper splits in the Church.

The liberal French Catholic magazine Temoignage Chrétien published an editorial in Latin this week criticising the Vatican for fostering two liturgies within one church.

It said what concerned them was not aspects like the Latin of the Tridentine rite, but "the view of the outside world held by most supporters of the traditional rite ... of a Church that saw itself as the sole holder of the Truth."

"Forty years after the Second Vatican Council, this stand is untenable," it wrote.

Additional reporting by Tom Heneghan in Paris

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mel Gibson will feel so vindicated.
 
Got hidden because of COVID-19 (Published 8 months ago on April 7, 2020)...

The Vatican’s Cardinal George Pell Is Freed From Jail & His Child Sex Abuse Convictions Are Overturned

From link.

pell.jpg


Cardinal George Pell, who a couple of years ago became the highest ranking Vatican official to ever be convicted of child sexual abuse, has now been freed from jail after Australia’s highest court overturned his conviction. The 78 year old senior Catholic figure was facing a six-year jail sentence after a jury found he was guilty of sexually abusing two boys in Melbourne in the 1990s. Seven judges ruled unanimously in Pell’s favour, stating that the jury who found him guilty had “not properly considered all the evidence presented at the trial.” Throughout the entire time, Pell maintained his innocence from the moment he was charged in June of 2017, and despite what’s happened since, regardless of whether he’s actually innocent or not, his case has brought even more attention to the on-going problem of pedophilia and sexual abuse in high level places, like the Vatican.

Although the conviction against Pell has been dropped, people will forever ponder if this man is actually guilty of what he was accused of, and perhaps much more. Unfortunately, sexual abuse within the Vatican, and other places of power has been an issue for quite some time. It begs the question, how is this type of activity able to persist and sustain itself? The answer may be simple, it could be that those involved are simply some of the most powerful people in the world. A retired police detective of 25 years, John Wedger, spent a lot of his time investigating child abuse and how it operates continually without being taken down. People are threatened, and in some cases those whom one goes to in order to solve the problem, a ‘higher up,’ is actually involved in it, and the investigation gets shut down You can watch the full testimony of Wedger, here.

It’s disturbing to contemplate the idea that Cardinal George Pell is or would be involved in such things, after all, he himself established The Diocesan Commission Into Sexual Abuse in 1996. If he is in fact guilty, this leads to the point above made by Wedger, that the people responsible for tackling this issue are actually involved and part of the problem. That being said, Pell is innocent under the law.

It’s no secret that sexual abuse scandals have plagued the Catholic Church for decades, and it seems almost every single year. For example, prior to the accusations against Pell, in 2015 a lawyer by the name of Ulrich Weber uncovered that for the the thirty year reign of boys choir run by Benedicts XVI’s elder brother, approximately 600 boys with a “high degree of plausibility” were victims of sexual and physical abuse, or both. The report identified 500 cases of physical abuse, and 67 cases of sexual abused committed by a total of 49 people in a position of power within the church. (source)

Furthermore, it was only a few months ago when Carlo Maria Vigano, former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States and Secretary-General of the Governor of Vatican City, implicated multiple church officials, including Pope Francis, in sexual abuse. You can read more about that here.

With everything that’s emerged with regards to Jeffrey Epstein and child sex trafficking over the past couple of years alone, it really makes one wonder, Especially the fact that it seems Epstein was involved in a blackmail operation and working for some powerful people.

A couple of years ago, Pope Francis compared child abuse within the Catholic Church to a “satanic mass.”

The Reverend Gabriele Amorth is another example, he was an Italian Roman Catholic Priest, and an exorcist of the Diocese of Rome, which is an administrative branch of the Catholic Church of Rome. He claimed to have performed tens of thousands of exorcisms over his half a dozen plus decades as a Catholic Priest, and has mentioned a number of times how Satanism is practiced within the Vatican. He has also claimed that girls are commonly kidnapped by a gang of Vatican police and foreign diplomats. He claimed that these girls are recruited for Vatican parties, and crimes with a sexual motive.

