Papal Arrest?

[zero2056]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7094310.ece


This guy is definitely a motivated activist, but I happen to agree with what he's attempting.

Disclaimers: 1) I'm not catholic, so I don't "get" the whole Pope thing anyway (right hand of God??? Huh?). 2) I'm not a religious person, so taking down a figure head of a major religion has no meaning to me. They are just people, like everyone else.

What I know is wrong and I simply don't understand is why child molesting priests, popes, and whomever cannot be brought to justice under the law of the land (wherever they reside), are tolerated and not for lack of a better term, "burned at the stake" and tossed out of the institution.

I realize the Vatican is afforded its own status as an independent "State" but if you can arrest Saddam internationally for war crimes, you should be able to go after guilty clergy for crimes committed. Especially crimes as heinous as child molesting. Even the most devout catholic worshippers have to cringe a little when these atrocities are uncovered.

Right? Am I off base? Any catholics want to explain how they handle knowing that their faith system caters to pedophiles and can still believe it is something worth supporting?

Let me put an aside in here that I've no doubt there are other perverts in other religions that also need the same treatment, but right now the witch hunt is on Catholics.

Will humanity walk away from Cults/Religions, or will they exist in perpetuity? Before you tell me your religion is not a "cult", look up the definition in a dictionary and then refute my derogatory term.

[Soul Queen]

I'm not keeping up on this topic too much.

My opinion is that Humanity will always have religion and or cults.
I'm reading a book called Hidden Brain. I used to be optimisitic about people until I read this book. Now, I'm not so sure what is subconscious leaking into everyday decisions and what I can consider logic.

People have a subconscious affinity for community. Religions/Cults provide this sense of community/belonging. Even if they know the actions of the community is wrong, they have a hard time walking away from it.
This applies to larger communities as well beyond religion.

Agreed that the pedophiles should be brought to justice.

[False Alarm]

Will humanity walk away from Cults/Religions, or will they exist in perpetuity? Before you tell me your religion is not a "cult", look up the definition in a dictionary and then refute my derogatory term.
cult (kŭlt)
n.

1.
a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
b. The followers of such a religion or sect.
c. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
d. The object of such devotion.

2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.
4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.
5. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.

re·li·gion (rĭ-lĭj'ən)
n.

1.
a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
first we need to isolate exactly which definitions of the two words you were applying. words generally have specific definitions when people use them otherwise they'd have no meaning at all.

re: religion, obviously definition 2 doesn't apply. you weren't talking about an individual's life or condition. definition 4 might apply and might work well for your purposes. the problem with that is 1) it seems plain they mean for this to apply mostly to expressions such as "SQ reads religiously" or "making money is a religion to zero" and 2) it's so general that it makes it meaningless to describe that cause, principle, or activity as a cult. any reader, materialist, or churchgoer can be described as a cult member according to definition 4 if you want to equate a cult with religion. indeed, any person who cares much about even one thing--ie, most human beings--can be described as a cult member if you want to equate cult with this sense of religion. workaholic? cult member. politics enthusiast? cult member. dedicated family man? cult member. and so on. so 4 looks wrong after all.

which leaves us with definitions 1 and 3 of religion. there's some overlap between them--1 seems to describe a belief and an institution while 3 seems to describe a belief system more generally. i can't say for sure which you intended but i'm gonna guess definition 1 because you refer to the vatican and such and talk in a way about religious institutions in the post.

now, cult. definitions 2 and 3 of cult overlap with religion, obviously, but are nonderogatory, so by your own admission they're not your intended meaning. 4 refers to a method, and 5 has no religious connotations.

that leaves you with definition 1 of cult--as you said, the derogatory definition--as your intended meaning. clearly the mainstreams of major religions aren't generally considered extremist, and while there are tons of bold, rugged freethinkers such as yourself who'd dismiss it as false, even more people identify with one of the major religions on some level, so it's dubious to state that they're generally considered false. therefore 1a doesn't match with any recognized definition of religion.

