Some call him "God's Rottweiler" - welcome, Benedict XVI
My apologies for jumping on the Guardian bandwagon, but Cardinal Ratzinger didn't gain the above nickname for nothing. On the one hand, he denounced the paedophile scandal, and claims never to have fired a shot while in the German army in the Second World War. He speaks ten languages and there's no denying the guy's pretty smart. He also wrote a book called "The Ratzinger Report", which sounds a bit like the title of a Radio 4 satire. On the other hand...
1. He strongly opposes the use of condoms in Africa
2. He thinks all other Christian churches are "invalid"
3. He describes homosexuality as an "intrinsic moral evil"
4. He denounced rock music as being "the vehicle for anti-religion" (that's my vocation screwed, then)
5. He supported the Magdalen Laundries
6. He was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of faith (formally known as the Holy Inquisition)
7. He denounced fighting poverty through social action as it "smacked of Marxism"
8. He is not only against ordination of women (which I'll let him off on as it's understandable perhaps for someone in his position) but also against the use of female choristers and altar servers.
9. All but 2 German bishops opposed his appointment, and German opinions polls have suggested more people oppose him than support him.
10. He is in favour of refusing Mass to those who do not agree with the Church's teaching. He has banned colleagues who take issue with Church teaching from holding certain roles (e.g. Hans Kung, a former colleague from Tubingen University)and evenm had a go at Sr Lavinia Byrne for voicing her views on certain moral issues.
Overall, he seems like a bit of an arse.
Heaven knows I'm Anglican now.
1. He strongly opposes the use of condoms in Africa
2. He thinks all other Christian churches are "invalid"
3. He describes homosexuality as an "intrinsic moral evil"
4. He denounced rock music as being "the vehicle for anti-religion" (that's my vocation screwed, then)
5. He supported the Magdalen Laundries
6. He was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of faith (formally known as the Holy Inquisition)
7. He denounced fighting poverty through social action as it "smacked of Marxism"
8. He is not only against ordination of women (which I'll let him off on as it's understandable perhaps for someone in his position) but also against the use of female choristers and altar servers.
9. All but 2 German bishops opposed his appointment, and German opinions polls have suggested more people oppose him than support him.
10. He is in favour of refusing Mass to those who do not agree with the Church's teaching. He has banned colleagues who take issue with Church teaching from holding certain roles (e.g. Hans Kung, a former colleague from Tubingen University)and evenm had a go at Sr Lavinia Byrne for voicing her views on certain moral issues.
Overall, he seems like a bit of an arse.
Heaven knows I'm Anglican now.
posted by RLS at 9:43 am
8 Comments:
Hi Polly!
Peter, from the Chaplaincy here!
You might want to put links or citations to actually prove what you're saying...
Actually, I think Ratzinger will make an excellent Pope - he'll stand up for Christian orthodoxy, and not the cafeteria Christian attitudes that Church 'liberals' want us to adopt.
All-in-all, yay for Ratzinger!
Peace be with you,
The Cavalier (for it is he...)
Actually Polly, I don't want to be overly critical, but I just re-read your post and I just can't help but think that it's actually saturated with wrongful thinking.
So much so, in fact, that I have to challenge what you're saying here. Let's just go through your list of objections to Pope Benedict XVI:
"1. He strongly opposes the use of condoms in Africa"
And? What's wrong with that? AIDS wouldn't spread (anywhere near as much) if Africans didn't fornicate - which the Church also condemns.
Do you really think that an African person who engages in extra-marital sexual activity, and so has already proven they couldn't give a monkeys about the Church's teaching, is in anyway consistent to claim "Oh, but I can't use a Condom, the Church forbids it!" Like they care!
The fact is: if the Church's teaching was followed through completely, AIDS wouldn't be anywhere near the problem it is today.
But it is a problem, not because the Church condemns condoms, but because people fornicate, don't use a condom (often because of male African unwillingness to use something they perceive to be emasculating), and then hypocritically blame it on the Church.
