Woman jumps barrier, knocks down pope at Christmas Eve mass, Vatican says

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by Gateway
Which is....please enlighten me. What does he represent to you? What EVILS is he speaking of to you?

Covering up for child rapists and allowing them to move on to new hunting grounds.

How many paedos in police or judges or something are hidden.

Grow up and accept paedos are part of the world, not the catholic church alone.

Originally posted by Gateway

Originally posted by Lillydale

Just to be clear.

Okay...

While I still do not condone tackling such a frail victim. I am specifically picking on this man because of what he himself is responsible for.

Which is? Do tell...

He is no more responsible for the inquisition or the crusades...as the average American for slavery.

I would really like to know when I ever said this man himself had anything to do with those things outside of being the figure head at the front of the organization that helped promote such villainous practices.

This man himself...I believe I have been more than overly specific as to what he is personally responsible for.

There is also that pesky HEAD OF THE CHURCH thing that makes him a representative of Catholicism to the world. You know pope is the big job at the top right?

Why does this bother you so?

Did I specifically say that it bothered me or that it might be a reason someone might want to knock the pope over? Both are true but at this point, I fail to have the energy to defend points I never made.

reply to post by andy1033


It is the fact that they withinthe Catholic church tried to sweep these abuses under the carpet, and also those many abuse victims whom went un-heard, whom have committed suicide as a result, that is the problem alot of people have with the Catholic Church.

They knew these abuses where happening, but done nothing about it. Until they were forced to admit to the abuses. If they had not been forced to admit tothe abuses. Those child molestors would have went unpunished.

Why should people from other Christian denominations follow or even listen to the Pope, when his own church carries out human right abuses all over the world, even to this day, people have aids, hiv, over the Pope discouraging, the use of condoms.

The Moralle Authority of the Catholic Church died along time ago. It is about hight time, those at the head of the catholic church conceeded this and accepted it. Not everyone in the world are willing or even listento thier doctorine anymore.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Laurauk]

Originally posted by andy1033
How many paedos in police or judges or something are hidden.

I am not sure. Sounds like a good topic for a thread. Do the title of this thread and the OP only show up on my computer?

Grow up and accept paedos are part of the world, not the catholic church alone.

Grow up and accept them? Is this part of some pro-pedophile crusade?

This is getting really old. How many time do you really want to go over this?

1- I never once mentioned pedophiles.

2- This thread is not about why someone might knock down the leader of all police in the world.

3- This thread is not about why someone might knock down the leader of all the judges in the world.

4- This thread is specifically about the attack on the CATHOLIC POPE. In the OP, it is asked why someone might want to do that. I offered reasons.

If this is not clear at this point, then there is not going to be any clarification. Someone seems bent on derailing the thread or defending pedophiles. In either case, this is not what this thread is about.

If he truly is good, a true pope, and the closest human being to god, he'll make a public statement forgiving her for her actions and demand that they release her. If not, just one more knock on religion in general.

Originally posted by Lillydale



Covering up for child rapists and allowing them to move on to new hunting grounds.

Those who have been accused of molestation have been excommunicated or are in jail. Would you rather the Church have created a christian prison for these pedophiles? The Church has no business, in putting these men in jail. That is the job for the state.

Are you saying the Church hid or concealed evidence of this? If so the burden of proof is upon YOU.

He is directly responsible for every rape comitted by a priest he knew about and helped to just 'move.'

I didn't know Ratzinger fondled little boys? Or willingly knew of rapists and let them proceed with raping, please do tell? What is your evidence? He is human is he not, Catholics do not claim that the Pope is omnipotent. Here you are making the conclusion that HE KNOWS...and because he knows FOR SURE and let these men stay in the Church. He is as culpable as the men who commit the rapes. The Church needs information and proof to accuse its clergy of such despicable acts.

This man represents all kinds of evils in his positions as pope but this man himself specifically represents the church's desire to allow the rape of children to continue and grow in favor of letting the church get a bad reputation for having to admit what it had done.

Here you equate the act of several sick individuals as therefore a condone act of a religious body.

Let's try a little more logic and reason with our arguments.

When you are so worried about the name of your organization that you are willing to allow MORE CHILDREN TO BE RAPED

I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you saying because the Catholic Church continues to exist, WE are therefore CONDONING the raping and molestation of children? Huh? What would you have people do....burn down St. Peter's Basilica.

because you don't want any trouble, you represent something pretty bad all the way around.

So....

