Archbishop: Pope's election made me shiver

[emad]

By Alf McCreary

12 May 2005

A senior Church of Ireland clergyman has said that "shivers went down his spine" when he heard that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had been elected Pope.

The Archbishop of Dublin, Dr John Neill, the second most senior cleric in the Church of Ireland, was speaking at a Press conference at the General Synod in Dublin yesterday.

However, he added: "I had to sit back and reflect very quickly. The more I reflected the more I became aware that what I knew of Cardinal Ratzinger, apart from a couple of controversial documents, was very limited."

Archbishop Neill, a noted ecumenist within the Anglican Communion, said: "I realised that the Catholic Church is now calling on the cardinal to do a very different job, and to be pastor to the world-wide Roman Catholic community. This is quite different from his previous role of being the chief theologian defending the faith, and therefore I am prepared to wait and see.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=637818

[Donkeyboy75]

1. An archbishop of the Church of Ireland

probably wouldn't be gushing with compliments regarding Catholicism. Think about it.

[MaineDem]

4. My thought exactly (nt)

[DemBones DemBones]

5. So true -- the man is an ANGLICAN archbishop, not a Catholic archbishop.

But how many will get that from the headline?

[Bridget Burke]

9. St Patrick's & Christ Church are Dublin's ancient Cathedrals.

Founded by Catholics (of course) but now in Church of Ireland hands, due to the vagaries of history. Most of Ireland's ancient churches shared that fate--if they weren't totally razed.

Of course, this story appeared in a Belfast paper--where much of the populace doesn't particularly care for any type of archbishop.

[trotsky]

39. So, attack the source?

Is that the marching order?

[Donkeyboy75]

43. Yes.

It was a disingenuous post.

[trotsky]

44. Aren't non-Catholics allowed to voice an opinion...

about the Catholic Church or its leadership?

Especially ones that form the leadership of other religions?

B16 has certainly offered his opinion on other religions.

[Donkeyboy75]

45. Of course they are.

And I'm no Catholic apologist. However, what is the point of this article? It's hardly shocking that a COI archbishop will have doubts about the papal election...and the OP doesn't even bother to comment. My original comment was more along the lines of "Yeah...so what?"

[Donald Ian Rankin]

48. In this case,

The messenger is the message. The article is reporting "CoI Archbishop doesn't approve of Pope", not saying "Pope is bad for these reasons, according to CoI Archbishop". As such, attacking the source is the only form of response possible or (if you feel that a response is necessary) sufficient.

To quote Christine Keeler "Well, he would say that, wouldn't he".

Which is not to say that he is wrong, of course, but it does show that this article doesn't tell us anything we didn't know already.

[Misunderestimator]

2. That's quite an indictment even though he did hedge his bets on it.

To paraphrase his last quote... "I realized that the Catholic Church has lost its collective mind and ignored all the horrible things Ratzinger did as a cardinal, but I'll wait and see if pigs can fly."

[Demeter]

3. Love Your Translation!

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Misunderestimator]

8. Wow... I truly don't understand where that came from...

If you mean that I disagreed with virtually everything CUBAN_LIBERAL or PADRAIG18 defended about the Catholic Church, then, I do understand. What I don't understand now is why you would attack me here for having had disagreements with the BIGGEST TROLL DU has seen. :shrug:

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Misunderestimator]

19. That's absolute bullshit. Do a search right now and prove it.

You know for a fact that I had disagreements with Cuban_liberal and padraig18. You know that I disagree with HIS stance on women's rights, and with his defense of the Catholic Church regarding abortion and gay marriage. NOWHERE will you find that I ever once attacked a catholic for being a catholic, or attacked anyone at all... I have ONLY responded to posts that concern things that AFFECT ME PERSONALLY or that AFFECT MY PRINCIPLES.

You, however, are attacking me now, accusing me of attacking others, which I have NEVER done.

Frankly, I didn't pay much attention at all to catholicism compared to how much I did after Cuban_liberal/Padraig18 constantly defended the church's anti-progressive policies.

You and I disagree on a woman's right to choose. Perhaps THAT's why you are attacking me here now? Or was it because I exposed a liar here who was able to manipulate you? I understand how betrayed you must feel by that.

[DemBones DemBones]

24. You started this with your snide humor (and dozens of earlier posts)

so I'll let you do a search and prove you have not consistently made posts attacking Catholic beliefs, practices, hierarchy, etc., apart from those made to the banned posters, since their posts are all deleted. Prove me wrong and I'll apologize. ;-)

I doubt you really know any of my viewpoints, BTW, so I will tell you my views on abortion. If you read carefully, you'll understand me better.

