Meet Joseph Ratzinger
Cold_NiTe
Join Date: 2003-09-15 Member: 20875Members
Join Date: 2003-09-15 Member: 20875Members
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">The New Catholic Pope</div> That's right. Pope Benedict XVI, the new Catholic Pope.
<a href='http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050416121309990001' target='_blank'>The Source.</a>
I figured this deserved a thread and some recognition. What do you guys think? I'm surprised they chose a hardliner. I pray he does as well as John Paul.
<a href='http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050416121309990001' target='_blank'>The Source.</a>
I figured this deserved a thread and some recognition. What do you guys think? I'm surprised they chose a hardliner. I pray he does as well as John Paul.
Comments
Whoops, just remembered what "hardliner" means....
<b>Whoops, just remembered what "hardliner" means....</b> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yup. I'm scared sky, I really am.
Its a good thing they change the name 'n' all, Pope Ratzinger would sound like a cheap-meat KFC burger.
<b>Edit:</b> Yup, he used to be in the Hitler Youth.
muahaha...he really looks a bit scary...hmm...hes german...no comments on that one yet..
As for being in the hitler youth - yes... at a very early age and on a non-voluntary basis. He also opped out of it ASAP - and played hookey from the German Army. Hardly the work of a Nazi supporter.
Another interesting fact - he is pope 111 - which is the second to last according to certain prophecies... the next one being the anti-christ. He already fulfilled his prophecy (Gloria Olivia - glory of the olives) as Benedict means "of the olives" (many thought this pope would be a benedictine monk).
As for being in the hitler youth - yes... at a very early age and on a non-voluntary basis. He also opped out of it ASAP - and played hookey from the German Army. Hardly the work of a Nazi supporter.
Another interesting fact - he is pope 111 - which is the second to last according to certain prophecies... the next one being the anti-christ. He already fulfilled his prophecy (Gloria Olivia - glory of the olives) as Benedict means "of the olives" (many thought this pope would be a benedictine monk). <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm guessing after this guy, no one will want to be the pope?
It's hard to be positive about this considering his stances on abortion, homosexuality, and women's rights.
It's hard to be positive about this considering his stances on abortion, homosexuality, and women's rights. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
womans rights I'll have to look into - but as for the other two... let me see, he is keeping the same stance the RCC has had for 2000 years - and now there is something wrong with it?
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes yes yes, but that makes it far less fun!
Oh god save us. I'm not normally superstitious, but stuff like this scares me no end.
You'd think that this would cause them to chose a young pope. Like a one month old baby.
<a href='http://www.crystalinks.com/papalprophecies.html' target='_blank'>Linky</a>
You'd think that this would cause them to chose a young pope. Like a one month old baby.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No one ever said the RCC was intelligent. :-)
As for my opinion? I think I approve. Mainly because he looks like Toad of Toad Hall, "Toot Toot, out of the way" etc.
Besides if he is a 'hardliner' it means he'll kill the catholic church even more. They should have picked a cuddly one, would be far more succesful.
[Edit]
Thanks for the prophecy link, hadn't seen that when I first posted.
Can you say tenuous? Sorry but anyone who believes in that is... well it's just ludicrous!
I'll go ahead, delete a few of the more stupid page one remarks, and <span style='color:white'>***move***</span> this into Discussion.
Pepe is correct on the first count. If you are of a certain age and German, you pretty much had no hope of escaping the Hitleryouth. The second remark is an article of faith, so I'll withhold my judgements.
On Ratzinger's socio-political opinions, he's somewhere right of John Paul. Expect him to take drastic stances regarding birth control (i.e.: more torching of preservatives in Indonesia), homosexual rights in front of god, women's involvement in church, or transreligious communication. Where John Paul tried to close the gap between the confession, Ratzinger excommunicated priests who held the sacraments in front of ecomenical congregations.
I'll go ahead, delete a few of the more stupid page one remarks, and <span style='color:white'>***move***</span> this into Discussion.
Pepe is correct on the first count. If you are of a certain age and German, you pretty much had no hope of escaping the Hitleryouth. The second remark is an article of faith, so I'll withhold my judgements.
On Ratzinger's socio-political opinions, he's somewhere right of John Paul. Expect him to take drastic stances regarding birth control (i.e.: more torching of preservatives in Indonesia), homosexual rights in front of god, women's involvement in church, or transreligious communication. Where John Paul tried to close the gap between the confession, Ratzinger excommunicated priests who held the sacraments in front of ecomenical congregations. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Could you clarify for me... are you pro-this pope, or would you have picked another - why? (sorry - I don't know if your angry at one of us or the choice in general).
