Papal succession

[silverfox]

Personally I'm divided between the first black Pope in modern times and a South American Pope.

Perhaps Cardinal Peter Turkson (aged 64, Ghana) may be too conservative and not what the church needs at this point, although he could provide an 'Obama' factor.

Alternatively, the South American Candidates Cardinal Odilo Scherer, (63, Brazil) and Cardinal Leonardo Sandri, (69, Argentina) may be seen as too liberal.

Given the moral bankruptcy of the West, perhaps it's time to turn to the developing world.

[Huguenot]

Why is Western moral bankruptcy a given?

If any institution has lost a sense of right and wrong it would be the Catholic Church: from paedophile priests having their crimes covered up, to the murder of homosexuals in Africa and preaching against condom use worldwide despite the fact that it prevents the transmission of HIV.

This is not an organisation that can tell right from wrong.

It is foolish to assume that because the developing world has shown a predilection for religion that any individual from that region is representative of it: drawing conclusions about individuals because of the broader population is simply racism.

What the developing world has suffered is exploitation, dictatorship, corruption and summary 'justice', so it may well be that these are themes from which the Catholic Churhc may like to draw sustenance.

[silverfox]

I'm surprised at you Huguenot - you missed out plague and pestilence in your imagined list of crimes.

Now, back on topic ...

[El Pibe]

HE has a point though.

I keep hearing from Catholic acquaintances how liberalism (which is really the old enemy communism) is underming the family and family values in the west leading to moral bankruptcy.

The sheer hypocrisy of it staggers me every time.

If you think the crimes are imagined you might want to start with the Ryan commission.

http://www.childabusecommission.com/rpt/

Then have a look at Spain where children were stolen from their families and sold for cold hard cash. Very moral.

[Huguenot]

There's commentators who say it better:

"the Vatican has seemed to be pressing hard in the opposite direction: into a cul-de-sac of conservative authoritarianism which neither inspires nor revives the mass of cradle Catholics, who are still deserting the church even in heartlands such as Spain and Ireland. Fifty years ago, governments in Catholic countries would tremble at the Vatican's displeasure; now they just wag their fingers back and press on with their plans for gay marriages or easier abortion. There is no comeback when the church has squandered its moral authority across the world over child abuse." (Stephen Bates)

In other words the problem in the church doesn't lie with the moral bankruptcy of the west, but with the moral bankruptcy of the institution.

If they push ahead with conservatism they have lost their power base in a world that can see through their destructive hypocrisy, if they liberalize they lose the hard line core who believe in totalitarian politics and a mandate to abuse.

At least a liberal Catholicism has a chance to survive the next 100 years.

[Huguenot]

Silverfox, I'm not sure I ignored plague, I was pretty specific about HIV. I believe plague is a subset of pestilence.

Whilst contemporary history would preclude war being laid at their door, their history certainly does.

Thankfully, the Catholic Church accepts GM food, so it's doing its bit to avoid famine. I wonder whe their investments lie?

I suspect Ratzinger himself has demonstrated the incapacity of the Catholic Church when faced with death.

Mixed bag to date then, let's hope the new incumbent takes his responsibilities more seriously.

[uncleglen]

Not to mention the killing of street kids in Brazil and Colombia by the police! Some sort of clean-up operation. Wholesaledelivery of condoms and/or the pill might be a better solution

[WorkingMummy]

It's surely highly dubious to talk of "moral bankruptcy" in relation to a belief set that revolves around the idea of the existence of a supreme being who: created the universe including humanity; then decided humanity was not too appealing after all on the grounds that it would not do as it was told (amongst its crimes - a thirst for knowledge, eating forbidden fruit and copulation outside of marriage/with a wrongly gendered partner); condemned humanity to eternal damnation in hell for said unruliness; then decided, ok, maybe not, I would quite like to absolve the fallen but, hey, I can't just forgive them and get over it, no! I am righteous and SOMEone has to pay; soooo, how-very-lovingly incarnated his own son as flesh and blood in order that he might be a "perfect sacrifice" in a terrible act of torture and murder; and after that sordid business was out the way could think about letting humanity into heaven, as long as any particular individual had heard of said loving sacrifice of own son and joined a group to worship him.

IMO, hypocrisy goes even higher than the church. It's right deep in he heart of the church's supreme being itself.

[El Pibe]

Let's face it. all that OT stuff is just rehashed Sumerian legends with a bit of jewish legend and pedantic law making thrown in afterwards.

The NT stuff is the ramblings of a revolutionary with a messiah complex (albeit with some pretty cool ideas).

One of the most evil empires in history then embraced it, co-opted, institutionalised it, then spent then next few hundred years trying to sift the various interpretations into some sort of orthodoxy that squared the circle of unifying disparate, nonsenensical, self-contradictory stuff into a cogent whole (I mean the holy trinity, crappest compromise ever!!!)

Not so much hypocritical as lacking internal consistency.

[WorkingMummy]

Yes that's about it. Ultimately, just a means of one powerful group of human beings exercising control over everyone else.

And not in a particularly cool way.

A wonderful bit of NT self-contradiction is: "God is love, and everyone who lives in love, lives in God, and he in them."

Now there's a creed I could go for. Just not a very accurate description of the (blood thirsty) god of the bible. For example, not a great fit with the god of the book of Job (opening scene, god and the devil having a chat, god agrees to ruin this guy Job's life, for the sake of a bet (that Job will not respond by cursing god). god then proceeds to impoverish Job, kill all his children and strike him down with a sickness worse than death. Very, very not loving. Hideously narcissistic/sadistic.)

