Pope Benedict XVI Resignation

[xaniamom]

<p>

@eastcoascrazy

I brought this thread in this direction, and it is fine if we drop this subject to avoid having the thread shut down, but isn’t it interesting that the moment a nonCatholic questions the way Catholic hospitals use religion to restrict legal, safe, standard care of nonCatholic patients who may be forced to use a Catholic hospital because it is the only one in the area, we are asked to stop questioning and shut down the thread?

I didn’t suggest it because someone is questioning Catholic hospitals, but because the thread has gone into into the realm of “inflammatory topics”. This is not the place for an abortion debate. Not to mention that posters have started with personal attacks.</p>

[MomCat2]

<p>Looks like the Pope will be hiding out in the Vatican in order to avoid prosecution:</p>

<p>Pope will have security, immunity by remaining in the Vatican<br>
[Pope</a> will have security, immunity by remaining in the Vatican | Reuters](<a href=“http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-pope-resignation-immunity-idUSBRE91E0ZI20130215]Pope”>http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/15/us-pope-resignation-immunity-idUSBRE91E0ZI20130215)
<a href=“Reuters”>quote</a> - Pope Benedict’s decision to live in the Vatican after he resigns will provide him with security and privacy. It will also offer legal protection from any attempt to prosecute him in connection with sexual abuse cases around the world, Church sources and legal experts say.</p>

<p>“His continued presence in the Vatican is necessary, otherwise he might be defenseless. He wouldn’t have his immunity, his prerogatives, his security, if he is anywhere else,” said one Vatican official, speaking on condition of anonymity.</p>

<p>“It is absolutely necessary” that he stays in the Vatican, said the source, adding that Benedict should have a “dignified existence” in his remaining years.

[/quote]
</p>

[Krlilies]

<p>

It’s been 2000 years plus of editing, yet we are supposed to seeit as gods word ignoring the fact man has twisted and turned it

</p>

<p>To correctly interpret the bible passages, one is supposed to take into account the original language and the historical background when the passage was written. For example, when Christ said, “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God,” there are 2 possible interpretations of the analogy:</p>

<p>1) In Aramaic, the word camel can also refer to a thick rope made out of camel hair which would be impossible to insert through a needle’s eye
2) During Jesus’ lifetime, there was supposedly a short door in Jerusalem called “Eye of the Needle” and the only way a camel can pass through the door is if it walks through the door on bended knees.</p>

[eastcoascrazy]

<ol>
<li><p>Who brought up abortion?</p></li>
<li><p>The Catholic hospitals that I am referring to are in the United States, not overseas. </p></li>
<li><p>The kinds of procedures and care that are restricted in Catholic hospitals in the United States include vasectomies, tubal ligations following cesarian sections, the availability of emergency contraception for rape victims, invitro fertilization, the ability of physicians to treat molar pregnancies, miscarriages, and pre-viable premature rupture of membranes.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>From the standpoint of secular obstetric ethics, physicians are obligated to provide care with respect for a woman’s autonomy, acting in her best interest at all times, and acting in the best interest of the fetus conditional on the woman’s wishes (ACOG 2005). Some ethicists make conditional exceptions requiring physicians to intervene to save the fetus’ life regardless if the woman’s wishes after the point the fetus is viable outside the womb. </p>

<p>Catholic directives come from a different ethical perspective and therefore impact and interfere with the patient-doctor relationship.</p>

[Booklady]

<p>

For example, when Christ said, “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God,” there are 2 possible interpretations of the analogy:</p>

<p>1) In Aramaic, the word camel can also refer to a thick rope made out of camel hair which would be impossible to insert through a needle’s eye
2) During Jesus’ lifetime, there was supposedly a short door in Jerusalem called “Eye of the Needle” and the only way a camel can pass through the door is if it walks through the door on bended knees.

</p>

<p>Both the above explanations have been pretty much discounted by scholars. However, one could just keep reading. In Matthew, the following verse says “With God, all things are possible.” :)</p>

<p>

A brief survey of sermons or search on the Internet reveals how many perpetuate the myth of the small gate in Jerusalem. Victorian travellers to the Holy Land even claim to have been shown it. The inaccuracy may appear harmless but it is neither good scholarship nor good exposition. The exaggerated and contrasted size is deliberate and is not an overt judgement on riches or poverty. Jesus reflects on how hard it often is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God. The riches are a distraction and hard to share if one is too attached to them. The disciples’ incredulity is that if even the rich cannot be saved, who can? But the verdict is that even the rich, not only the rich, will find it impossible to save themselves – but with God all things are possible.