Catholic Church = Nabla

I see...looks like I'm dealing with a Ph.D., here...

Originally posted by Chad_Thomas89
If he truly is good, a true pope, and the closest human being to god, he'll make a public statement forgiving her for her actions and demand that they release her. If not, just one more knock on religion in general.

Apparently they already did that once. Medicated people can't do what she has turned into her own holiday tradition. She is connected.

reply to post by Gateway

He is human is he not

Yes he is and so are you and so is the pope.

Pope: Hey god
God: wats up pope
Pope: why dont the people ever hear you and its just me?
God: were did you get that idea from?
Pope: But im the head of the curch?
God: and?
Pope: so people can hear you as well?
God: Yep
Pope: oh crap better keep that under raps then

God: silly people so much to learn

[edit on 25-12-2009 by 13579]

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by Gateway

 

He is human is he not

Yes he is and so are you and so is the pope.

Pope: Hey god
God: wats up pope
Pope: why dont the people ever hear you and its just me?
God: were did you get that idea from?
Pope: But im the head of the curch?
God: and?
Pope: so people can hear you as well?
God: Yep
Pope: oh crap better keep that under raps then

God:

silly people so much to learn

[edit on 25-12-2009 by 13579]

Do you always respond in knock knock jokes. Is writing an opinion that difficult?

reply to post by Gateway


I find it better to show how i feel using something you can understand that is not insulting but points out how people can be hypercrtis without even knowing it.

but your responce to me shows you did not have a comeback other than how i felt i wanted to respond

maybe next time you can equate my work with monty python unless you have no need for satire or ever watched it....

im guessing you aint.

So ? its wrong for me to type the way i do now, guess im one of them athiest phycos LOL

and just for your information

its not a joke.. its a fact.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by 13579]

Originally posted by Gateway
Those who have been accused of molestation have been excommunicated or are in jail. Would you rather the Church have created a christian prison for these pedophiles? The Church has no business, in putting these men in jail. That is the job for the state.

Please read my posts before replying to them. This man himself helped to cover up the rape of children and allow the men to continue to practice raping children. This man knew what they were doing and moved them because the heat was on the way up. Get that? People were on to these priests and that is why they had to be moved, sometimes OFTEN. When you know someone is committing a crime and you cover it up, maybe you can argue you are not guilty in court but not in my eyes. If you help to facilitate the further practice of said crime, you are certainly guilty. This man - this pope is personally responsible for these things and he has hardly been excommunicated.

Are you saying the Church hid or concealed evidence of this? If so the burden of proof is upon YOU.

The church admitted to all of this. There is no burden of proof. It is not up for debate. They are NO LONGER denying it.

I didn't know Ratzinger fondled little boys? Or willingly knew of rapists and let them proceed with raping, please do tell? What is your evidence?

Do you have google?

In 2001, while he was a cardinal, he issued a secret Vatican edict to Catholic bishops all over the world, instructing them to put the Church's interests ahead of child safety. The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated.

He is human is he not, Catholics do not claim that the Pope is omnipotent.

Actually no, he is apparently not human because he is considered infallible by the church which means they believe that the pope cannot commit a sin. Last time I read my bible, all humans were still capable of sin. You might really find learning about the Catholic Church interesting. There are many good places to research beginning with your local library, town hall, and churches.

Here you are making the conclusion that HE KNOWS...and because he knows FOR SURE and let these men stay in the Church. He is as culpable as the men who commit the rapes. The Church needs information and proof to accuse its clergy of such despicable acts.

It is really rather well known that the Church was fully aware of the issue. This would be why the spent millions of dollars hushing up victims families. There is no shortage of coverage on this. Where are you from? What is your access to news about the church? Does it only come from the church?

Here you equate the act of several sick individuals as therefore a condone act of a religious body.

No, I did not. I was referring to the Church's long history of wonderful gifts to the world like the Crusades and Inquisitions.

Let's try a little more logic and reason with our arguments.

Information is always good too. I really do encourage you to look into this more before defending it blindly. You are trying to play lawyer for a case the church has already plead guilty to and that tells me that you have not even taken a cursory glance at this issue.

When you are so worried about the name of your organization that you are willing to allow MORE CHILDREN TO BE RAPED

I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you saying because the Catholic Church continues to exist, WE are therefore CONDONING the raping and molestation of children? Huh? What would you have people do....burn down St. Peter's Basilica.

