Benedict XVI

Remove all ads!

Ah well forget it, i'm not on a mission to convince you of what i hear, read or believe. I couldn't care less if you believe it or not, and besides, i've wasted more than enough words already on such a useless topic as the friggin pope. I think i'll go talk to that brick wall overthere now.

 

You expected us to reply after posting this?

The same I could say about you: "what else could you expect from the Pac man?"
You still haven't provided us with the context. I believe when you say that Ratzinger was quoted as saying that, but I still didn't see the context in which it was actually said, so it might be very possible that he meant a specific rock'n'roll branch, but unless you provide the entire context, we will never know.

That is the same as saying the following:
"All classical music is written for symphonic orchestra, and sometimes for a choir" after listening only to all 9 of Beethoven's symphonies. Or the following:
"All classical music is terribly complicated, and I fail to hear anything in it, as everyone plays what they want, and it's a constant barrage of interwoven sounds" after hearing all of Bach's works (when you develop linear hearing, they sound so clear and logical you wouldn't believe it—it's as logical as higher order calculus done on multiple variables when done correctly).

 

Gee... and it's the Latins who hate the Greeks, right?

Then why bother?

 

@ Toughluck

Do you only read what you want to see, or is it that you just like being daft ? I said that the statement was "rock&roll", not any other specific terms were used. And for the second time....it was quoted on TV, so i can't show you a link.

 

Religion should simply be banned, one thing the commies got right. Nothing but mass psychosis.

 

Amen!

 

Personally, I'm not a christian and therefore I don't hate anyone because of his religion (as long as he doesn't try to interfere to my life). I've only tried to show you what the orthodox church believes, and like it or not orthodoxes can rightly accuse catholics for many things. On the other hand the orthodox church can be blamed for many things as well, and yes there are fanatical elements among the orthodox church who believe that pope is the respresentative of Satan on earth.

 

No problem with not showing the link there. However, yesterday in TV, I've heard Netherlands has recently issued a government act that all people above 50 years old are to be euthanased. This must be true, as it was on TV, and I don't care about the context, you must live in a terrible country. I don't care whether they meant that people may be euthanased, or that they are to be done in involutnarily, I just want to spread rumours.

All music should simply be banned. Nothing but mass psychosis. All other arts should be banned as well. Nothing but mass psychosis. Heck, eating, drinking and breathing should all be banned. Nothing but mass psychosis.
That's your opinion. What about the people that believe? I guess they are not worthy to live, as they came under mass psychosis?

 

Ah, i see...you are one of those people who have to read or see something with their own eyes, otherwise it's only a rumor. You wouldn't believe me anyway if i told you the man who reported this is reliable and trustworthy, wouldn't you ? Nope, probably not, because you'll have to see it with your own eyes first. If you were in Indonesia a few months back and someone would run up to you and tell you to start running your ass off because a tidal wave is coming your way, you'd probably ask him for a written confirmation first, wouldn't you ?

Wouldn't it be much easier if you downright called me a liar ?

 

Pac man, you still don't get it. I know it was shown on TV. I even believe Ratzinger did say it. But I have no idea what he meant unless you put some context into it. It's not like he was stopped in the street, asked: "What do you think about rock'n'roll?" and he answered: "Oh, it's a tool of the devil, it is!" I also doubt it was a simple remark like: "We can see devil working in our everyday lives, such as rock'n'roll."
Simply put—I believe he said it. But I cannot know what he meant.

 

Is this what you are looking for?

 

Thanks.

Notice the word sometimes? And I agree completely with him. This happens all too often at many music festivals. People become infatuated by the musicians, by the situation, and go along with the flow. Before you start saying that those people are irresponsible, I agree, they are. But some of them lead very serious everyday lives, and you wouldn't believe they did this or that at such a concert.

 

That wasn't it though.

 

@Toughluck


First of all, you are correct in pointing out the need for references/citations when offering anecdotes as some sort of evidence for something(e.g. "I heard the pope say that*this* was wrong on tv once!").

My only contention with anything you have said in this thread has to do with your knack of taking a relatively rational stance in such matters(as the above noted citation/reference issue) but then turning around and throwing rationality out the window when you defend your religion.

For example:

Now pay close attention to what you wrote above then replace "musicians"/"rock & roll" with "theists"/"religion".

See? Loses none of it's veracity in the substitution.
So why go out of one's way eitehr making or defending such a charge leveled at rock and roll? It is like Charles Bronson saying "There sure are a lot of ugly people here!".

Worship is flat out WRONG whether you are worshipping an existent musician/celebrity/pope or worshipping an (likely)imaginary God/devil or even an object like the sun/moon/a doorknob. The act of worship as ALWAYS demeaning to teh worshipper and no sentient entity which deserved to be worshipped would want to be worshipped!

So why even worry about what some young people are doing at a rock and roll festival, even if it may result in a drug overdose, an STD or a deadly stampede when these events are downright laughable compared to what the "true believers" do at their "festivals" and in the name of their "rock stars".

