Praying for the Pope...um, just why, exactly?

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1269856#1269856

Lola's tired of politics for now.

Peace is only from within.

Well..........I guess the world is lost then. Conflict motives all action. Oh well....here's to a better adaptation. Humor seems to work well.

I see where the Boston cardinal that resigned in disgrace after protecting pervert priests, at the expense of the victims, was given a high post in the vatican by the pope. Perhaps the prayers were to keep this disgusting person from busting Hell wide open.

Is that true? Anybody? Like to know.

Read it in the NYTimes today, I think. He's a member of the group that will select Pope John's successor.

Bernard Cardinal Law He wil be leading a memorial mass in the vatican,

Hi, Boo. Nice to see you. Hope you've been well.

Very disappointing about the appointment. That guy should be in jail. A lot of them should be, IMO. Not in the freakin Vatican.

I'm doing pretty good , thank you Lash

That's what cardinals do. Correct.



One of the several hundred by several hundred cardinals, bishops, priests ....



Cardinal Law resigned as as archbishop of Boston Archdiocese - you can't resign as cardinal.

Mmm . . .

Is Heaven considered jail?

walter

Over here in North America, there has been quite a lot of discussion on the direction that the church might take now and how it might regain the respect and affinity it has lost through, particularly, the widespread abuse scandals and the subsequent scandals related to protection of priests (from prosecution) and protection of property (from law suits by the abused).

The general consensus, from the sorts of discussions I have watched (among sympathetic scholars like Brit Timothy Garton Ash, and active high-level parishoners) is that the Bernard Law case (in Boston and now as regards the funeral) has been precisely the sort of thing the church, under John Paul, has gotten wrong.

It's no small matter here.

I totally agree that it isn't a small matter.

However, this has little to nothing to do about "the sort of thing the church, under John Paul, has gotten wrong" but with the Canon Law.

The Church in Both Europe and North America faces the issue of widespread secularism and disaffection among the professional and managerial classes of these countries. This is the central challenge it faces in these regions, In North America, the Unted Srates in particular, the Church has had the additional problem of a generation of fairly widespread homoxexuality among priests, this, in my view a result of relaxed standards in the seminaries that trained and selected them. I believe the root cause is being addressed, but the consequences have been rather devastating both to the confidence of Catholics and the financial health of the church.

I don't know about any wrongful 'protection of assets' issues, though there may be some. Any person or legal entity has the rright to protect what assets it can from lawsuits. Certainly the financial impact of the judgements and settlements on the Church has been enormous. It will be a long time before the Church is able to restore the schools and social serrvices that have been closed partly as a result.

Cardinal Law is no longer running the show in his Diocese, moreover his tenure has been rather thoroughly discredited both in Boston and among the other clergy. He is, as Walter noted, still a Cardinal. Some may believe he has not been sufficiently punished for his many lapses. Hard to know for sure.

All that...and people are simply becoming less superstitious and fearful of the unknown. Such being the case, religion is in its decendency...despite what minor upticks may lead some to suspect.

The sooner we are rid of it...the better for humanity.

I concur Frank,
As my signature hints at.By the way I noticed in today's paper, Bush is at odds with
Clinton for questioning the pope's legacy. YEAH BILL!!
And for the sake balance, there is somethin I alwaays admired about the late pope. We both are against deliberate murder, across the board. Mean-ing, abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia. It seems that most people divide the types of killing. Am I right or wrong?
Walter old friend, could you tell me the point you're making.

Well, all that is regulated in the Latin Code of Canon Law 1983, Can. 349 - Can. 359.

Welcome, fab..........you're new around here. It's always good to have new new blood.........yummy.

The consistency of which you speak is born of acquiescence to authority. And I think that's a danger. We must learn to think for ourselves.

Lola dear, are you seriously suggesting that the practicioners of political correctitude and doctrinaire liberalism really think for themselves????

My observation on these threads is that this tribe rather slavishly quotes their liberal 'scholars' and the secular theologians who direct "right thinking" for them in far greater specificity and with much greater doctrinal force than anything I have ever encountered in 'that constituency'.

Rarely do I encounter a counter argument from any members of your tribe based on facts and their own argument. Instead one gets only these predigested conclusions and quotes from members of their secular liberal clergy -- all, of course, accompanied by expressions of horror, indignation and disapproval of the heretical propositions with which free thinking conservatives and libertarians torture them.

I'm going to use a picture of the pope for a bookmark....