No. I am not sure where I lost you. I never said that the church continuing to exist condoned these actions and therefor should be destroyed. I said this man is particular covered up these crimes to save the reputation of the church. Is there a language barrier? Perhaps I can be more clear for you.

Catholic Church = Nabla

I see...looks like I'm dealing with a Ph.D., here...

Is that a personal attack at my perceived level of education based on your complete ignorance of the issue and this man's culpability in it?

I am sorry you do not know these things but to defend or deny any of them while clearly demonstrating a lack of knowledge on the issue does not seem smart to me.

P.S. a phd would gently inform you that it is NAMBLA and that while, "equals" is a strong term, you are not far off if everything the CHURCH ADMITTED TO is true. If there is more than what they admitted, then they may even be worse than NAMBLA.

[edit on 12/25/09 by Lillydale]

Originally posted by Gateway
Do you always respond in knock knock jokes. Is writing an opinion that difficult?

It seemed nicer than pointing out that the Pope is indeed better than human in the eyes of the church and therefore, no NOT HUMAN.

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by Gateway

 

I find it better to show how i feel using something you can understand that is not insulting but points out how people can be hypercrtis without even knowing it.

How is speaking in riddle and jokes easier than phrasing and opinion. It is what it is...a cop out.

If you find that expressing your view point directly, rationally, clearly too difficult and would come off as offensive. Than that is something you need to work on. Not the rest of us.

but your responce to me shows you did not have a comeback other than how i felt i wanted to respond

No...my response was bewilderment.

maybe next time you can equate my work with monty python unless you have no need for satire or ever watched it....

I don't make my reasoned arguments or judge others point of view more valid based on the number of times they've seen the "Life of Brian" either.

im guessing you aint. So ? its wrong for me to type the way i do now, guess im one of them athiest phycos LOL

I wouldn't say a psycho...but definitely someone who may have trouble stating your opinion.

and just for your information its not a joke.. its a fact.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Gateway]

Originally posted by Lillydale

Ahh the great BBC documentary. Do you just Google information and except it?

Let's take a look at the actual letter sent out by Ratzinger: You can find it HERE Can you read English?

Please point to the paragraph where he stipulates THAT NO CHILD SHALL SPEAK TO THE POLICE OR BE EXCOMMUNICATED.

Do you have google?

Do YOU?

The document dealt exclusively with the procedure to be followed in connection with a denunciation to the ecclesiastical authority of a priest guilty of solicitation in Confession or of similar acts. It imposed secrecy about the conduct of the ecclesiastical trial, not allowing, for instance, statements made during the trial by witnesses or by the accused to be published. But it did not in any way impose silence on those who were victims of the priest's conduct or who had learned of it in ways unconnected with the ecclesiastical trial. "These matters are confidential only to the procedures within the Church, but do not preclude in any way for these matters to be brought to civil authorities for proper legal adjudication. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People of June, 2002, approved by the Vatican, requires that credible allegations of sexual abuse of children be reported to legal authorities."[5] Some interpret the secrecy about the procedure as a cover-up of scandalous conduct. This view was presented in a BBC documentary film Sex Crimes and the Vatican.[6] of 1 October 2006. Others see it as aimed rather at the protection of all involved, the accused, the victim/denouncer and the witnesses, before the verdict was passed: "It allows witnesses to speak freely, accused priests to protect their good name until guilt is established, and victims to come forward who don’t want publicity. Such secrecy is also not unique to sex abuse. It applies, for example, to the appointment of bishops."[

en.wikipedia.org...(document)

Actually no, he is apparently not human because he is considered infallible by the church which means they believe that the pope cannot commit a sin.

You can be human and not commit sin. A child has not committed any sin. Once you have been chosen Pope you must be henceforth infallible. Therefore you commit your life to NEVER committing a sin. He certainly, probably has committed some sin at some point in his life. But people, can certainly IF THEY CHOSE to can lead a LIFE where they WILL NEVER COMMIT SIN.

Last time I read my bible, all humans were still capable of sin.

And still are...they are also capable of not committing sin...if they chose to.

You might really find learning about the Catholic Church interesting. There are many good places to research beginning with your local library, town hall, and churches.

I was a practicing Catholic. I am now an agnostic. However, I certainly will not get more accurate information about my former religion by going to town halls much less googling about it.

It is really rather well known that the Church was fully aware of the issue. This would be why the spent millions of dollars hushing up victims families. There is no shortage of coverage on this. Where are you from? What is your access to news about the church? Does it only come from the church?