For Western Liberals to complain about the Church's policy on Contraceptives is therefore just sheer humbug.
"2. He thinks all other Christian churches are 'invalid'"
No, he said that Protestant churches are "deficient" in their teaching, which he is perfectly entitled to believe (and he happens to be right).
"3. He describes homosexuality as an 'intrinsic moral evil'"
Which it is, according to the Gospel, when you understand homosexuality as "active homosexual lifestyles" as opposed to "being Gay per se". Again, nothing wrong with stating something that theologically and morally orthodox Christians know to be the truth.
"4. He denounced rock music as being "the vehicle for anti-religion" (that's my vocation screwed, then)"
Actually, he said it was 'a' vehicle, not 'the' vehicle. There are plenty of other vehicles of anti-religion, and Ratzinger knew this. What he probably referred to was heavy rock, like Marilyn Manson or Slipknot. These groups are undeniably anti-Christian, at least.
In addition to this, much rock music communicates a nihilistic view of the world that can corrupt those who don't know better. Just like "Gangsta rap".
So what he said wasn't untrue, maybe over-exaggerated, and maybe too pointedly towards rock, but still ultimately true.
"5. He supported the Magdalen Laundries"
Prove it. What do you mean by 'support' anyway?
"6. He was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of faith (formally known as the Holy Inquisition)"
Again, so what? The CDF is there to maintain orthodoxy, to protect the Church from error and falsehood, a job which, with thanks to Ratzinger, it does very well. The days of the Inquisition are over, the Church no longer burns people. So move on.
"7. He denounced fighting poverty through social action as it 'smacked of Marxism'"
Again, no. He denounced Liberation Theology as smacking of Marxism, which it did. It heavily borrowed themes from Marxist understandings of social conflict. Themes which, because they are ultimately classist and materialist are un-Christian. what was wrong with Ratzinger pointing this out?
Truly fighting poverty through real social action, as is done by CAFOD, for example, has never been attacked or slandered by Ratzinger at all. Probably because like most of us, he sees charity as a good thing.
"8. He is not only against ordination of women (which I'll let him off on as it's understandable perhaps for someone in his position) but also against the use of female choristers and altar servers."
Again, prove this. If it is true, then he's entitled to his opinion, though it's not one I would agree with necessarily.
"9. All but 2 German bishops opposed his appointment, and German opinions polls have suggested more people oppose him than support him."
Irrelevant. Firstly, the only "people" who matter are Catholics, not Germans. Secondly, the Church is not a democracy, we don't choose the leader of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church by majority vote. The election of the successor of St. Peter is not a popularity contest.
As for the German Bishops claim, I don't see how one could possibly know that. Again, prove it.
"10. He is in favour of refusing Mass to those who do not agree with the Church's teaching."
So, you suggest that we give the Eucharist to people who reject the Gospel or the authority of Christ's church on Earth? Is that truly giving respect to the Body and Blood of Christ? I don't think so...
"...He has banned colleagues who take issue with Church teaching from holding certain roles (e.g. Hans Kung, a former colleague from Tubingen University)"
Yes, he did. You know why? Because Kung is a HERETIC! Ratzinger's job was to remove the threat of error from the Church, which he did. You don't get to teach as a Catholic scholar by denying the truths of Catholicism! That's ridiculous!
"...and even had a go at Sr Lavinia Byrne for voicing her views on certain moral issues."
Again, because Sr. Byrne is wrong. She is wriong on Contraception, and she's wrong on the ordination of Women. So Ratzinger corrected her. And the problem with him doing his job is...?
I can't help but think therefore, for all the reasons above, that your ten objections are thus manifestly irrational or unsubstantiated. So, in response to this, what say you? (Dialogue's a great thing!)
Peace be with you and all my love,
The Cavalier
Hello Peter! Long tim no hear! How are you? How are exams?
In response, Me Say:
Firstly, I hope you realise my blog is intended to be somewhat tongue in cheek and as such not intended to be any sort of serious alternative political manifesto or anything like that. In fact I think there's very little on it anywhere that's complimentary to anyone!