N.B. I do not favor making abortion illegal.

I do favor making abortion rare, by educating people to prevent unintended pregnancy through the use of contraceptives (that the Catholic Church opposes), and by providing financial and other support to allow women to have babies they fell economic pressure to abort. I think our society needs to stop pretending that abortion just involves a few cells, a blob of tissue, a tumor (to quote a few DU posts) and learn what really happens from the moment of conception, which is that the zygote immediately begins to behave as an organism, not merely a cell.

It was my training as a biologist, and years of teaching about how life is defined, among all the other things taught in biology courses, that led me to my intellectual opposition to abortion. It was later that I became a Catholic and the two events have little relationship; had I wanted to join a church with an active pro-life ministry, I would not have chosen my local Catholic church as it has none.

N.B. I do not condemn women who have had abortions.

I only want to see the decision to make that choice become rare because unintended pregnancy has become rare. Unfortunately, this goal is not shared by many. Too many pro-lifers are focused on making abortion illegal, which won't make it nonexistent, and too many pro-choicers are focused on keeping abortion legal and seem to have little interest in making it rare.

Questions?

************************************************************************************

If you think I felt betrayal or even much surprise when I heard that Tony and Paddy (or whoever he/they was/were) had been banned and why, you're quite wrong. Having encountered real-life pathological liars, on-line ones never really surprise me. I also know they're not the only sockpuppets on DU. I never saw the disruptive posts he/they were said to have made so I was a bit surprised by that.

I note that you take credit for "exposing" him/them, something that hadn't occurred to me, though I suppose it would have if I'd given it any thought. Obviously, I'm not interested in vengeance or I'd have been tracking down those who "exposed" posters who were always perfectly nice in my experience and who added a lot to the Catholic group. Whether they were Catholic or not, their posts there were good. Not the first whose posts I've enjoyed who were banned, though, and surely not the last who will be.

But I do wonder if you feel any sorrow for the hurt you brought to those DUers who did feel manipulated and betrayed? Some good people were quite hurt, which I felt was the worse part of the episode.

[Misunderestimator]

26. No, actually, I paraphrased a quote in the OP when this was posted in GD

YOU attacked me claiming that I attack Catholics. I think it is in YOUR best interest to prove what you claim. I have no desire to defend myself against something that cannot be proven in the reverse. If you like, I can post all 14,000+ posts of mine here where you wouldn't be able to find a personal attack against a Catholic for being Catholic.

I don't take credit for exposing him. The "I" in my post was that I did not let his rantings go unquestioned for the months and months he was here spewing his garbage. That's what I meant by exposing him.

And it is not about vengeance. It is about answering people who come here to post anti-progressive garbage, even plagiarizing right-wingers to do so... I don't particularly want those people on this site. There are plenty of other places to find that.

I did not bring any sorrow for any DUers... "tony" did that all by himself.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

28. OH MY GOD!!

But I do wonder if you feel any sorrow for the hurt you brought to those DUers who did feel manipulated and betrayed? Some good people were quite hurt, which I felt was the worse part of the episode.


She should feel sorrow for people who ALLOWED themselves to be fooled by a con so obvious anyone with GOOGLE could bust him?

[DemBones DemBones]

32. Not everyone goes around trying to bust other DUers.

Not everyone saw the two posters making the obnoxious posts they're alleged to have made. I didn't.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

33. You had to not be looking..go back to the party time thread

Seems HUNDREDS of people saw it.

[DemBones DemBones]

38. I did NOT see it --

See my post to Kathy below, I have to leave for a doctor's appt. soon, can't waste any more time here.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

40. Fair enough

Just refrain from calling us bigots when there are many Catholics here I consider friends. Most of them have the same issues with your church's recent statements and actions that I do. I hardly think of those people as being self loathing.

On edit: and I do wish your husband well. I am sorry to hear of his recent health issues. I wish you well even though I don't appreciate your defense of what I consider indefensible. YOu can have your faith and not appreciate the fact that that faith is being weilded as a weapon by your leadership on SOME of us.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

29. I don't feel bad exposing a liar and a con man AT ALL

I'm Catholic, and the guilt card does not work on me. I feel bad that you were duped, and I think you're being disingenuous when you say that you never saw CL or Paddy post flames. Did you have issues when Paddy plagiarized a whole article and claimed it as his own? Did you have issues when Tony used the death of a young soldier, claiming it was his nephew, to garner sympathy? Did you call them to the carpet when they made blatantly misogynist statements?