 

Sorry, Chevalier, but a couple of points on your posts:

I do blame the Reformation on the Roman Catholic Church, and I suspect Martin Luther had some strong feelings this way too. By the time he nailed his 95 theses to the Wittenberg church door, the Church had endured a half century of popes who were venal and/or corrupt and/or depraved: Sixtus IV, Innocent VIII, Julius II, Leo X, Clement VII, and Alexander VI, the Borgia pope, who decorated the papal bedroom with lascivious paintings, fondled whores at papal banquets, and watched complacently from the window while his son Cesare shot down chained prisoners in the courtyard of the Vatican.

For Luther the final straw came when Leo X sent a Dominican monk named Tetzel into Germany selling indulgences to raise needed funds for the depleted papal coffers. (Leo X was extravagant beyond sense. When he died the papacy was so broke they had to use half-burned candles left over from a cardinal's funeral to illuminate the papal bier.) Arriving in full panoply and displaying the Bull of Indulgence Tetzel would proclaim, "I have here the passports...to lead the human soul to the celestial joys of Paradise." He claimed that "as soon as the coin rang in the bowl, the soul for whom it was paid would fly out of Purgatory straight to Heaven." An agent of the Fugger banking family stood by keeping count of the coins. The abuse of indulgence was a major topic of Luther's theses, and this was certainly inspired by the practices of the Roman Catholic church.(1)

"Show me where the Catholic doctrine has ever maintained that the earth is flat." Well, I don't know about that. But I do know that Copernicus delayed publication of his heliocentric theory until he was on his deathbed because he feared the church would comdemn him for heresy. I do know that after Galileo published his discoveries, particularly his discovery that Jupiter had moons which revolved around it--a miniature solar system--officers of the Inquisition took him to the papal prison and showed him the instruments of torture. Let me repeat that: They showed him the instruments of torture. Galileo recanted and kept his mouth shut for the rest of his life. Historically, the Church of Rome has opposed every advance of science until the point was reached where opposition was no longer possible. (2)

"The Catholic Church is not one of those" who adopt the "pick and take" what you want from the body of Christianity. Bullpucky. Let's go back to the early church for an example: The Council of Nicia in 325 AD. This conclave was called by the Emperor Constantine to settle once and for all the dispute between the Unitarians, led by Bishop Arius, who held that Jesus was a man; and the Trinitarians, led by Bishop Athenasius, who believed him to be a god, part of the trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Now it's an interesting fact that no Christian theologian prior to 195 AD had suggested that Jesus was part of a Trinity--Irenaeus of Marsailles was one of the first. (Perhaps basing himself on a benediction of Paul in Timothy I.) The Christian church in its first two centuries was entirely Unitarian, which is why most of their writings are "lost"; they became heretical and were suppressed. The Trinitarian idea "caught on", as they say, and their insistance that contrary opinions were heresy tore the church apart. Hence the council. The Athenasians won, by four votes in a council of 300 bishops, giving us the essence of the church we have today. I don't think it's unfair to say they "picked and chose". (3)

Sources:

1. The March of Folly--Barbara Tuchman
2. Any biography of Copernicus and Galileo
3. The Early Church--Henry Chadwick

 

Well, I agree about the Reformation, but if Luther wanted change, he should have changed the Church, not call for separation. Besides, even his ideas had been twisted beyond what he believed to be true, and what emerged as a "Lutheran" Church, wasn't Lutheran at all.

About the flat Earth/heliocentric system. Flat Earth was defended only in the Spanish court, when some influential proponents of sailing to India around Africa would lose Royal support.
And as for Galileo. He never faced the Inquisition. The trial was delayed, and then cancelled, but he stayed under house arrest.
Everyone likes to make an association between Galileo's heliocentric theory and how he was persecuted for that precisely by the backwards Church. Sounds nice, but doesn't add up. He was persecuted for his veiled and open attacks on the Church in his works.
It worked out for Copernicus the same way. His work was not published prior to his death, but Copernicus was not persecuted for writing academic papers on heliocentric theory. He was free to teach the theory anywhere he wanted. Yes, he was detained by the local bishops, but only because of one thing: he was a priest who sympathised with the Protestants. He got off with only a stern warning every time. He was spreading his ideas during his lifetime (how else would Galileo find out about them), and never had problems because of it. His De revolutionibus orbium celestium wound up on any prohibited books' list not because of the heliocentric theory, but because of Copernicus's ideas on Protestantism, thought heretic at that time.
Oh, and people most often comment that Galileo was condemned to burn at a stake, etc. This is wrong. If you want to find an example, there is one Giordano Bruno, but not Galileo.

This whole "unitarian" vs. "trinitarian" debate is best solved by the Evangelists, who quote Jesus of saying that he is indeed the Son of the Living God, Messiah. Then, is Holy Spirit God as well? Yes, otherwise how could anyone explain in what way should the Holy Spirit be placed in God's stead?

 

Religion is the opium of the people and is more sanctified (perhaps not the right word, im short of time at the moment) than it has ever been in its history.

 

Amen.

 

So you are basically a Marxist?