The Catholic Church Does it Again

51 posts / 0 new
Last post
al-Qa'bong
The Catholic Church Does it Again

next!

al-Qa'bong

Quote:

A website quoted Giacomo Babini, the emeritus bishop of Grosseto, as saying he believed a "Zionist attack" was behind the criticism, considering how "powerful and refined" the criticism is.

The comments, which have been denied by the bishop, follow a series of statements from Catholic churchmen alleging the existence of plots to weaken the church and Pope Benedict XVI.

Allegedly speaking to the Catholic website Pontifex, Babini, 81, was quoted as saying: "They do not want the church, they are its natural enemies. Deep down, historically speaking, the Jews are God killers."

 

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/11/catholic-bishop-blames-jews

 

 

While I've had a hard enough time believing people still held these "Christ killer" thoughts in private, for anyone to reveal them in public is incomprehensible.

 

On another note, here's an example of a real antisemite who uses "Zionist" in his diatribe against Jews, which must make some folks around here feel justified in saying anti-Zionism equals antisemitism.

j.m.

This was totally overlooked by the Anglo-speaking media, but the Catholic Church in Mexico really outdid itself with this comment in April 2009 by Auxiliar Bishop of Guadalajara and Secretary General of the Episcopal Conference of Mexico José Leopoldo González:

http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/notas/593164.html

http://www.elporvenir.com.mx/notas.asp?nota_id=303477

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn7mB-lB6DM

Quote:

 

Reporter: Pero eso no va a evitar que la gente ya no tenga confianza a su parroco porque igual tiene una doble vida

Leopoldo González: [not very audible]

Reporter: No, se lo comento que si eso no puede generar desconfianza

Leopoldo González: No, al contrario, entre más humanos nos vean más nos van apreciar

Translation:

Reporter: But that is not going to avoid that the people don't have confidence in their priest because he has double life [in reference to the similar behaviours of a Mexican priest that participated in a child pornography ring].

...

Reporter: No, I'm asking you if [those behaviours] can generate distrust.

Leopoldo González: On the contrary, the more human [the parishoners] see us the more they are going to appreciate us.

 

[Edit: Sorry, I didn't see this was in the Anti-Racism thread. 9:08 PM]

Joey Ramone

I'd like to say I'm shocked, but I'm not.  I grew up in a fairly strict catholic house.  Fortunately, my parents were class conscious working class socialists of different races, so when I was growing up I never heard any anti-semitism, or any other racism, from them or any of their friends. However, I knew a lot of catholics and I found that anti-semitism was never far from the surface for large numbers of catholics, and a significant minority (I think) were quite blatantly anti-semitic.  I recall hearing crude anti-semitic shit from clergy, in fact probably more often from clergy than from lay catholics.

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

The Church seems its own worst enemy.

Joey Ramone

Somehow I always suspected that anti-semitism, and other nastiness, is mainly concentrated in the upper hierarchy of the RC church. 

Unionist

Let me get this straight.

1. Joseph Ratzinger is a Hitler Jugend alumnus who protects child rapists, refuses communion to politicians who support women's right to choose and equal marriage, and tells Africans that using condoms intensifies the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

2. Apparently, the worldwide outcry against this man and his empire is the product of a Jewish conspiracy.

Ok. I personally had never heard of this conspiracy until Bishop Babini revealed it. I would like to thank him, and announce publicly that I am ready to lend whatever support I can to this worldwide Jewish conspiracy. It's hard to unite Jews around any cause at all, but the destruction of Ratzinger and his fellow gangsters may just be the banner we need.

Don't look to the Zionists to join this conspiracy, though. As long as the Vatican doesn't openly champion the end of the Occupation and the right of return of Palestinians, they rank with the angels.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Growing up, I've heard anti-Jewish comments from Protestants also, sadly. In my opinion and from what I knew of these folk, it reflected simple ignorance, maybe not pure hate. It was a long time ago and I'm relying on a fading memory.

