And people like Luther didn't want to start a new church either -- just happened that way b/c the catholic church wouldn't get their act together at the time.

Also, I don't believe the church will alter its views on contraception, priests, or homosexuals either... at least not ahytime remotely soon...

I could see, hypothetically, on the trillion-to-one chance that the church went liberal enough (which we all know will never happen), allowing limited contraception (condoms and the like, but nothing that involves chemical regulation of reproduction), and perhaps even women priests (but, not married priests), but I can't imagine the church would ever allow abortion except to save the mother's life (and it would have to be the absolute last resort), nor can I see them allowing homosexual rights.

Why do they make up monikers for themselves instead of using their real names? I didn't even realize they did that until I saw this thread.

"Hey, we got this guy...Roberto Palo out of Spain. He's got 99% of the support of the Catholic church."

"Yeah, but we've never had a Pope Roberto Palo. Mark his name off the list."

"Gotcha."

The church never got it's act together the way the reformers wanted it. It did reform the corruption, but it never accepted the doctrinal issues which were the main driving force behind the reformation. The council of Trent says very clearly that anyone who believes in salvation by faith alone (the foundation of protestant theology) is anathema. (Damned. And maybe some thing else too.) This was reaffirmed in 1991.



Heh heh. Darth Benedict!



It was the 95 theses. The Magna Carta was something drawn up by the English to give their citizens certain rights.

back in 400 (I think) a guy named mecurius became pope and decided to be called john the second as a pope with the name of a pagan god (i.e. his birth name)would not be a good idea.

Also, it seems that john paul the first chose his name because the two popes before him were john and paul.

Star Wars: A New Pope?

pope * p = new pope("Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger");

Your calling another religion's beliefs ridiculous? Seems kind of bigoted but whatever... The whole point of a religion is that it doesn't change. If the church just conforms to society and moves along with popular opinion then what do we have? It's not the same religion at all if you just change all the believes and values because you deem them "ridiculous". No one is making you be religious. If the Catholic church believes homosexuality is a sin and condemns them, then who are you to say that should be changed so that it's more "fair" to today's society?

If Catholics existed in their own little Catholic world, then of course whatever they believed wouldn't be a problem, despite how nonsensical it might be.
But the stance of the catholic church affects the entire world. The restriction on contraception has undoubtedly caused the deaths of thousands in the developing world through AIDs, and that is inexcusable, regardless of whatever theological tripe you throw at it.

Obi, we know it was the 95 theses. He was taking the piss.

(Read; he was making a joke)

A friend of mine's family own the castle at wartburg in which Martin Luther was hid when he being persecuted. That's just cool.

How in the heck is banning contraception related to death by aids?



[/flamebait] <-- but I'd like to hear the reasoning behind it...

The only change I think they need to make is to elect a younger pope. One that's just as experienced/knows as much, but isn't going to die within the next 10 years and have this process start all over again.

It's true that he's too old. Funny thing is, he's a former SS Officer.
Anyways, I think he'll be alright.

By the way, Episode III comes out exactly one month today. We all know that Palpatine plays a large role in that movie. It's a conspiracy!

And the non-extermination of the continent of Africa has allowed the AIDS virus to flourish there, as well. Tally ho!

Condoms prevent the transmition of AIDS. At some point John Paul 2 was telling people that comdoms spread aids, just so they wouldn't use them.

bull****

I really could care less about the pope, i only heard about john paul the II when he died.

how is it BS, if someone has AIDS and uses a condom when having sex, they are a whole lot less likely to pass it on.

BS indeed. Condoms prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. AIDS included.

If you have aids, you shouldn't be having sex, lest you risk transmitting it to your partner, and that's your own fault, not the pope's, for engaging in risky behavior.

Oh, and if you listen to the pope's teaching and not wear condoms, you can't really blame him for your getting aids because you chose to listen to him. No one forced you to go do stuff without a condom -- you followed his teaching of your own free will... therefore it's your fault if you get aids without wearing a condom (and it would be your fault anyway because it was your choice to have sex in the first place, condom or no condom)

Um, condoms dont PREVENT the transmission of aids. They lower the risk, but they certainly dont totally prevent it 100%. I think that's the argument that was being made.

I know, but the way I asked my question was wrong... i'm concerned that the pope is being blamed for the transmission of aids

[edit]oops, wait, was that directed at martyn?

Sure contraceptives should stayed banned, they can always just start up another low-budget orphanage.

I say John Kerry would've been a good Pope.

Wow, from the new Pope to condoms and AIDS transmission. This thread is most assuredly hijacked.

On the malachy prophecy, while it is semi-weird how he does seem to meet the description, if you read other sites they had lots of explanations on different cardinals who would meet the prophecy.

In other words, its not that difficult to assign a description from the past to fit around some person.

Like Jean Lustiger would have fit the prophecy by being a converted Jew. And since the olive branch is an emblem for the Jewish people, it would meet the prophecy.

And this pope meets the prophecy by choosing the name Benedict. Apparently, the order of St. Benedict stated that this pope will come from their ranks. But all he did was choose the name?! It's not like it's not a relatively common choice for a pople (*coughs* 16 *coughs*)

Plus, if you feel that the 112th pope that was added later to the list is a hoax, some view that the 111th pope should be Jesus. Some view that since the devil can reveal lies to people as well, it could be the Antichrist.