Do you just regurgitate what you see on the latest BBC documentary or CNN or FOX or google information. I go to the source and then base my opinion. I don't like to have my opinions TOLD to me.

No, I did not. I was referring to the Church's long history of wonderful gifts to the world like the Crusades and Inquisitions.

Information is always good too. I really do encourage you to look into this more before defending it blindly. You are trying to play lawyer for a case the church has already plead guilty to and that tells me that you have not even taken a cursory glance at this issue.

Ditto!! Please read above...

No. I am not sure where I lost you. I never said that the church continuing to exist condoned these actions and therefor should be destroyed. I said this man is particular covered up these crimes to save the reputation of the church. Is there a language barrier? Perhaps I can be more clear for you.

Again you keep saying the proof is out there. What proof?

Catholic Church = Nabla

I see...looks like I'm dealing with a Ph.D., here...

Is that a personal attack at my perceived level of education based on your complete ignorance of the issue and this man's culpability in it?

Ignorance of the issue? I'm bringing you the exact letter written by Ratzinger, above. Now please point to the conspiracy. Again the burden of proof is on YOU.

P.S. a phd would gently inform you that it is NAMBLA and that while, "equals" is a strong term, you are not far off if everything the CHURCH ADMITTED TO is true. If there is more than what they admitted, then they may even be worse than NAMBLA.

The Church is full of hierarchical leadership what some priests and some Bishops have done is abysmal, but certainly pointing to the church as a whole and accusing the Pope or the Catholic Religion as equally or "may eve be worse than NAMBLA" is moronic...and yes clearly this kind of reasoning is only found among the brightest of Ph.D. in our most highly regarded of institutions.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Gateway]

Originally posted by Gateway

Originally posted by Lillydale

Ahh the great BBC documentary. Do you just Google information and except it?

Let's take a look at the actual letter sent out by Ratzinger: You can find it HERE Can you read English?

Please point to the paragraph where he stipulates THAT NO CHILD SHALL SPEAK TO THE POLICE OR BE EXCOMMUNICATED.

Do you have google?

Do YOU?

The document dealt exclusively with the procedure to be followed in connection with a denunciation to the ecclesiastical authority of a priest guilty of solicitation in Confession or of similar acts. It imposed secrecy about the conduct of the ecclesiastical trial, not allowing, for instance, statements made during the trial by witnesses or by the accused to be published. But it did not in any way impose silence on those who were victims of the priest's conduct or who had learned of it in ways unconnected with the ecclesiastical trial. "These matters are confidential only to the procedures within the Church, but do not preclude in any way for these matters to be brought to civil authorities for proper legal adjudication. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People of June, 2002, approved by the Vatican, requires that credible allegations of sexual abuse of children be reported to legal authorities."[5] Some interpret the secrecy about the procedure as a cover-up of scandalous conduct. This view was presented in a BBC documentary film Sex Crimes and the Vatican.[6] of 1 October 2006. Others see it as aimed rather at the protection of all involved, the accused, the victim/denouncer and the witnesses, before the verdict was passed: "It allows witnesses to speak freely, accused priests to protect their good name until guilt is established, and victims to come forward who don’t want publicity. Such secrecy is also not unique to sex abuse. It applies, for example, to the appointment of bishops."[

en.wikipedia.org...(document)

[/quot e]
I am on my way out the door so I will have to get back to you on the rest but in the meantime I suggest you read that over a few times. It says exactly what I say it said. I priest is suspected of diddling children. The Church removes the priest without informing on him or carrying out any kind of trial themselves. That priest is given a new flock to fleece all in secrecy while they decide how best to handle the situation going forward. Please, please read again. Also check the difference between not committing a sin and being exempt from sin.

Merry Christmas. I promise to get back to you on the rest.




[edit on 12/25/09 by Lillydale]

Originally posted by Gateway
reply to post by BigfootNZ

 

Let me get this straight...you hold Ratzinger responsible for all that has occurred within the history of the Catholic Church...from the inquisition...to the invasion of the Americas?

He therefore deserves the a good tackle every Christmas. Any type of violence particularly, one which involves degrading a religious figure-head...regardless of religion....is at the very least counter productive to whatever message you are trying to invoke, stupid, and juvenile.

I can't help you if you think otherwise.

No not him personally, but the position yes, as every other individual that held that position over the many centurys. They should have a little line in the contract saying 'do you accept that your gonna be the target for anti vativan attacks having held the highest position attainable in the catholic church?'... everyone attacks those who inherit a mess, we do it with politicians and presidents, why not religious icons.