Unionist

Boom Boom wrote:

Growing up, I've heard anti-Jewish comments from Protestants also, sadly. In my opinion and from what I knew of these folk, it reflected simple ignorance, maybe not pure hate.

Personally, I'd much rather someone purely hated me, than someone ignorantly believing: 1) I killed God; or 2) I have access to untold stores of gold; or 3) I control the media and the politicians; or 4) I don't "belong" here because my real homeland is somewhere else; etc.

It's the simple ignorant folk who collaborated with the génocidaires, and given the right conditions, will do so again - not just against Jews.

 

Joey Ramone

Unionist wrote:

I would like to thank him, and announce publicly that I am ready to lend whatever support I can to this worldwide Jewish conspiracy. It's hard to unite Jews around any cause at all, but the destruction of Ratzinger and his fellow gangsters may just be the banner we need.

I'd like to get in on this too, but I'm not currently a Jew.  How do I join?  Is there a secret handshake or something? 

Joey Ramone

The Conneticut legislature is considering a bill which would remove the statute of limitations for adults who were victims of abuse as children.  Catholic bishops have denounced the bill and urged catholics to oppose it too. 

 

"Under current Connecticut law, sexual abuse victims have 30 years past their 18th birthday to file a lawsuit. The proposed change to the law would rescind that statute of limitations.
The proposed change to the law would put 'all Church institutions, including your parish, at risk,' says the letter, which was signed by Connecticut's three Roman Catholic bishops."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/11/connecticut.abuse.bill/index.html?hp...

Michelle

I love how they assume it would be used against them.  Makes you think they just might know something that makes them nervous, huh?  Maybe a little secret or two?

So does that mean that they're admitting that "all church institutions" and all parishes were involved in sexually abusing children?

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

Well, at least Bishop of Tenerife is following a consistent policy of blaming the victims --  apparently the current problem should be blamed on predatory minors abusing adults.

[link may be slow to open]

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

bagkitty wrote:

Well, at least Bishop of Tenerife is following a consistent policy of blaming the victims --  apparently the current problem should be blamed on predatory minors abusing adults.

[link may be slow to open]

 

Quote:
 His comments were that there are youngsters who want to be abused, and he compared that abuse to homosexuality, describing them both as prejudicial to society. He said that on occasions the abuse happened because the there are children who consent to it.

There are 13 year old adolescents who are under age and who are perfectly in agreement with, and what’s more wanting it, and if you are careless they will even provoke you’, he said. 

Read more: http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_14332.shtml#ixzz0kvACVWZ2

This sounds like an admission of his own guilt to me.  I know it was I that seduced the priest when I was 13. How can anyone blame him it was my exploding hormones he was attracted too after all.

This is the line of thinking that has sheltered the church for generations.  Those boys who had it done to them wanted it so they are sinners too.   That goes hand in hand with; "Lets not dwell on the sins of others."

Unionist

Joey Ramone wrote:

Unionist wrote:

I would like to thank him, and announce publicly that I am ready to lend whatever support I can to this worldwide Jewish conspiracy. It's hard to unite Jews around any cause at all, but the destruction of Ratzinger and his fellow gangsters may just be the banner we need.

I'd like to get in on this too, but I'm not currently a Jew.  How do I join?  Is there a secret handshake or something? 

I can't disclose the secret handshake (it's a secret), but I'm authorized to declare you an honorary member of the World Jewish Conspiracy. Welcome, Brother Joey, and mazel tov!

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

I want to thank the Comedia dell'Arte for infiltrating the Catholic church O these many years and providing us with such satire only a deity could write. If only the concomitant tragedy weren't so galling, wounding and terrifying.

Jaku

Unionist wrote:

Don't look to the Zionists to join this conspiracy, though. As long as the Vatican doesn't openly champion the end of the Occupation and the right of return of Palestinians, they rank with the angels.

 

Leave it to Unionist to be sure to bring in the Israeli/Palestinian issue no matter the topic.

Michelle

Actually, the opening post, had you read it, already mentioned "Zionists".  Beg, borrow, or steal a clue, maybe?

