Cardinal Says U.S. Treated Saddam 'Like a Cow'

[Rudey]

If you don't have to accept what non-catholics say about you then why are you arguing on here? And who said something about you? The Vatican chose to say something about the US, and US citizens chose to return criticism towards the Vatican.

You've made the Vatican completely pure and innocent. On top of that nobody that isn't Catholic can make a criticism. Any other conditions you want to add to this? On top of that, you've thrown out comments about revisionist history and made it apply to any and all cricisms of the Vatican.

The reason why the Vatican is being discussed is because the Vatican made this remark. If it was the governing body for Anglicans, then Anglicans would be discussed. Also the Vatican is a much more hierarchical organization - most other religions are NOT. Now I can go on and on about the "sins" of the Vatican (I'm sure you'd consider it revisionist history even if it affected people that weren't Catholic) - but I'd just rather the Vatican stay quiet on all matters like this or start becoming more balanced and less political, spreading criticism more fairly including upon itself and the roles it took within even the last 50 years that have gotten it into hot water.

-Rudey
--America is always being bashed through revisionist history...

Originally posted by adduncan
Christia (and Tom....)

Last post on the subject.

Everything you posted is the populist "Cliffs Notes" version. (And by the way I was a history minor FWIW.)

You can both egg me on and demand more detail but the fact is the details take up a library full of books and both of you know they don't fit in a sound bite or in a post on GC. That does not mean your quips "win" an argument or are even correct.

As for the Crusades, which is a popular bashing topic, I would recommend Sir Steven Runciman's "A History of the Crusades" (a work in 3 volumes) which is considered the seminal work on the topic. He does not share your conclusion on the Childrens' Crusade. His books are a relatively easy read for a scholarly work. No, I will not reproduce it here for your satisfaction. Check out Amazon.com

The "Heaven's Ring" you refer to would take about 10 pages to explain - and was addressed and resolved in the Council of Trent. You can read it in its entirety (and in English) here: http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent.html

Female priests - never. You're thinking of a gnostic splinter group. Not the same thing, even as early as the writing of the Gospel of John.

Married priests - no kidding that used to be the norm. And the problems caused by that situation is what led to the Western church (Latin rite) banning it. In addition, some entered the priesthood or religious life after their spouses died. So of COURSE they had children!
The Eastern Rites however, do allow married clergy with very specific and rigid stipulations. It's not like Protestant ministers being married. (Some Eastern rites reunited with Rome recently.) Also, when Episopalian or other ministers convert to Catholicism, they are ordained under the Eastern rite if they are married. There's much more than 20.

"Black" schism? Can you clarify? There were several "schisms", some major, some relatively minor, and there's more going on today. If you're thinking of the Church of England split, you can set the blame on Henry Tudor the 8th - he wanted to bend the church to fit HIS opinion. T'ain't how it works. You can't blame the Pope for that one.

More than one Pope? Yes, happened too. Disputes among Church leadership happen, like in any org. You want to talk about two ancient Church leaders in a spat, check out Peter and Paul. So what? The same thing happens in every other damn religious organization on the planet. It just doesn't make CNN.

I've read the background of the Catholic church. It's the reason I converted to it in college--because I wouldn't accept the small-minded, revisionist history that is so popular in the media and on message boards like this. The only thing that "shocks" me is Catholic self-hatred and ignorance. It's just plain sad. We don't have to accept what non-Catholics say about us, folks.

Tom--it was nice knowing you while it lasted.
Christia--good for you for hanging in there--there's a lot more to read out there than you have found so far and I hope the above references are a good start.

Edited to correct the Hanover University URL

[rainbowbrightCS]

hold up, I am Roman Catholic. I went to St. Francis Xavier Elem. School then to St. Mary's High School. I was confirmed at St. Francis Xavier Parish when I was 18. I cried at my confirmation. It was wonderfull. Now my next goal is to marry a Catholic so I can get married in the Church.


Most of my information came From Dr. Camille, who has a PhD, Dr. Camile is also known as Sr. Loiuse. She is a wonderful little noun. Who I love very dearly.