As stated at the beginning, this all came from the Guardian. They have various articles and profiles etc at www.guardian.co.uk ,if you can bring yourself to read the Guardian, which I doubt! :-)
Unfornately, Africa (to name but one example) didn't follow Church teaching, and as a result you have a big problem - millions of people being newly infected with AIDS every month. As such many regard condoms as the lesser evil.
Magdalene laundries:
Basically he maintains the Catholic Church was correct in running these. Actually, to an extent I see his point: a lot of these girls were estranged from their families, so someone had to look after them. I don't doubt that generally the Church had the best possible motives for what it did. It's just that as a young woman and adoptee I have a hang-up about the whole situation.
I know what he meant re: rock music, but I have no taste in music (I am a Clash fan) so that comment was really intended to take the piss out of me!
I don't understand homosexuality in that way. (As you know!)
I have no view on the CDF, but the Inquisition is an inside joke among many of those who read this forum (long story) from when we were at school together. (Ultimately one of our mates then wrote a novel called "Inquisition", the second installment in the Aquasilva Trilogy and available in all good bookshops! And some crap ones, too.)
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - yes, I think whether or not you partake of the Eucharist is between you and God and it isn't up to anyone else to decide who can and can't take it. (But that's just my opinion and i know you won't agree.)
OK, I admit to know nothing about Kung, I was more using it to illustrate the extent of hte Cardinal's power (when he was still a Cardinal, obviously!)
As for altar servers, I found that in the Guardian and added it in because I thought it was funny. Maybe I should put "allegedly" before it to make myself clear! Chances are the Guardian is wrong, or actually meant something else entirely bit misspelled it! :-)
Hope exams etc go well.
Px
Interesting, Peter. A number of times you say the Pope is entitled to his opinion. Is P not entitled to hers?
Other than that I find most of your comments beneath even responding to.
hello folks, thought I would join in the debate, since I have more time than Rachel, and there a very few things which are beneath me (I'm very short) I will give this a poke.
Actually Polly, I don't want to be overly critical, but I just re-read your post and I just can't help but think that it's actually saturated with wrongful thinking.
So much so, in fact, that I have to challenge what you're saying here. Let's just go through your list of objections to Pope Benedict XVI:
"1. He strongly opposes the use of condoms in Africa"
And? What's wrong with that? AIDS wouldn't spread (anywhere near as much) if Africans didn't fornicate - which the Church also condemns.
Do you really think that an African person who engages in extra-marital sexual activity, and so has already proven they couldn't give a monkeys about the Church's teaching, is in anyway consistent to claim "Oh, but I can't use a Condom, the Church forbids it!" Like they care!
The fact is: if the Church's teaching was followed through completely, AIDS wouldn't be anywhere near the problem it is today.
But it is a problem, not because the Church condemns condoms, but because people fornicate, don't use a condom (often because of male African unwillingness to use something they perceive to be emasculating), and then hypocritically blame it on the Church.
For Western Liberals to complain about the Church's policy on Contraceptives is therefore just sheer humbug.
Hi Peter, I’m not a liberal, but I am western. Just wanted to take a couple of pointers up with you. For this first point, all I’ve really got to say is here already http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CA993.htm
And here
http://www.libchrist.com/std/vaticanlies.html
and here
http://www.tldm.org/News6/condom.htm
and in the last one of those I would just like to point out an incredible fallacy which just seemed to leap of the page and down my throat, making me gag with anger at the idiocy.
“The Holy Father has explained that when contraception is used, the marital act ceases to be an act of love.”
So if I have sex with my wife for the purposes of breeding, then that is an act of love, but if I have sex because I deeply care for my wife and wish to share physical intimacy with her, then that is not?
…ok then…
"2. He thinks all other Christian churches are 'invalid'"
No, he said that Protestant churches are "deficient" in their teaching, which he is perfectly entitled to believe (and he happens to be right).