And people who somehow try to argue that the (same?) god of the NT is somehow better (has he grown up?) ignore the fact that the sacrifice of Christ - which is I think THE point of the NT - follows same sadistic theme.

Speaking for myself, no way would I take a steer on family values from the institution which venerates this god. No matter what continent its leader hailed from.

[silverfox]

WorkingMummy I loved your 'Where God went wrong' contribution.

So, just to recap:

On the negative side -

One of the most evil empires in history is reponsible for the murder of homosexuals in Africa, murder of Brazilian street children, kidnapping and trading of Spanish Children. Paedophilia is a unique Catholic problem. Talk of electing a black Pope is racist. The Church is theologically in error because of Summerian legends. And Catholics who worry about the family unit and family values coming under threat are hypocrites.

On the positive side -

In order for the Church to reclaim a degree of moral authority, the new Pope should adopt secular ideas such as gay marriage, easier abortion and euthanasia. Condoms and the pill should be distributed globally like sugared almonds handed out as wedding favours and this will solve the problem of Aids and Global poverty. And, only if it grasps this will the 2,000 year old Catholic Church manage to last another hundred years.

Ummmm ... I'm not sure you've grasped the nature of this thread.

[WorkingMummy]

I didn't say any of that.

I said, I don't like the church's concept of god. I think that god is, page after page in the bible, a childish, violent, controlling, and heartless figure. Therefore I think your proposition that the "west" (including, er, me? Other people in ED?) is "morally bankrupt", compared to the glorious bride of Christ/the church, um, how should I put it:

CHEEKY NONSENSE!

But as it happens the bible DOES say that homosexuals should be put to death. Is that Deuteronomy or Numbers, maybe you can tell me? And on at least one occasion that I remember (other than the Great Flood) god personally intervened to murder them on mass, did he not? Maybe ask the potential new popes what their apologia is for that crime against humanity, and maybe go with the man with the least offensive/self-deluded answer...

[Jeremy]

Anyone who takes the bible literally - from Noah's Ark to Balam's Donkey to the Four Horsemen - clearly has a screw loose.

But if you take it metaphorically, how can you be sure your interpretation is correct? How can you be sure that there's any value in it at all?

[WorkingMummy]

There's value in some of it as beautiful poetry. It's an interesting (if mostly unattractive) historical record of cultural norms in different periods.

As allegorical prose, it has value, IF you are trying to sell the moral that divine right trumps reason/natural justice and that relationship (between mortals, between god and mortals) should all be about control and obedience.

Cue all the institutions in history that have adopted it...

[civilservant]

so a liberal pope who appeals to the dwindling numbers of the Western faithful or a conservative African pope to buttress the Faith in the developing world...

I'd say that the conclave faces a bit of a dilemma

[uncleglen]

Why don't they sit down, have a proper think and give it all up- it's cruel and illogical and enslaves people

[WorkingMummy]

I like this balanced (if a little bombastic) commentary.

Perhaps a pope who would:

1. Remove Benedict's ban on gay priests (surely gratuitously homophobic when priests have to be celibate anyway)

2. Impose ban on sex offenders in priesthood.

3. Extend permission to use condoms from male prostitues only, to all men.

4. In view of these (and a million previous) u-turns, admit he's not infallible and thereby encourage people to think for themselves.

[El Pibe]

I do wonder, if homosexuality in the priesthood is so anathema, why they seemed so reluctant to defrock preists who raped boys, it's a topsy turvey world, which I suppose brings in your second point, though regardless of bans, they at the very least should go to prison, unless the church believes it's ecumenical laws supercede those mere passing fads of temporal authorities.

Of the fourth point, in fairness it's a much misunderstood concept.

It was only crystallised in modern times and isn't often invoked, it doesn't say popes are infallible, but on crucial ecumenical matters they bang a proverbial fist on the table and say 'the buck stops here'. The last pope never used it once I believe.

[DJKillaQueen]

Perhaps not a good idea to compare homosexuality to peadophilia. The two are completely different things.

But yes, the inaction over peadophile priests is unforgiveable and completely discredits the catholic church imo.

[El Pibe]

Indeed, but irrelevant, we're trying to get into the instituional mind here aren't we, and by the strict interpretation of the church that even a theoretical penchant for male on male sex invalidates eligibility for the priesthood, then sex with boys surely fulfils that criteria.

[DJKillaQueen]

Yeah but it's a tenuous comparison. Priests having sexual activity with underaged girls would be seen as what? I do see your point though. A church can not have an anti- homosexual stance and then do nothing about peadophilia and child abuse within it's ranks, and then expect to be seen as a moral authority. And it also gives the followers of that church a problem too for it is they who will bear the day to day brunt of the criticism. The pope has a walled vatican filled with opulence to protect him.

[WorkingMummy]

It's a stupendous piece of idiotic evil to not de-frock priests/cardinals/bishops who rape children (and in fact, cover up their crimes and, when they finally came out, in some cases grant amnesty in Vatican) full stop. To then de-frock gay priests adds insult to very serious injury.

In fact, I'd say the Church accomplished the most perfectly evil response to one of the worst institutional crimes ever.

I don't find trying to get into that institutional mind set very edifying. Cannot understand the hold these people have on a supposedly enlightened west.

[uncleglen]

Kind of on a par with the Spanish Inquisition imho

[LadyDeliah]

Has anyone else wondered if the pope's resignation has anything to do with the stuff the butler saw?

[Huguenot]

Just about everyone ;)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/21/pope-retired-amid-gay-bishop-blackmail-inquiry

Keep up!