You saw what you wanted to see. I'm Catholic and what I saw was a couple of pseudo-orthodox hypocrites. At least they didn't take you for money or a camera like they did on another website.

[sniffa]

30. kick for the sLow

[DemBones DemBones]

35. Wasn't duped, not being disingenuous. Search and you'll see

a couple of posts I made about my husband being hospitalized twice in a five week period, starting just before Holy Week. I was too busy to spend much time at DU, would just pop in to the Catholic group and to check my PMs.

I saw what I saw. I will not take responsibility for not responding to things I never saw.

I never know with certainty whether someone is telling the truth about anything and I doubt anyone here does. If he or they lied about things, they were wrong but I'm not absorbing their guilt because they were (or claimed to be) Catholic. Kindly note it is everyone else here who is bringing up their names, not me. I'm not defending them, I'm simply saying I don't know what they (or he) did.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

37. I'm sorry to hear about your husband. How is he doing?

[Misunderestimator]

41. But you came on here to say that I am a BIGOT.

When all I have EVER done is defend what I think is right. I have NEVER attacked a Catholic simply for being a Catholic. I have only criticized anti-progressive policies and doctrines and hypocrisy. I brought up Cuban_Liberal/Padraig18 because it is the only thing I can think of that would make you attack me in this manner.

If you only came in to read the Catholic group and check PMs, then how is it that you have come to this erroneous conclusion that I am a bigot? I urge you to provide some proof of that. And no, most of his (tony's) posts have not been deleted. There is plenty left to search.

[emad]

7. Glad to see that subtle humor not entirely lost on this DU......

although sometimes it takes a stretch of the imagination to understand why not everyone gets the joke....

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

23. That's completely uncalled for. No one is an anti-Catholic bigot

YOur church has covered up for child molestors for decades and still refuses to come clean about it. Your current Pope called it a vast conspiracy. Your current Pope made statements tantamount to those of a recent Baptist preacher regarding our election. It isn't bigotry to be reviled when a Pope calls me evil while defending his church's policy of harboring criminals. IF anything Catholics who defend this reprehensible behavior at all costs are perplexing.

Finally, you should rue the day CL came to DU as did Padraig. They did MORE to harm the church in the eyes of many DU'ers than to help it.

Especially when a guy who has his penis posted all over the internet defended a Catholic Bishop in San Diego for denying a gay man a funeral..and get this...this was Cuban Liberal's defense...on the basis that the gay man in need of a funeral owned a bar where promiscuity took place.

It isn't bigotry to point out the very obvious hypocrisy of the church's position in those matters.

[DemBones DemBones]

31. Apparently you think only Catholics make mistakes, only Catholics

say certain acts are evil, and that all Catholics defend everything the Church does. All of which suggests to me that the reason nothing shocks you anymore is that you don't pay attention to anything that doesn't fit your predetermined opinions. That's a flaw all of us have, I think, but your wild allegations certainly suggest some biases.

I see that the new tactic of those who continually criticize my faith is to try to tar us with the disgraced names of Cuban Liberal and Padraig. You all are forgetting that Tony and Paddy were individuals (or one individual, whatever) and what they said here is not my responsibility nor the responsibility of any other Catholic DUer.

As far as I know, no one knows whether "they" were Democrats or gay or Catholic so it is unfair to remember them only as Catholic. Anyone could read up and pass themselves off as Catholic or most anything else on the net. He or they did advocate pro-Dem and pro-gay positions as well. Since he/they are alleged to have posted at conservative sites, his/their goal was probably to discredit gays and Dems more than Catholics.

Apparently you have filtered it out every time the Vatican or a bishop has said that homosexuals are children of God like any other and must be treated with respect. That is in the 1994 Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, which covers all the beliefs and rules of Roman Catholics. Pope John Paul II ordered the preparation of this updated Catechism and guess who supervised its writing and approved every word of it? Our present Pope, Benedict XVI, then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. It was then approved by John Paul II so that's two popes putting their names on a document that says homosexuals are children of God and must be respected.

From the Catechism you could also learn that fornication, adultery, and promiscuity are considered sins, but they're equal opportunity sins, can be committed by homosexual or heterosexual people, as can murder, stealing, lying, etc. You'd also learn that the Church teaches any sin can be forgiven if the sinner repents of it. We had a thread in the Catholic group a few weeks ago asking whether anyone had ever heard a priest condemn gays. You might want to check it out.