Right, what he actually said was:
“`If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.”
- from the decree ``Dominus Iesus'' signed by Ratzinger and issued by his office, Aug. 6, 2000.
Now, the word objective is an adjective meaning ‘undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena” which means that “objectively speaking” all churches can be judged only on the number of followers. Now I’m willing to grant that looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_world_religions this page shows that Catholicism is still, just about, the biggest religion in the world in terms of adherents, although their numbers are dropping and the numbers of the closest religion (Sunnism) are climbing, and I’m sure that the Catholics have more money than any other religion, after all, they destroyed several ancient civilisations in their search for gold, and they haven’t left off money gathering.
That quote about camels passing through eyes of needles, and rich men and heaven, always made me wonder. Maybe it should have http://www.chick.com/reading/books/153/153_10.asp something about rich religions?
"The Catholic church is the biggest financial power, wealth accumulator and property owner in existence. She is a greater possessor of material riches than any other single institution, corporation, bank, giant trust, government or state of the whole globe. The pope, as the visible ruler of this immense amassment of wealth, is consequently the richest individual of the twentieth century. No one can realistically assess how much he is worth in terms of billions of dollars." From THE VATICAN BILLIONS by Avro Manhattan
Perhaps the word to describe other religions should have been “impoverished” unless by ‘the fullness of the means to salvation’ he means lots of money….
"3. He describes homosexuality as an 'intrinsic moral evil'"
Which it is, according to the Gospel, when you understand homosexuality as "active homosexual lifestyles" as opposed to "being Gay per se". Again, nothing wrong with stating something that theologically and morally orthodox Christians know to be the truth.
Ok, just so no one can accuse me of anti semanticism we’ll start with that. The word ‘intrinsic’ means: ‘Of or relating to the essential nature of a thing’ which means that according to Ratzinger, God made homosexuality an essential part of our moral natures.’ Now I’m not homosexual, and I don’t feel that homosexuality is an intrinsic part of me in any way, so I’m tempted to say that while he may feel that he is intrinsically drawn to the idea big butch vergers bending him over and shafting him over the alter, he’s wrong about it being intrinsic to ‘us’
He also brings back that word objective, when he says that homosexuality should be seen as an ‘objective disorder’ now not everyone thinks that homosexuality is wrong, so that means his opinions on homosexuality are just that, opinions, and are not objective in any way. Also, while you could describe homosexuality as an abnormality, because the ‘norm’ of society is to be heterosexual, it cannot be described as a disorder unless talking strictly in terms of reproduction. I always thought that one of religions functions was to convince us that life on earth is not all about reproduction, and had a higher purpose, but it’s funny how the Catholics make such a big deal about fucking for the sake of reproducing, and ignore the fact that people might want to fuck for fun, or for love…(now those two, they might be intrinsic moral evils!)
Ratzinger then goes on to say, ``It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the church's pastors wherever it occurs. ... The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in work, in action and in law.''
Now, I’m going out on a limb here, but calling someone “evil” sounds pretty violently malicious to me…
"4. He denounced rock music as being "the vehicle for anti-religion" (that's my vocation screwed, then)"
Actually, he said it was 'a' vehicle, not 'the' vehicle. There are plenty of other vehicles of anti-religion, and Ratzinger knew this. What he probably referred to was heavy rock, like Marilyn Manson or Slipknot. These groups are undeniably anti-Christian, at least.
In addition to this, much rock music communicates a nihilistic view of the world that can corrupt those who don't know better. Just like "Gangsta rap".
So what he said wasn't untrue, maybe over-exaggerated, and maybe too pointedly towards rock, but still ultimately true.