As for the whole prophecy thing - ehh, take it with a grain of salt. I find it interesting - but not authorative by any leingth.
Also, if he is pope 111, how come the article state this:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The crowd responded to the 265th pope by chanting ''Benedict! Benedict!''<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Also, if he is pope 111, how come the article state this:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The crowd responded to the 265th pope by chanting ''Benedict! Benedict!''<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
"In all, 112 popes and their characteristics are listed from 1143 to the "end of the world."
Have fun flaming the RCC guys, I'm out.
I have another question then... as a self proclaimed agnostic with an atheistic world view (correct me if I sterio-type to harshly - that isn't my purpose here) what does it matter who is on the holy seat?
I'm not a catholic... my view on them is that they are the apostate big brother who has gone to live with the swine... for 1500 years (Biblical imagery - not to be taken literally). As such - I view the choice with a bit of curiosity - and I suppose I am happy that they picked someone who "toes the line" with Christian doctrine. But really it doesn't matter - it isn't my church - nor is it representative of my faith. I was equally as interested when the Raelians called Ward Churchill to be an honorary priest.
So here is the big question - why do liberals world wide care at all who the pope is? They obviously disagree with catholic doctrine as it stands - why does it matter at all? Sure, catholicism in America (and in Germany too apparently) has ceased teaching RCC doctrine - In my opinion they should split! If you disagree with the tennants, quit calling yourself that! There are a million other religions out there ready and willing to take membership. The papacy isn't like the superbowl, if your team doesn't win it shouldn't matter...
I'm done ranting - but I hope you see where I'm coming from.
He's our new pope, even if we do not agree entirely with him, we must follow and accept. Just like you would to a loving parent.
Oh and i find that profecy extremely hard to beleive coming from a source like that. Am i to beleive that the end of Roman Catholicism and supposedly the world will come in lets say ( 5 - 10 years of Pope Benedcit the 16 then one other...) 20 years tops??
Come on...
I have another question then... as a self proclaimed agnostic with an atheistic world view (correct me if I sterio-type to harshly - that isn't my purpose here) what does it matter who is on the holy seat?
I'm not a catholic... my view on them is that they are the apostate big brother who has gone to live with the swine... for 1500 years (Biblical imagery - not to be taken literally). As such - I view the choice with a bit of curiosity - and I suppose I am happy that they picked someone who "toes the line" with Christian doctrine. But really it doesn't matter - it isn't my church - nor is it representative of my faith. I was equally as interested when the Raelians called Ward Churchill to be an honorary priest.
So here is the big question - why do liberals world wide care at all who the pope is? They obviously disagree with catholic doctrine as it stands - why does it matter at all? Sure, catholicism in America (and in Germany too apparently) has ceased teaching RCC doctrine - In my opinion they should split! If you disagree with the tennants, quit calling yourself that! There are a million other religions out there ready and willing to take membership. The papacy isn't like the superbowl, if your team doesn't win it shouldn't matter...
I'm done ranting - but I hope you see where I'm coming from. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
It matters, Pepe because when the Pope says something has to be done this way, it is done that way. That can, and has, have a direct influence on politics all over the world.
Just use what John Paul II said on homosexual marriage, suddenly, not even a year later the US is voting on the "sanctity of marriage."
Not to pick on anyone pope, but this one looks to be far worse in the terms being a right winger. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You are stereotyping me there; agnosticism doesn't equal atheism. I'm certain there's an active god, I merely distrust the concept of institutionalized religion. But for the purpose of this discussion, feel free to consider me an atheist, since my view of the catholic church is less that of a religious and more that of a cultural system.
I grew up surrounded by this system and have first hand impressions of its downsides, but I also know that it is, all said and done, a great and unifying force to many. I spoke to too many people doing small miracles in its name, saw too many people finding comfort and a home in its midst, saw too much <i>good</i>, however you want to define that, happen due to it to condemn it. It is this system, this 'global family', if I may summarize that far, which I am concerned about right now. The pope is considered the father of the catholic church. I simply doubt that Ratzinger can hope to keep this family together, and as simple as you make 'splitting' sound, it's a long, difficult, and painful process for every single one involved. People will break over it. To see something like this happen out of - in my perception - misunderstood 'purity' in the interpretation of predominantly politically formed traditions is just nothing I'll enjoy.
The Inca, (or was it the Maya?) predicted the end of the world as December, 2012.
Food for thought.