[sniffa]

34. gays are chiLdren of god

and they're aLso eviL, and they're marrying is an abomination that must be stopped. aLL cathoLics are caLLed upon to oppose and obstruct gay marriage or face excommunication.

sounds Like a Loving father then.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

36. PULEEEEEZE

Apparently you think only Catholics make mistakes, only Catholics"
Posted by DemBones DemBones

say certain acts are evil, and that all Catholics defend everything the Church does. All of which suggests to me that the reason nothing shocks you anymore is that you don't pay attention to anything that doesn't fit your predetermined opinions. That's a flaw all of us have, I think, but your wild allegations certainly suggest some biases.

No I challenge all the evil that is done in the name of religion, not just yours

I see that the new tactic of those who continually criticize my faith is to try to tar us with the disgraced names of Cuban Liberal and Padraig. You all are forgetting that Tony and Paddy were individuals (or one individual, whatever) and what they said here is not my responsibility nor the responsibility of any other Catholic DUer.

No, only to the degree that you defended their tripe. THEY did do more harm than good to your religion on this board and those of you that were so UNCURIOUS about their (HIS) very obvious hypocrisy ENABLED.

As far as I know, no one knows whether "they" were Democrats or gay or Catholic so it is unfair to remember them only as Catholic. Anyone could read up and pass themselves off as Catholic or most anything else on the net. He or they did advocate pro-Dem and pro-gay positions as well. Since he/they are alleged to have posted at conservative sites, his/their goal was probably to discredit gays and Dems more than Catholics.

That's why, in my view, outing them was a good thing for all involved parties. YOu should thank us.


Apparently you have filtered it out every time the Vatican or a bishop has said that homosexuals are children of God like any other and must be treated with respect. That is in the 1994 Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, which covers all the beliefs and rules of Roman Catholics. Pope John Paul II ordered the preparation of this updated Catechism and guess who supervised its writing and approved every word of it? Our present Pope, Benedict XVI, then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. It was then approved by John Paul II so that's two popes putting their names on a document that says homosexuals are children of God and must be respected.

Nope, I haven't filtered it out. I am well aware of the double speak on this matter.


From the Catechism you could also learn that fornication, adultery, and promiscuity are considered sins, but they're equal opportunity sins, can be committed by homosexual or heterosexual people, as can murder, stealing, lying, etc. You'd also learn that the Church teaches any sin can be forgiven if the sinner repents of it. We had a thread in the Catholic group a few weeks ago asking whether anyone had ever heard a priest condemn gays. You might want to check it out.

I saw the thread. I know people haven't heard priests condemn gays. IN fact, at a recent event a SPOKE with a priest about the Church's position and their double speak. He was in complete agreement with ME..Misunderestimator was there when the priest and I spoke. He then introduced me to the crowd as an extraordinary person and BLESSED my relationship with Misunderestimator. Remember your church has done all it can to SILENCE those good priests.

[Misunderestimator]

42. Yes, I am an evil child of god.

Who has filtered out the part where they respect me... because it isn't very apparent.

You can't see the hypocrisy in saying in 1994 that we should be respected, then 10 years later saying we are evil?

(On edit... in case you decide to deliberately misinterpret me, I am referring to the two popes you mentioned, not all Catholics...)

[Atlas Mugged]

10. Shivers?

Oh, piffle. My head spun and I projectile vomited.

[Inland]

11. Wow, another protestant against the papacy. Film at eleven.

Of course protestants don't want Ratz. to be pope. They don't want ANYONE to be pope. They don't think there should BE a pope as such.

Next clip: republicans denounce choice of Dean as democratic party head.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. Look at what he said about the last pope

Countless churches and theologians around the world have studied one of his key encyclicals “Ut Unum sint”. It is a privilege for me representing the Church of Ireland to share with you this evening in paying tribute to a very special person who led the Roman Catholic Church for over a quarter of a century and influenced for good so many people, reflecting to them the joy of faith in Jesus Christ.

His vision for the healing of the divisions of Christendom was lived out at a difficult time on the ecumenical journey – when we had passed beyond the euphoria of the friendship arising from Vatican 2 – and were at the more difficult stage of looking at not only what unites, but trying to understand somewhat more of what divides. It was often simply the friendship and warmth of John Paul II that allowed differences to remain differences between brothers and sisters in Christ – family differences.
...
So this evening I join with you in thanksgiving for what John Paul II achieved, and join with you in rejoicing that God has taken him to a place of peace and joy, into the nearer presence of the One whom he knew and served.