Unionist

Thanks, Michelle, and Jaku's ignorant comment is very revealing. Jaku doesn't notice that it's the Catholic Church that lumped Zionists and Jews together. Jaku doesn't have a word to say against these Jew-baiting monsters.

Sort of proves my point that the Vatican and the Zionists are allies, doesn't it?

Thanks, Jaku.

 

Stockholm

Of course any intelligent person knows that not all Jews are "Zionists" and that not all "Zionists" are Jews. However, its also clear that people who are genuinely anti-semtic tend to use the terms "Zionist" and "Jewish" interchangeably and that is one of the reasons why I think that many Jews see attacks on "Zionism" as a coded way of attacking Jews as a whole. I'm not saying they are right to feel that way, but i think that people should be sensitive to the fact that that perception exists.

al-Qa'bong

Yeah, like I pretty well said in the opening post.

Prophit

Michelle wrote:

Actually, the opening post, had you read it, already mentioned "Zionists".  Beg, borrow, or steal a clue, maybe?

Michelle are you not being just a bit too cute by half? Jacu was referring quite clearly to Unionist trying to get this thread off topic by targeting the Israeli/Palestinian issue. The use of the word "Zionist" in the opening post had nothing specifically to do with this. That you would gallop to Unionist's side does not surprise me. Though you and others always make comment anytime I am seen supporting anyone identified as pro-Israel. All not surprising.

al-Qa'bong

I believe the last line should read, "Why am I not surprised?"

Slumberjack

Here's a surprise:

Richard Dawkins calls for the Pope to be put on trial.

Quote:
Writing in the Washington Post on Friday, Dawkins described Ratzinger as a "leering old villain in a frock ... whose first instinct when his priests are caught with their pants down is to cover up the scandal and damn the young victims to silence."

Without admitting that he had consulted lawyers he added: "This former head of the Inquisition should be arrested the moment he dares to set foot outside his tinpot fiefdom of the Vatican, and he should be tried in an appropriate civil - not ecclesiastical - court. That's what should happen. Sadly, we all know our faith-befuddled governments will be too craven to do it."

Prophit

al-Qa'bong wrote:

I believe the last line should read, "Why am I not surprised?"

No, it reads properly

al-Qa'bong

Strictly speaking, yes; I was merely noting how your text strayed slightly from usage found in Farber's Elements of Style.

Slumberjack

al-Qa'bong wrote:
Strictly speaking, yes; I was merely noting how your text strayed slightly from usage found in Farber's Elements of Style.

And slightly further than Strunk would have intended with his Elements of Style.  Fortunately for many of us though, the formality of proper language usage is generally not enforced around here.

Joey Ramone

Unionist wrote:

Joey Ramone wrote:

Unionist wrote:

I would like to thank him, and announce publicly that I am ready to lend whatever support I can to this worldwide Jewish conspiracy. It's hard to unite Jews around any cause at all, but the destruction of Ratzinger and his fellow gangsters may just be the banner we need.

I'd like to get in on this too, but I'm not currently a Jew.  How do I join?  Is there a secret handshake or something? 

I can't disclose the secret handshake (it's a secret), but I'm authorized to declare you an honorary member of the World Jewish Conspiracy. Welcome, Brother Joey, and mazel tov!

 

Well thanks Unionist, I can't wait to get started.  I don't have to have any, ahem, "medical procedures", do I?

Joey Ramone

Stockholm wrote:

However, its also clear that people who are genuinely anti-semtic tend to use the terms "Zionist" and "Jewish" interchangeably...

That's pretty obvious, I thought.  It's pretty easy to tell the intended meaning of the word from the context in which it used.  I know a few elderly FN folks who still use "coloured people" and "negro" with no racist intent, but I can't imagine anyone of my generation using those terms without malicious intent.  It's pretty obvious when anti-semites are using "Zionists" to mean "Jews".  I never post on the Middle East threads because I don't feel I have anything unique to contribute, but I sometimes read them and I have learned from anti-Zionist Jewish friends, and from some of the posters on this board, that rabidly pro-Israel Zionists and anti-semites both would like the world to believe that Jew and Zionist are interchangeable terms.

