[Skunkabilly]

The pope has said a war would be a "defeat for humanity" and that the conflict would be neither morally nor legally justified. He wants Iraq to be disarmed through methods short of military force.

OK well at least the Vatican. Shame we ain't a theocracy! :D

More here on the Clinton News Network
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/05/sprj.irq.bush.vatican.ap/index.html

[BigG]

Him and the other religio-politicos should get together and get their story straight before making unilateral pronouncements ex cathedra.

[cuchulainn]

ex cathedra

He wasn't speaking ex cathedra.

[Frohickey]

I think someone needs to mug the Pope... that, or someone show the Pope the history of the Crusades.

[dev_null]

Let me get this straight...

Removing Saddam = BAD
Sacking Constantinople = GOOD.

:rolleyes:

[cuchulainn]

What do the Crusades, sacking Constantinople or anything else that happened 700 to 800 years ago have to do with anything?

(Oh, and I happen to disagree with the pope on his pronouncement today, but let's be reasonable, OK?)

[dev_null]

They have to do with hypocrisy from the Vatican, supposedly God's spokespersons on earth and therefore not subject to any statute of limitations in my book.

-0-

(Two of my ancestors were popes, btw, plus one Saint.)

[MitchSchaft]

I quit being Catholic a long time ago.

[cuchulainn]

They have to do with hypocrisy from the Vatican, supposedly God's spokespersons on earth and therefore not subject to any statute of limitations in my book.

Huh?

So to avoid being hypocritical, the pope must make pronoucements that are consistent with the actions of his predecessors 800 years ago?

[MitchSchaft]

You gotta defend Catholosism better than that, man.:neener:

[dev_null]

The Vatican claims to be in touch with the Will of their God, or some such. Either they are or they aren't. Either their God needs to make up His/Her/Its mind on the use of force to acheive political and other ends here on the material plane, or they need to admit once and for all that they don't have any such claim to the Inside Scoop (tm), and close up shop.

As for hypocrisy vs consistency vs adaptability, it seems to be all about whether it's the Papal ox that's gored or not. Not to mention kowtowing to whatever European political authority figure they think will best suit their needs, whether it's helping the King of France abolish the Templars, or sucking up to Hitler and Mussolini, or going along with the "who cares if the US gets attacked" program currently in vogue across the pond (UK excepted, of course).

Sorry, Sir Gawain, I know you're making sense from a logical perspective. It's just that these people tend to get me wound up with their "war is wrong... unless we want it for our own purposes" crap. :fire:

-0-

[cuchulainn]

You gotta defend Catholosism better than that, man.

Who's trying to defend Catholicism? This has to do with the lack of logic in the idea that the pope was hypocritical today because some pope 800 years ago supported the Crusades.

That's like saying George Bush is hypocritical because the U.S. allowed slavery and decimated the Indians or Tony Blair is hypocritical because of Oliver Cromwell's abuses in Ireland.

Again, I disagree with the pope today, but let's be reasonable.

[cuchulainn]

dev_null,

So what you're saying is that this has more to do with your dislike of the Church than with today's pronouncement, and you're just lashing out.

[s&w 24]

John Paul the II just forgot to read anything in the old testament.

P.S. Happy Ash wed.

[Ebbtide]

Skunk,

Where does it say "GOD" is anti war, or are you fabricating this to miss lead us?

I totally agree with the Pope ("defeat for humanity"). It is a shame that we can't solve this situation without war. It does take two to tango, you know.

"morally nor legally justified" I believe he is gathering this proclemation from scripture (I would if I were the Pope).

I see short thread life,

ehenz

[spacemanspiff]

whoa, i thought this thread was closed???

but who says god is 'catholic'?
is he 'american'?
will he bless the troops just because an army chaplain says he will?
did catholic germany lose wwii because catholic american troops had better prayers or more faith?

[scottgun]

The Pope speaks on behalf of the Church, not God.

Any really do you think the Pope would ever say, yeah, war is a good idea, go kick some a$$.

my $.02

[seeker_two]

So to avoid being hypocritical, the pope must make pronoucements that are consistent with the actions of his predecessors 800 years ago?

Well, we Christians follow the teachings of a person who came to Earth 2,000 years ago... :D

The Pope speaks on behalf of the Church, not God.

Exactly. I doubt that God would support leaving child molesters in positions of power in the Church..:banghead:

[Blackhawk]

The Pope speaks on behalf of the Church, not God.On behalf of the Catholic Church, maybe.

However, he's entitled to his opinion just like everybody else.

[tetchaje1]

Anybody who thinks that God is a pacifist when war is justified hasn't read the Old Testament... :eek:

[Skunkabilly]

Not being well versed in international relations, does the Vatican have any clout in the UN? Are they viewed as an 'ally' (nation or whatever the heck they are) by the US?

[Destructo6]

I think he's getting at the idea that the Pope, like the Shiite Imam, is infallible. If Pope/Imam A made a decision in 1024, that decision still stands today.

Both get themselves backed into a corner for similar reasons.

If you want some good examinations of the Imamate, you might try al-Mawardi or al-Ghazali. They both write from the Sunni perspective. Qadi Nu'man wrote on the same topic from the Shiite perspective in about the same period.

[Matt G]

This thread is about "The Morality Of War", and
"Catholicism and Religion."

Neither are RKBA issues. Neither are directly or even secondarily gun-related.

Both are, however, highly divisive. For the most part, no big squabble. But why let a high-divisive, off-topic, emotionally charged thread stand, when we don't have to? :uhoh:

I'm closing it. :(