It also came from Fr. Rousse, Fr. Cattahane (sp) and Bishop O'Brien (the Bishop that ran the guy over in PhX last summer)

I had this wonderfull news article From CNN about a Catholic Preist being married, I can't find it so I will tell you about it. This man got married and had kids, he then became a priest for a Methodist (i think, don't get mad If I am wrong) and wanted to be one for the Catholic Church. So he petitioned to the Pope who after a couple years agree inder certain terms.

1) he may never get divourced/annulled
2) If his wife dies, he may never get remarried
3) He may not use church funds to take care of his kids
4) the local parish must approve

When I find that link I will PM it to you.



about the women preist, yes there was some. In the very begining. Their reason of being was that men and women did not touch in every day life. ( as many of the history majors should know, it was not done) So the women priest (who did every thing a male priest did ) would be the one to help a women every day life. They has this practice for about 200 years, maybe less. But there were woman preist. I believe at Vatican 3 there will be again, hopefully before I die.


I have read most Sir Steven Runciman's "A History of the Crusades" thank you very much. It was very well written and gave me some great ideas and thoughts. But I simplefied it so some one who did not know much would understand. I am sorry if my over simplication to offend you.

The black Shism was the shism were we had two popes who fault for power many many years. That is its offical name.

The "Heaven's Ring" you refer to would take about 10 pages to explain - and was addressed and resolved in the Council of Trent. You can read it in its entirety (and in English) here: http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent.html

as I said I could not remeber was that ring/ coin was offically called. I have heard many names for them. As I said I tend to over simplefy things. AS you said that subject would take about 10 pages to talk about.


If some one read my very last line that I said I picked this faith on my own accord, no matter the history. But what I wrote was to prove that we (hence I am in this "we" part too) had a religion that ruled an Empire, and had a very rocky start. That we are govern by "man" and therefore have faults. We are not perfect, nor is our church. But people here kept trying to say that the church has made no mistakes.

I've read the background of the Catholic church. It's the reason I converted to it in college--because I wouldn't accept the small-minded, revisionist history that is so popular in the media and on message boards like this. The only thing that "shocks" me is Catholic self-hatred and ignorance. It's just plain sad. We don't have to accept what non-Catholics say about us, folks.

You may believe what ever you beleive. The only thing I am wrong of is over simplfying, I tend to do that alot. I am also glad that you picked the Catholic Chrurch, to me and for me ( no bashing me on this please) it was/is the best choice of faiths for me.

[justamom]

The Pope did not make the statement. The Pope, NOT THE CARDINAL, is the head of our Church. People close to him have said his strength does not allow him more than showing up and perhaps reciting a few prayers that have been repeated through the years. That about covers that.

The Cardinal made a statement of opinion...NOT doctrine. The problem is when anyone speaks FROM the Vatican, they are seen as speaking FOR the Vatican. I do not for one minute agree with his statement and believe he was wrong to put it out there without clarification.

Dragging historical wrongdoings into THIS discussion is uncalled for.

Yes, I do agree some of the BS flying around FEELS like "bashing".

One simple question...
I feel rather certain that there are one or two other threads where Catholics get bathed in criticism. Has this ever occurred where the table are turned on the Jewish Faith? I would like a link if someone could provide it. Maybe there was some debate over Israel and the Palestinians a while ago.

I do not understand such ill will towards my faith. it's one thing to
disagree. It's quite another to vehemently spout off things that are irrelevant to the Church of today.

My husband's family is not too fond of Jewish people period. They have opinions on a few of the other Christian faiths as well.(My husband NOT included) I could shovel some BS right back at "ya"
that would be accurate on some level, but not in totality. Yet, tit for tat does not improve understanding or communication. I can honestly say that on GC, I haven't seen too many Catholics go for the jugular with such vengeance. What, IS it? No one is holding a gun to anyones head and saying you have to join the "club".

You would think everyone would love us! Think how much we spur the economy and line those retailers pockets at Christmas time... think about that and you might see the underlying inference-then tell me how it feels.