May he Rest in Peace and Rise in Glory

http://dublin.anglican.org/pr/2005/pr050406-pope-mass-reflection.html

Yeah, obviously Neill is against all popes. :sarcasm:

[Bridget Burke]

13. Pope Benedict is not more theologically conservative than JPII.

He just lacks the charisma.

What percentage of the Irish population belongs to the Church of Ireland?

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. Lack of charisma - or diplomacy?

The "they're not real churches" remark he made wasn't exactly tactful, was it?

A fairly small percentage, I'd imagine - but I'm not that sure what that has to do with this. My point was to show that Neill is not anti-Catholic at all (which the earlier pope had implied) - he's keen on ecumenical work. But he didn't see Ratzinger as being keen on it. He's now hoping that, as Pope, this will change, now that his main job isn't enforcing the Catholic doctrine.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. Every religion teaches that it is the true religion, with the exception of

those who have no clearly defined doctrines at all. Anglicans, particularly in the UK and former colonies, think THEY are far superior doctrinally to RCs. I don't fault them for thinking so. If a person doesn''t believe their religion is the true one, why on earth would they stay with it?

Most Catholics, at least in the US and Europe, UK, Australia, etc., would not say Catholicism is the only true religion. Most priests wouldn't say it, either, but the Vatican pretty much has to say it or give in to moral relativism, which ain't gonna happen.

[emad]

22. "True Religion": The Jewish, Muslim and Christian Orthodox

churches have all at one time or another in the last 2000 years, said that the Roman Catholic Church has perpetually lied about the following for purely political reasons:

1)John the Baptist - the real victim who died on the cross
2) Mary the mother of "Jesus" and of all his other real life siblings
3) The human paternity of "Jesus" - d'divine not because of who his FATHER was but who his MOTHER was
4) Mary Magdalene and Martha, as much companion disciples as any of the 12 male apostles
5) The hoax of the Resurrection
6) The "authenticity" of non-contemporaneous writings called the Old and New Testaments

The Catholic faith is 100% house of cards run by organised crime for the benefit of political and financial control of the masses.

The brainwashing and intimidation of billions of naive individuals is the sole objective of this "mystery of faith" cabal which has been fooling the planet with its hocus pocus smoke and mirrors nonsense in the name of patriarchy.

Humbug. All the way.

[Inland]

25. Oh, he isn't against popes more than any other protestant.

He's perfectly willing to praise them or condemn them according to his own religion, and his own interests. May I point out that he has his own religion and his own interests? Or is that just rude?

So if I may: he doesn't think there should BE a pope. So it is somewhat bizarre to quote his reaction. But then again, it was somewhat bizarre and impolitic for him to have articulated a position, too.

Can wait to hear his position on the identification of the next Dalai Lama.

[muriel_volestrangler]

46. Do you mean there's no point in quoting anyone on another religion?

So we should ignore anything this Pope says about other religions, and other Christian churches, since he doesn't think they should exist?

Does that mean this entire forum is useless, and we should just use forums that are dedicated to single faiths, since we have nothing to say of any relevance to each other?

I'd say not. I suspect you'd say not, as well. But in that case, the remarks of one church leader about another are interesting to some.

[Inland]

47. The post was originally made in LBN, not theology.

So I think my post was pretty apropo. It's not LBN. It's not even news.

It is interesting, I suppose, that the supposed advocate of ecumene makes officious comments about the selection of the head of another religion. I myself commented on it being a strange and impolitic weighing in. Which it was.

[cap]

17. so how does this play out with the Protestant/Catholic divide

in Northern Ireland?

I am not hopeful.

[DemBones DemBones]

20. I'd guess it will make little or no difference whatsoever.

Are most Protestants in the North of Ireland members of the Church of Ireland? I thought most of them were Presbyterians, as is that old bigot Ian Paisley, IIRC. (Obviously bearing little resemblance to Presbyterians in the US, except perhaps the evangelical ones.)

The Brits (my own people) did a terrible thing when they settled a bunch of Scots (mostly Presbyterians) in Catholic Ireland. It's always been a disaster. Many people are working on the problem, though, so perhaps it will eventually be sorted out. The Brits (again, my own people) have been right bastards quite often, though, and denied the Irish their human rights.

[Bridget Burke]

21. He's Archbishop of Dublin--not the North.

The Archbishop of Armagh (in the North) is the top guy in the Church of Ireland. (And the RC Archbishop of Armagh fills that slot for the Catholics.)

Most Protestants in the North aren't Church of Ireland. At times, their denominations were oppressed by the Established Church--just not treated as badly as the Catholics.

The statement is politically unimportant.