Is Pope Francis Still Sneaking Out at Night to Feed and Give Money to the Poor?

reject
reply to post by BomSquad

 

Its not so secret though, is it?

In fact, they've even made a bigger deal out of it than if it had been done like other church functions.

So much for not honoring the giver, huh.

Too much drama.

The THEY in this case is the media...not the Vatican or the Pope or his spokesman.

In today's age of paparazzi journalism, do you think anyone in the public eye can keep a secret for long? It doesn't mean you don't try to keep the secret, but it always comes out in the end.

reply to post by reject

Its not so secret though, is it?

In fact, they've even made a bigger deal out of it than if it had been done like other church functions.

What are you talking about?

This was a media interview with a guy at the Vatican whose job it is to give money to poor people on a personal basis, the interviewer asked if the Pope tagged along with him, and the guy said "Next question!"

How is that "making a bigger deal out of it"?

charles1952
reply to post by ooMoo

 

Dear ooMoo,

That's really the fundamental question isn't it? Who is to be worshiped? God or Man. Feel free to choose either one. You don't want to be with God eternally? Fine, you don't have to be. I don't actually recommend the alternative, but it's your call. He can't force you to choose. You've got time yet. At least, I suppose you do. We never really know, do we?

Well, best of luck to you. I think I'll toss up a prayer for you tonight.

With respect,
Charles1952

I'm not sure why you think any God (or Man for that matter) needs or has to be worshiped? But I assume you do so because someone told you to or you have read it? I take it you have had no direct correspondence (communication in both directions) with any God in order for your to come up with your views? I would love to hear about them if you have.

You believe what you believe for whatever reason, but don't pretend that you actually know what happens before or after we die. There is no possible way for you (or anyone else for that matter) to know. So stop trying to convince us that you do know. You have a view or an opinion based upon what other people have told you, but that's it.

Thank you for the offer to pray for me, but I would recommend that you spend your time and energy praying for other people who are in more need of divine intervention than myself. Perhaps patients in the Children's Hospital may be a good starting point.

reply to post by ooMoo

Dear ooMoo,

I'm not sure why you think any God (or Man for that matter) needs or has to be worshiped?

God doesn't have to be. And no man is to be.

Suppose you take a physicist to see the ocean for the first time in his life. He looks over it as the sun is setting, seems to be thinking deeply, then says "You know, I bet there's at least 16 septillion teaspoons of cold water mixed with various salts and minerals out there."

Or a contractor on his first sight of the Sistine chapel might say "Well, with about a year, and this list of supplies, I could probably do it for you, if I don't run into labor troubles."

Here, while they may have their facts correct, I am perfectly comfortable in saying that their reactions are wrong. Not a matter of taste, they are wrong.

It's not that God has to be worshiped, He doesn't need anything at all. We're the ones that have to get our reactions right, that's what worship is about.

But I assume you do so because someone told you to or you have read it?

Please forgive me for offering up another example. My understanding is that golfers are told to keep their heads down during the swing, or something bad will happen to the flight of the ball. The novice golfer goes out, tries a lot of things, and discovers, "He was right, lift my head makes the ball go all wonky." Does he keep his head down in the future because someone told him? Or, because he worked it out for himself?

You're right, it's been told to me, I've read it, and I've worked it out for myself.

I take it you have had no direct correspondence (communication in both directions) with any God in order for your to come up with your views? I would love to hear about them if you have.

That's a couple of interesting statements. You've packed a lot into them.

You know of course, that throughout history there have been Christians who claim to have heard God's voice and spoken to Him. Dozens, hundreds, of such episodes have been reported, even to modern times. It's not a dead certain bet that I haven't. Which brings us to your next comment, that you would love to hear about them.

What were you thinking when you wrote that? Were you expressing complete disbelief that such a thing could happen? Were you saying, "If I hear one reasonable story, I'll convert right away?" What would you're reaction be if I said I had talked with God? Ridicule and mockery? It happens all the time. In short, forgive me, but why should I answer that question? I don't believe you're seriously asking.

You believe what you believe for whatever reason, but don't pretend that you actually know what happens before or after we die. There is no possible way for you (or anyone else for that matter) to know. So stop trying to convince us that you do know.

I'm surprised you would say that. I've taken great pains in this thread, and many others, to make clear that I do not know what happens after death. I know what I believe happens. I am not trying to convince you, or anyone, I know.

I would recommend that you spend your time and energy praying for other people who are in more need of divine intervention than myself. Perhaps patients in the Children's Hospital may be a good starting point.

Thank you. That is a wonderful idea. They had slipped my mind.

I must say that I'm a little surprised that you agree with me. Spending time and energy praying for others is a good thing, you're right.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by CosmicDude

Out at Night

I like this Pope

illuminnaughty
He would better help the poor by stripping all the gold out of the churches and give it to the people. Religious people sneaking about at night to help people? lol sneaking about in the dark. hmmmm

Maybe he just wanted to wash some more convict feet without all the paparazzi!
Convicts got dirty feets, need washing. Hard to concentrate in the light of day, or with flashbulbs poppin'. Gotta wash dem feets!