Anyway, back to the thread.  Like I said above, I have a feeling that there is a direct relationship between the rank of Catholic clergy and tolerance for both anti-semitism and abuse of children.  In other words, while bigots, abusers and their apologists exist at all levels of the church, I think they are most highly concentrated in the upper ranks of bishops and cardinals.  Remember when the Holocaust-denying bishop was welcomed back into the mother church last year?  I never believed it when the Vatican claimed they were unaware of bishop Williamson's views.  Everyone knew.  They were simply surprised by the reaction because the sheltered assholes didn't realize that Holocaust denial is not acceptable outside of their world.

al-Qa'bong

Slumberjack wrote:

 

And slightly further than Strunk would have intended with his Elements of Style.  Fortunately for many of us though, the formality of proper language usage is generally not enforced around here.

 

Who's this Strunk guy?  If you refer to Farber's Elements of Style, somewhere under "M," you'll find the chapter on "mishification." 

e.g. "Sadly, babble isn't free of this type of evil filth, but then, why am I not surprised?"


Prophit

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Strictly speaking, yes; I was merely noting how your text strayed slightly from usage found in Farber's Elements of Style.

Totally unaware of such a publication. Though must admit that your obsession with Farber and conspiracy is a little scary.

al-Qa'bong

Again with the "conspiracy" talk?  And how does mentioning someone suddenly become an obsession?

 

Noah_Scape

I agree with Dawkins in that the Pope should be put on trial for crimes against humanity.

    In fact, there is ample evidence for the Catholic Church to be declared "a threat to civil society", and that it would not be inappropriate for nations to ban the Catholic Church as a way to protect our youth from sexual predation.Any other group with this kind of history of sex abuse would surely be criminalised.

   As for the evidence that should be gathered, prosecuters would ask "Is there a culture of pedophilia within the Catholic Church?", as in, "does the Priesthood feel it is their right to have sex with young boys and teens?" [as compensation for the celibacy demand perhaps?]. And "how many centuries has this culture of pedophilia existed in the Catholic Church?"

 Or is this just a "knee-jerk response" from 50 years of hearing about this sex abuse by Priests? When will it stop? [the leadership of that church is certainly showing no signs of taking the necessary steps to end this abuse].

Jaku

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Again with the "conspiracy" talk?  And how does mentioning someone suddenly become an obsession?

 

Well when you and others mentio him obsessively Laughing

oldgoat

Prophit wrote:

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Strictly speaking, yes; I was merely noting how your text strayed slightly from usage found in Farber's Elements of Style.

Totally unaware of such a publication. Though must admit that your obsession with Farber and conspiracy is a little scary.

 

I'm familiar with it, myself.  It's pretty much like the Chicago Manual of Style except WAY shorter, and as books go, I always have the feeling I know how it ends.

al-Qa'bong

Jaku wrote:

Well when you and others mention him obsessively Laughing

 

So...what, there's something in my - I dunno - tone, perhaps that you find obsessive? How do you discern obsessiveness?  Do you rely on what you've learned through training as an inquisitor (hey, we're in a Catholic Church thread) or do you have a gift from God?

Jaku

You are a funny person al-Qa'bong. Doesn't really take much to understand an obsession. Repitition is the first sign, over and over, same name, same person. then ascribing super-human powers to your object of obsession, classic really,

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

If only Bernie was here, watching over us, guiding us, keeping us safe--we would have no need for this silly obsession which grips us all.

oldgoat

I'm going out on a limb here, and suggest that CERTAIN PEOPLE in our history, who shall remain nameless (though lord knows they've been through here with enough names) could be, by Jaku's definition, obsessed with babble.

.

.

.

.

Just sayin'...

.

.

.

.

Just speculatin'...

.

.