Malachi Martin, an Irish Catholic priest and writer on the Catholic Church who published many books exposing the Vatican was originally ordained as a Jesuit priest, he eventually became Professor of Palaeography at the Vatican’s Pontifical Biblical Institute and was one of many who exposed the practice of Satanism within the Vatican.

These are just a few examples of why so many people believe something fishy is going on, regardless of whether or not Pell is innocent or guilty. Is something beyond the abuse of children happening here? Some sort of ‘ritual’ abuse? How has this been ongoing for so long? How are these people and places still able to operate with such power? It seems that they are quite untouchable.
 
Interestingly, Pope Francis seems a lot more progressive than Pope Benedict. For instance, he has made supportive comments towards the LGBT community and endorsed civil unions for gay people. The church still has a long way to go, but these are steps in the right direction.

They also have to find more effective ways of dealing with sexual abuse than shuffling priests around. I think that now that entire metropolitan archdioceses are starting to go bankrupt because of sexual abuse lawsuits, they will face more pressure to make meaningful reforms.
 
Interestingly, Pope Francis seems a lot more progressive than Pope Benedict. For instance, he has made supportive comments towards the LGBT community and endorsed civil unions for gay people. The church still has a long way to go, but these are steps in the right direction.
It may be, but progressive policies and inclinarions can be the death of large church organizations. The Anglican, Presbyterian, and United churches have all gone through a progressive wave, bending their core tenets and foundations to accommodate the demands of new congregants. The United Church of Canada, for example is now the United Church of Everyrhung. The challenge is that the new arrivals, in their demands for for example, of female or LGBT priests and of support for LGBT issues and marriage, and involvement in new political movements such as anti-Israel, and of the rejection of traditional hymns and modifications of liturgy have all driven away the core parishioners and financial supporters of these churches. Their replacements may have espouse the progressive values we deem necessary today, but they don’t have the willing/deep pockets and dedication to keep these churches afloat.

Meanwhile, the Catholic Church of Canada, in its rejection of many progressive ideals serves as a beacon to those who feel rejected by their Protestant faiths. Not that the Catholic Church in Canada isn’t seeing a precipitous decline in attendance and membership, they are, but not anywhere close to the rate of decline in the Protestant churches. As a regular attending Anglican I welcome the progressive movement in my church, especially as we’re a welcoming place for the Catholic Church’s castoffs, like this once Catholic, but I‘ve already had one Anglican Church close under my feet, and expect to see many more. Progressives may be on the right side of history, but they’re not going to save the churches.
 
As a regular attending Anglican I welcome the progressive movement in my church, especially as we’re a welcoming place for the Catholic Church’s castoffs, like this once Catholic, but I‘ve already had one Anglican Church close under my feet, and expect to see many more. Progressives may be on the right side of history, but they’re not going to save the churches.
Are you familiar with Alisa Childers? She’s one of the eminent voices who addresses the topic of progressive Christianity. If not, search the following on YouTube: Alisa Childers Progressive Christianity.

I’d recommend watching any one of her multiple expositions on this subject. She’s very articulate, graceful, and well-studied in this area. See what you think.
 
Are you familiar with Alisa Childers? She’s one of the eminent voices who addresses the topic of progressive Christianity. If not, search the following on YouTube: Alisa Childers Progressive Christianity.

I’d recommend watching any one of her multiple expositions on this subject. She’s very articulate, graceful, and well-studied in this area. See what you think.
No, but I’ll check it out. The challenge though is that most progressive Christian speakers are not affiliated with the big, bricks & mortar, episcopal churches. In fact these independent voices may pull newly arrived progressives out of the traditional churches as they reject the remaining orthodoxy, but only after the traditional church has morphed itself away from its roots. So now the progressives leave for independent or grassroots religious experiences and the traditionalists leave as they reject the new church, or die off.

Edit, I had a quick read of https://www.alisachilders.com/blog/...w-age-spirituality-are-kind-of-the-same-thing. Goodness, there’s not much of Christianity left in it. Do they even read the New Testament? The Book of Revelations might scare the crap out of these folks. I like and can agree with much of what she says, but that’s not Christianity to me.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top