Or some people feel it is just forged since it didn't emerge till the 1600's - and up to that point about all of the descriptions (on past popes) are pretty accurate - since it's supposed to have originated from ~1000ish or so. After that, it gets a lot more sketchy on descriptions.

Either way - who knows! I think its probably a forgery, since I've seen descriptions from works like Nostradameus and others being applied to everything.

Plus they've only boasted that it's near the end of times for ~2000+ years.

Food for thought:

The Catholic Church teaches chastity before marriage. The Catholic Church is against contraception. Some of you seem to think that if the Church changed her stance on contraception, AIDs would practically disappear -- but what if people followed the other teachings as well, and didn't have sex with each other before they were married, and if they were also faithful to their spouses? If people would embrace all of the teachings of the Church instead of complaining about contraception, the AIDs issue would become much less severe.



That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've read in a while. Conspiracy, anyone?

Did you actually read the link I posted -- the link that explained the reasoning behind the anti-contraceptive stance?

Incidentally, the Vatican just had a multi-million dollar deficit.

The contraception issue will not change because there is something intrinsically evil about treating the fertility of either yourself or your partner as though it were a disease that needs to be medicated or prevented.

A sin is the acceptance of a lie, which can never bring any good, because it has no basis in reality. Humans are fertile, sex will often result in kids, and your partner is a human, not a source of pleasure. The Catholic alternative is Natural Family Planning involving the use of infertile periods (the majority of the month). It's 99% effective (the 1% supposedly being due to the few women who ovulate on orgasm).
Most importantly it fosters respect for one's sexuality and that of one's partner, as one would expect in having to discuss vaginal temperature, etc. to determine an infertile period.

As for AIDS being stopped by contraception, that's just a half-assed "solution" that allows one to dodge the real issue that people need to be educated on the disease (ie: having sex with a virgin doesn't cure you of AIDS, etc.). There is no justification for saying that Catholics shouldn't teach what they believe.

On another note, those dark bags under the eyes are pretty creepy looking.

I think the 666th pope will be the antichrist
and the 777th pope will restore order to the galaxy, in a classic lightsaber duel, and overthrow the emperor.



sorry, that's just the first thing that came to mind when I read that...
I just had to share...

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/04/19/new_pope_is_former_h.html

Warning: I dunno what stuff is linked on the rest of the site. I only stuck to that page and it seemed ok. I don't know whats on the rest of the site.

Well according to that site, he use to be a member of Hitler's youth program or something. But then again, alot of German's were in that time, even if they didn't want ot.

An interesting collection of links regarding the new Pope

His pastoral letters in particular might give insight into his "style." His doctrinal letters are lengthy, but display some doctrines that he apparently felt the need to reassert as During his time in Munich.

The News tends mash things into a sentence, maybe his own words might speak better.

[edit]Yeah that Hitler Youth stuff is wild. Sounds like stuff that'll become big. Apparently he deserted when he was drafted, and the Polish John Paul II who named him Cardinal was certainly no fan of the Nazis, so I highly doubt it means anything.

But what if I want to please my wife? Say that she doesn't want oral sex or masturbatory pleasure - am I supposed to simply say, "Well, dear, you're just on the wrong time of the month."

Or...I could say, "Okay, let me go get the condoms," and we have a night of pleasure. Humans are fertile, but they are also sexual. If we don't want kids (be it due to inability to financially sustain them or some other reason), why should my wife and I be unable to physically consummate our love and affection?

By the way, does the Catholic church consider oral, anal, and masturbatory sex to be sinful as well?

Uh.h..h...... Catholics realize that sex is used 99% of the time without the intent to conceive a child by the rest of the world, right? Seems to me they should stuff it if they're trying to push their agenda onto non-Catholics.

Masturbation, yes. Don't know about the others, although I have an inkling they don't like anal.

rofl, and I hope they realize 99% of men masturbate and the other 1% are lying, too. Geez...

Yeah, it's never talked about. It's one of the rules that's written down, but nobody cares about since everyone breaks it.

Wolfy: Well there's the self-control factor. Sure you want to please your wife, which Catholic doctrine says is a must (which is why the impotent can't marry under Church law and the Church supports efforts to help impotence).

If you don't think you can handle kids at this time in your marraige you make the choice to wait. It's an act of love, not solely pleasure.
The exact wording of the Natural Family Planning teaching:


Church doctrine states that sex must be "unitive and procreative," both bringing the couple together and being open to life. This means that oral and anal sex don't fulfill the requirements. As foreplay, I don't know, I'd have to check.

As for masterbation, it's again self control. Everyone has weakness, everyone sins, to say that that alone imples that sin is okay makes no sense.

Freelancer: The Catholic Church isn't forcing it's beliefs on people. The Church has its stance based on Christ's teachings that it passes on to its believers. If you don't believe it, don't accept it, but the Church has to duty to proclaim and defend it regardless.

I could go on at length, but I think the thread is derailing into an arguement over Catholic doctrines on sexuality. (I thing the new Popes documents I posted mention a lot of it anyway.)

Wow, I've never felt more sorry for them until I heard that...

Yeah, I'm sure all those people in Africa don't use contraception because the Catholic church is against it. Please. They don't use it because they aren't educated about it, and it just isn't available. If you are complaining about AIDS, these people need to be provided with contraception and education.

that is because discussions about religion, along with politics, is the most likely topic that a thread about it will get hijacked.