 

al-Qa'bong

Jaku wrote:

You are a funny person al-Qa'bong. Doesn't really take much to understand an obsession. Repitition is the first sign, over and over, same name, same person. then ascribing super-human powers to your object of obsession, classic really,

You're just making that up.  That, and you're protesting a leetle too strongly...

Jaku

Sure sure

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Joey Ramone wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

However, its also clear that people who are genuinely anti-semtic tend to use the terms "Zionist" and "Jewish" interchangeably...

Like B'Nai Brith, the CJC, the Conservative Party, and all of Israel's political parties? I've suspected the most extreme anti-semites were all Zionists. But I'm not sure what that has to do with the Catholic Church self-destructing. Go Church!

Bacchus

Oh I like that point FM

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Putting the Pope on Trial
Posted April 13, 2010

Over the weekend the authors Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens announced that they’ve asked lawyers to prepare a case against the Pope(6). A few days ago in the Guardian Geoffrey Robertson, the barrister they are consulting, explained that senior churchmen who protected paedophile priests, swore their victims to secrecy and allowed the perpetrators to continue working with children committed the offence of aiding and abetting sex with minors(7). Practised on a large scale, this becomes a crime against humanity recognised by the International Criminal Court. This is the general Vatican policy over which the then Cardinal Ratzinger is accused of presiding. When Benedict comes to the UK in September he could, if Dawkins and Hitchens get their warrant, be arrested.

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2010/04/13/putting-the-pope-on-trial/

Cookiebehbeh

Frustrated Mess wrote:

Joey Ramone wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

However, its also clear that people who are genuinely anti-semtic tend to use the terms "Zionist" and "Jewish" interchangeably...

Like B'Nai Brith, the CJC, the Conservative Party, and all of Israel's political parties? I've suspected the most extreme anti-semites were all Zionists. But I'm not sure what that has to do with the Catholic Church self-destructing. Go Church!

I suppose I understand the sarcasm but it was not really necessary. Seems overly provocative to me.

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Stick around.

remind remind's picture

that was too good of an observation FM.......in respect to those who show real anti-semitism.... :D

Cookiebehbeh

FM I am not going anywhere. And if you think provocation gets you somewhere other than sounding shrill and silly be my guest.

Caissa

Pope Benedict has rejected the idea of collective Jewish guilt for Jesus Christ's death, in a new book to be published next week.

Tackling an issue that has led to centuries of persecution, the Pope argues there is no basis in scripture for the Jewish people to be blamed.

The Catholic Church officially repudiated the idea in 1965.

But Jewish groups say the Pope's detailed analysis of the gospels is a major step forward.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12634176

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Bishops Tell Catholics to Celebrate Holy Week by Attending Anti-Gay March

excerpt:

For Western Christians, Catholic and Protestant, the seven days between Palm Sunday and Easter Sunday are the most solemn and sacred days of the entire liturgical year. In fact, that week is so sacred that it's been known as Holy Week since the third century and is commemorated by fasting and solemn prayer.

This year, however, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is encouraging Catholics all across the country to add one more activity to that list. In addition to fasting, praying, and preparing for Easter, the bishops are asking their flock to take time out of their Holy Week observances, travel to Washington, D.C., and participate in a march and rally to protest the possibility that loving and committed same-sex couples might be granted the freedom to marry.

 

(Mods: wrong forum? Move somewhere more appropriate - I aw the thread title and thought it was about Catholic goings-on)

Unionist

Joey Ramone wrote:

Unionist wrote:

I would like to thank him, and announce publicly that I am ready to lend whatever support I can to this worldwide Jewish conspiracy. It's hard to unite Jews around any cause at all, but the destruction of Ratzinger and his fellow gangsters may just be the banner we need.

I'd like to get in on this too, but I'm not currently a Jew.  How do I join?  Is there a secret handshake or something? 

Ok, we've gotten rid of Ratzinger (went a little past schedule, sorry) - and now I want Joey Ramone back! Please come back, Joey! I'll even teach you the handshake! Maybe.