Ratzinger blasted rock music as a “vehicle of anti-religion”. He said rock and roll is a secular variant of an age-old ecstatic religion, in which man “lowers the barriers of individuality and personality” to “liberate himself from the burden of consciousness”. Rock is thus “the complete antithesis of Christian faith in the redemption”. http://www.thetablet.co.uk/cgi-bin/register.cgi/tablet-00936
Now I’m with him when he describes pop music as “sheer banality” but he should be careful what he mouths off about. Creed for example and P.O.D are examples of Christian rock music that are very popular and are good music. I can’t speak for Polly’s taste in music :) but again, Ratzinger is shooting his mouth off without checking his facts. If what he meant was Marilyn Manson and Slipknot, then he should have qualified that fact by referring to “Industrial Metal” and “Goth Metal” into which categories fit nicely. If indeed, as I suspect, he was aiming it at rock music in general, (and showing his age when he called it rock and roll, unless he meant Chuck Berry and Huey Lewis) then again it is a matter of opinion, and unless he himself has experienced this ‘lowering of barriers of individuality and personality’ then he should probably make sure that rock fans themselves experience it, I for one, have never really done so. The dirges sung in church however, now they break down the barriers of individuality and personality as they grind your spirit down, they get you saying the same things over and over… We believe and trust in him…” which to me…well …it sounds like brainwashing techniques…primitive ones to be sure, but effective ones. Check this out – incense in the air – cuts down the amount people breath in, therefore lowering oxygen intake, therefore lowering activity of the brain, therefore making them more suggestible. Quality brainwashing trick there…
"5. He supported the Magdalen Laundries"
Prove it. What do you mean by 'support' anyway?
"6. He was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of faith (formally known as the Holy Inquisition)"
Again, so what? The CDF is there to maintain orthodoxy, to protect the Church from error and falsehood, a job which, with thanks to Ratzinger, it does very well. The days of the Inquisition are over, the Church no longer burns people. So move on.
Hmmm…matter of opinion. Maybe not literally. More a humorous point by Polly I feel.
"7. He denounced fighting poverty through social action as it 'smacked of Marxism'"
Again, no. He denounced Liberation Theology as smacking of Marxism, which it did. It heavily borrowed themes from Marxist understandings of social conflict. Themes which, because they are ultimately classist and materialist are un-Christian. what was wrong with Ratzinger pointing this out?
Truly fighting poverty through real social action, as is done by CAFOD, for example, has never been attacked or slandered by Ratzinger at all. Probably because like most of us, he sees charity as a good thing.
Define ‘real social action.’ Surely fightin poverty by any means that doesn’t actively hurt people is a good thing?
"8. He is not only against ordination of women (which I'll let him off on as it's understandable perhaps for someone in his position) but also against the use of female choristers and altar servers."
Again, prove this. If it is true, then he's entitled to his opinion, though it's not one I would agree with necessarily.
http://www.iol.ie/~duacon/l960301.htm
"9. All but 2 German bishops opposed his appointment, and German opinions polls have suggested more people oppose him than support him."
Irrelevant. NO Peter, not irrelevant, him being a german bishop, the other clergy with whom we will have had most contact will be the other german bishops. The catholics with whom he will have had most contact will the the german catholics.
Frankly, I'm bored of this now. I can see only two explanations, you're an idiot, or a fascist.
Some references from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4950878,00.html
And for the record...blogs are often intended to be fun to read and fun to write. This one is, yours doesn't seem to be if you can't take something meant in jest to be funny, then you probably should refrain from using the net very much. There are far more deserving candidates for your angry young Catholicism. You should be picking on the atheists amongst us rather than bullying those who could, if you treated them better, be your allies...
Come pick on someone your own size!
The Roundhead (for the purposes of this is he...)
The Roundhead quoted Ratzinger:
"the intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in work, in action and in law."
Did you know the Catholic church (religious bodies in general) are exempt in LAW from equality legislation at WORK? i.e. they can turn someone down for a job purely on the basis of their homosexuality.
Ratzinger also says that homosexuals taking care of children amounts to "doing violence unto children"
Again, nice and respectful. Well done.
I have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you! »
ha, I will try out my thought, your post get me some good ideas, it's really amazing, thanks.
- Norman
Post a Comment
<< Home