Im a non violent person, and basically a pacifist, but i see where some action is warranted if it sends a message... if my own churchs leaders where doing similar things as the Pope id be cheering the same thing if it happened to them. It seems for you a position automatically gives a right to respect...

I also find it funny how people are saying that the Catholic Church is THE christian religion... it was more or less a combination of early variants all brought under control of a single body... which eventually created new separate branches when people got ticked at what it had become and split.

For me the opulence of the Vatican, and therefore the individual at the top who seems to happily go with the status quo, who is the Pope is wrong, I wont say evil, but its definitely at that level, he isnt god, he is a man with a pointy hat... he gains respect simply by his position, not his works... he earned it since the previous one kicked the bucket and a bunch of high up clergy decided in a closed door ballot who got the job next.

If he wants real respect... he'd break down the Vatican and put all that gold to good use, unfortunately the catholic church is more than a religion, its an institution and a very powerful one, sure it provides help... but its a pitiful compared to what it could do if it decided to change tact. Some people seem to want the upper catholic establishment preserved at all cost as if its somehow important... thing is this establishment has nothing and contributes nothing to the catholic christian religion apart from being a fancy symbol like rosaries (you dont need a bunch of beads to say a rote pray) , its something that people can direct their faith towards thats tangible thats all. Which is a sore point for me in a way, since to me a large number of the catholic church with its pope and the virgin Mary and its saints, relics and miricals are nothing more than people worshiping tangible worldly symbols, 'they cant see god which takes a personal kind of faith to accomplish, so give em a pope, a mother figure and some saints instead, they can see them'.

Im of christian belief basically... not catholic, i have nothing against the catholic church, just an irrelevant elite that does nothing for it apart from give it some glitz and a whole heck of a lot of money.

My question is do you find the vatican and hence the pope necessary?.. and why do you think he deserves respect? And no you probably cant help me... as I for you, but is it wrong to think otherwise?. Im not attacking christian religion, im not attacking the Catholic church... unless however you think the Vatican and the Pope ARE the Catholic church and therefore the christian religion, in which case I guess my views will always be considered juvenile attack...

Anyway off for the family boxing day picnic, merry Christmas for you guys in the north, catholic, atheist, pope follower or otherwise.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by BigfootNZ]

reply to post by Lillydale


Quick response:

Do you not believe in protection of the defendant as equally as that of the prosecutor? Or simply because one is accused, he therefore is guilty and should be ridiculed in the eyes of the public. For someone who may loathe the inquisition, the line of reasoning I made above would contradict that.

This document, merely protects both...

In fact if this sort of system was practiced in OUR own COURTS on such trials such as the false rape and accusations made of the Duke Lacross players then maybe innocent people would not have their lives and names ran through the mud.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Gateway]

reply to post by andy1033


I find your last comment rather shocking and disgusting to say the least. Society does not accept Phedophilia, and nor should it. It seems to me that, you think it is acceptable for these abuses to occur? That is what I find Bizzare.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Laurauk]

This document, merely protects both...

Protects BOTH Equally ? Does it address helping the party that experienced the "delict" ?

BBC News

Those who have been accused of molestation have been excommunicated or are in jail

That is poppycock and you know it. Those priests whom have resigned present even from today,tried thier dammist to hold on to thier position,and the pope helped them. So please do not try and cover this up like the catholic church have done in previous cases.

Those priests should have been ex-communicated from the beginning. When these abuses came to light, but no, they were kept within the secuirty of the Vatican. So they could so called repent. Once a child molestor always a child molestor.

And yet the pope has the cheek and the adarcity, to criticse and demonise homosexals and lesbians. Double standards dont you think.

Are you saying the Church hid or concealed evidence of this? If so the burden of proof is upon YOU.

The Pope summoned the Primate of All Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, to Rome after the Vatican was criticised for failing to respond to the Murphy inquiry.

The Murphy Commission said the Pope's ambassador to Ireland, Papal Nuncio Archbishop Giuseppe Leanza, had failed to respond to extracts of its draft report, referring to him and his office, which it had forwarded to him.

The Catholic Church did hide and conceal evidence, they denied that any abuse was taken palce what soever. When they knew well that abuse was occuring within their church run homes. Look at the abuse cases in America, Look at the abuse cases in Ireland, and else where. Are you seriously telling me, that the pope had no clue?




[edit on 25-12-2009 by Laurauk]