moving on to definition 1c (1b merely refers to the followers of 1a, which i just refuted), no major religion has lasted less than hundreds of years, so it's hard to describe them as faddish. the label could perhaps apply to movements within religions that might be only short-lived--eg, a certain possibly faddish strain of televangelist would fall under the umbrella of christianity--but that strain's life span is unclear, and anyway it certainly doesn't apply to the mainstream of, in this case, denominational or nondenom christianity, which again has existed for centuries. finally, obsessiveness is variable among individuals within a given religion; the major religions would not be major, would not have lasted so long or been so widespread, if they required a zealous or obsessive level of devotion from all (or even most of) their members. therefore 1c does not equate with any recognized definition of religion. 1d has no bearing because it refers to an individual or object.

i think that about covers you. consider yourself refuted. an easy way to understand the difference in the words as you used them (ie, definitions 1 of cult and religion) is to look at them as logical conditions:

being a religion is a necessary condition for being a cult.
being a cult is a sufficient but not necessary condition for being a religion.
ergo, a religion is not necessarily a cult.

i do agree that pedophile priests should be lined up in front of flamethrowers.

[matty]

I love you, FA.

[JVO]

The Catholic Church just needs to let priests and nuns get married already.

[zero2056]

Actually, i went to webster. Apparently you found different definitions.



Main Entry: cult
Pronunciation: \ˈkəlt\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate — more at wheel
Date: 1617
1 : formal religious veneration : worship
2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults>
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : the object of such devotion c : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion


You're welcome to type it all out again, but 1) and 2) seem to be fairly cut and dry.

[slam]

so i was raised (and confirmed) a catholic, and there's something important to remember about their religion: they believe that while the bible wasn't really put together until generations after jesus died, the church was began by his disciples, and therefore actually predates the bible. while the bible may be the word of jesus, the church is, in effect, his wife.

i think it's necessary to understand how important the institution itself is to catholics. the pope is far more than a figurehead, or leader. he's essentially god's chosen representative on earth. to doubt that is to doubt the entire organization, and to therefore doubt your very identification as catholic.

now, no one is claiming that the pope molested anyone. but it sure seems clear that when he was a bishop, he protected known molestors within his ranks. i imagine that anyone with desires to be pope must play the politics very deftly, and having a child abuse scandal break out in his diocese was out of the question. so he probably kept it quiet.

in germany, the church is not actually held to the same laws as everyone else. i'm sure it's a relic of past times when the church, and the pope, held more power than the various kings around europe. and i'm sure it's the kind of thing germany might now change. but for a long time, the church were the authorities in a lot of places, and i can see how the concept of them being self-policing might have arisen.

i'm incredibly curious to see if the pope will, in fact, resign. i cannot imagine that he would do so, or what kind of serious damage the church would suffer as a result. but i can't see this issue 'going away'. man, if any court anywhere ever subpoenas the pope himself, the vatican is going to fucking go apeshit.

[False Alarm]

Actually, i went to webster. Apparently you found different definitions.



Main Entry: cult
Pronunciation: \ˈkəlt\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate — more at wheel
Date: 1617
1 : formal religious veneration : worship
2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults>
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : the object of such devotion c : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion


You're welcome to type it all out again, but 1) and 2) seem to be fairly cut and dry.
definitions 1 and 2 in your listing are exactly the same as 3 and 2 (respectively) in the listing i used. what's cut and dry, once again, is that those senses are in no way derogatory, while you yourself stated that you were using the derogatory sense of the word:
Before you tell me your religion is not a "cult", look up the definition in a dictionary and then refute my derogatory term.
did i make up that quote or something? WTF dude?

clearly, inarguably, the sense of cult you originally intended, going by webster's, wasn't definition 1 or 2 but 3 or 5. unorthodoxy, spuriousness, and faddishness are the derogatory elements in those definitions. i dealt with faddishness in my previous post:

no major religion has lasted less than hundreds of years, so it's hard to describe them as faddish.

i dealt with spuriousness in my previous post:

while there are tons of bold, rugged freethinkers such as yourself who'd dismiss it as false, even more people identify with one of the major religions on some level, so it's dubious to state that they're generally considered false.

as for unorthodoxy, we're talking about widely accepted, major, mainstream religions. they are by definition the opposite of unorthodox.

so, again, the derogatory sense of the word cult in no way applies to major religions, and it's absurd to equate the two. you've done nothing to refute my refutation.