[rainbowbrightCS]

your right Justamom. I am sorry. I will refrain from posting anymore on this thread becuase it is a touchy subject.


I am sorry to any one that I offended.


Christia

[justamom]

RB- I'm kind of sorry I posted on this thread too.

So ditto RB's comment.

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by justamom
The Pope, NOT THE CARDINAL, is the head of our Church.

I am way out of my depth when commenting on the Catholic Church, but I've been waiting since the beginning of all of this acrimony for someone to point that out.

[Rudey]

What did Judaism have to do with this??

A) The Prime Minister of Israel did not go to the media and make a remark against US treatment of Saddam Hussein.

B) Even if the PM were to do that, he represents nobody but the nation of Israel which is composed of Jews, Muslim, Christians, Buddhists, Atheists, and more.

C) Judaism does not have a singular power structure. Many branches have developed over the years and there is no kind of body to control them. There is a Chief-Rabbi of Israel but that is sorta ambiguous as there are Chief Rabbis in a lot of places for several denominations. There is also a Chief Rabbi for the areas of Judae and Samaria.

D) Judaism is a religion. Catholicism is a religion. Catholicism (the religion) was not commented on but the Vatican (the controlling body with political history) was. Would you happen to know what the political body for Judaic religion (see bullet C) is so we can discuss that?

E) The Vatican is not without its sins and is not off limits. Should anyone that makes a comment on the Vatican be considered as insulting your faith?

F) Why is it wrong to bring historical wrongdoings into this? Are there not character judgements made daily from jounalism, business dealings, and court rooms? The Vatican has a lot to answer for. Should someone of such high stature within the Vatican say something about Saddam and not about other things including things in his own church, it sound not only hypocritical but also tarnishes their image.

I couldn't care how your husband's family or he feels towards Jews. Do you know why? Because for hundreds of years through progroms, inquisitions, the holocaust we've been hated and kicked around. We've been in ovens, felt the tips of cold steel-toed boots, and more and we're still here and we're still prosperous. Antisemitism has peaked globally to levels unexperienced for years now. But at the end of the day, none of us will sit there and take it. In areas of religion, philosophy, science, medicine, finance, business, entertainment, and now global security Jews have been groundbreakers. We're not just a religion but a people - different from any other religion. There is no comparison. Those that sit there hating us are the ones that fall behind - they are the errors of the world that end up disgusting the future generations.

-Rudey
--And I do love Catholics.

Originally posted by justamom
The Pope did not make the statement. The Pope, NOT THE CARDINAL, is the head of our Church. People close to him have said his strength does not allow him more than showing up and perhaps reciting a few prayers that have been repeated through the years. That about covers that.

The Cardinal made a statement of opinion...NOT doctrine. The problem is when anyone speaks FROM the Vatican, they are seen as speaking FOR the Vatican. I do not for one minute agree with his statement and believe he was wrong to put it out there without clarification.

Dragging historical wrongdoings into THIS discussion is uncalled for.

Yes, I do agree some of the BS flying around FEELS like "bashing".

One simple question...
I feel rather certain that there are one or two other threads where Catholics get bathed in criticism. Has this ever occurred where the table are turned on the Jewish Faith? I would like a link if someone could provide it. Maybe there was some debate over Israel and the Palestinians a while ago.

I do not understand such ill will towards my faith. it's one thing to
disagree. It's quite another to vehemently spout off things that are irrelevant to the Church of today.

My husband's family is not too fond of Jewish people period. They have opinions on a few of the other Christian faiths as well.(My husband NOT included) I could shovel some BS right back at "ya"
that would be accurate on some level, but not in totality. Yet, tit for tat does not improve understanding or communication. I can honestly say that on GC, I haven't seen too many Catholics go for the jugular with such vengeance. What, IS it? No one is holding a gun to anyones head and saying you have to join the "club".

You would think everyone would love us! Think how much we spur the economy and line those retailers pockets at Christmas time... think about that and you might see the underlying inference-then tell me how it feels.