The only man who can help the dirty convict feets is that guy from Brazil, oops, I mean Argentina. You know, Juan Peron. I mean Pope Francis. Sorry.

They're really trying hard to make this Pope "cool". Oooh, he was a nightclub bouncer! Hahahahaha!! Will this bring themasses back to the Church?

Maybe next photo op he'll be wearing a leather jacket. Or - or -! a fedora!!! Maybe switch out the Pope-mobile for a Harley? I want to see the Pope Hollywood San Francisco tooling around on a motorcycle with a rainbow flag, smoking a joint. Then I'll think about going to Church.

Fonz it up, Francis! You're winning them over!!!!


(Look in my eyes, what do you see?
The cult of personality...)

reply to post by rawheroine


He was a night club bouncer? Thats nothing hes just a nobody the last one was a Hitler youth. God sure works in mysterious ways. Turned a nazi into a good man. Who covered up for child rapists and moved them to new churchs when ever they were caught. Didnt the vatican run an escape route for thousands of nazis after the war and sent them to south America? Francis is from were? South America? I think god had best start checking the CVs of some of the people he has running the show down here on Earth. Or does he not care? Maybe its one of his famous tests of faith? Like the time he wanted some one to kill his son ? I dont know what to believe as so many of them out right liars and hang around with child rapists nazis and such .

Is there an 'ignore' function on ATS?

The last few posts are awash in idiocy and instead of feeding the trolls it might be more productive to just remove their posts entirely from what I view.

Thanks,

Eric

EricD
Is there an 'ignore' function on ATS?

The last few posts are awash in idiocy and instead of feeding the trolls it might be more productive to just remove their posts entirely from what I view.

No, they took that functionality away in 2010. Just have to manually ignore them, not responding to trolls is the best way to drive them away.

Vatican refuses to share sex abuse investigations with UN Panel

Quote:
Vatican refuses to share sex abuse investigations with U.N. panel

ROME Tue Dec 3, 2013 9:04pm EST
2 Comments

inShare1
Share this
Email
Print

Pope Francis waves as he leads the Angelus prayer from the window of the Apostolic Palace in Saint Peter's Square at the Vatican December 1, 2013. REUTERS/Alessandro Bianchi

Pope Francis waves as he leads the Angelus prayer from the window of the Apostolic Palace in Saint Peter's Square at the Vatican December 1, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Alessandro Bianchi

(Reuters) - The Vatican refused to provide a United Nations rights panel with information on the Church's internal investigations into the sexual abuse of children by clergy, saying on Tuesday that its policy was to keep such cases confidential.

In response to a series of tough questions posed by the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Holy See said it would not release information on its internal investigations into abuse cases unless required to do so by a request from a state or government to cooperate in legal proceedings.

The response of the Holy See, which will be directly questioned by the panel in January 2014, will be closely watched as it tries to draw a line under financial scandals and abuse by priests that have damaged the standing of the Roman Catholic Church around the world.

Since becoming the first non-European pontiff in 1,300 years, Pope Francis has largely succeeded in changing the subject after the resignation of Benedict XVI in February.

The questions from the panel aimed to assess the Church's adherence to the 1990 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, a treaty guaranteeing a full range of human rights for children which the Holy See has signed.

In its response the Vatican said internal disciplinary proceedings "are not open to the public" in order to protect "witnesses, the accused and the integrity of the Church process", but said this should not discourage victims from reporting crimes to state authorities.

However, it said state laws, including the obligation to report crimes, must be respected.

The Holy See noted it was "deeply saddened by the scourge of sexual abuse" and emphasized that it had changed the requirements for admitting candidates for priesthood, updated canon law, and asked bishops' conferences to draw up guidelines to combat abuse.

But it indicated the Vatican could not be held responsible for the behavior of institutions or individual Catholics around the world and said local bishops had the responsibility of ensuring children were protected.

"The Holy See does not exercise effective control over the local activities of Catholic institutions around the world," the response read, indicating the Catholic Church's central administration could only be held accountable for events within the Vatican City State.

The U.S.-based advocacy group the Center for Constitutional Rights criticized the responses as too vague.

"In claiming it only bears responsibility for what happens inside Vatican City and blaming the lack of prevention ... on local governments, the Holy See has taken one of its most explicitly disingenuous and misleading positions on the issue to date," the rights group said in a statement.

(Reporting by Naomi O'Leary; editing by Christopher Wilson)

So here he is this great man, refusing to share his info on the paedophiles within the church.

reply to post by illuminnaughty

Actually, he's refusing to share it with the UN, while agreeing to abide by the laws of the various states. The UN is not a state with laws and courts in the same way a nation is.

By the way, what is the effect if he doesn't give it to the UN? Certainly it doesn't affect the abuse law suits which are continuing. Much information has already been made public through various countries' legal systems.

Incidentally, what does that have to do with the topic of the Pope giving assistance to the poor confidentially?