[The</a> camel and the eye of the needle](<a href=“http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm]The”>http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm)</p>

[Lergnom]

<p>The issue of who follows what is playing out in big terms now. A number of pharmacists will refuse to hand out morning after pills - perhaps some in the mistaken idea it is an abortion pill - and some companies are insisting they must or be fired. Choose to work there and follow the rules or else, right? Or is it that your personal beliefs trump everything?</p>

<p>Some companies are saying they don’t want to pay for women’s health care - not limited to but certainly including contraception - because as owners they don’t believe in that. It’s the same argument in reverse: don’t like it, work somewhere else. I find it humorous I see the same people defending this example and fighting the right of a company to require adherence to a practice.</p>

[penguin369]

<p>Just reviving this thread because I’m curious: which papal candidate is most appealing to you? I’m personally cheering on the Manila Archbishop, Luis Antonio Tagle. He’s one of the younger candidates (55), is considered moderately progressive by Vatican standards, and is known to have a serious commitment to helping the poor. I’ve heard that Cardinal Odilo Scherer (Brazil) might be one of the frontrunners though, and he sounds pretty promising as well.</p>

<p>Not that I have any say in the conclave, but in today’s world, I think that the ideal Pope would be one that is connected with the people, and is more of a Vatican “outsider”.</p>

[PlantMom]

<p>How about Gianfranco Ravasi?</p>

[penguin369]

<p>I like Ravasi’s attitude and his genuine attempts to reach out to non-Christians (especially atheists) but my ideal Pope would be someone who reflects the changing face of Catholicism. As horrible as this sounds, Ravasi is an elderly Italian theologian, and I’m hoping that the Church leadership will finally begin to reflect the fact that the majority of Catholics aren’t in Europe anymore. I’d love to see Ravasi appointed as the Vatican Secretary of State or some other high powered position (sorry, I don’t know what he is right now), but I think that in this critical time for the Church, the Pope should be younger and able to withstand the rigors of the job for longer.</p>

[mini]

<p>"“His continued presence in the Vatican is necessary, otherwise he might be defenseless. He wouldn’t have his immunity, his prerogatives, his security, if he is anywhere else,” said one Vatican official, speaking on condition of anonymity."</p>

<p>Perhaps the CIA could rendition him.</p>

[spectastic]

<p>honestly, if he just took some Hgh supplements, he would feel years younger. Last I remember, Jesus didn’t say anything about Hgh supplements.</p>

[mini]

<p>Michael 8:13</p>

[momof2kids]

<p>“Vatican watcher” guy on talk radio this morning said: “they are looking for a pope that is Jesus with an MBA.” Made me smile…</p>

[cptofthehouse]

<p>It seems to me we can figure out who will be the next pope by looking to see who isn’t at risk for a scandal. They may have to pick someone outside of the priesthood, however, which would then make the field wide open.</p>

<p>Ok, mIni, I give up. what is Michael 8:13?</p>

[mini]

<p>Where Jesus talks about HGH supplements.</p>

[Seahorsesrock]

<p>With regard to bible passages and how to determine what they mean, first one needs to realize what’s even been left in or taken out of the bible. Who picked what gospels went into the different versions? </p>

<p>Men did. Editors did. Some claiming god</p>

<p>As for the stories, well, many are not originals. Bit of recycling going on and twisting and turning to fit the needs of those in power.</p>

<p>Imagine .</p>

[spectastic]

<p>Michael 8:13? Is that a book in the Book of Mormon, where Jesus preaches about nutritional supplements and expensive sneakers? </p>

<hr>

<p>btw. And this one is for the record… One thing I do remember from relilvious class is that genesis in the Bible has some key correlations to an ancient text called the babylonian genesis. There was also a similar ancient text that’s remarkably similar to baby moses floating in the river. I think both of these non-blibical texts predate the bible the time each story was supposedly written, so it’s easy to argue that the ‘Pentateuch’ is just a collection of a bunch of ancient tales.</p>

<p>And I agree, as far as bible passages, it’s all about who wrote it, and why he wrote it. for instance, some people would argue that the Jews wrote the part about Abraham and the promise land, because it gives them entitlement over a huge chunk of land from a supposedly greater authority. On the other hand, traditional christian viewpoint would simply say “God wrote it, you fool.”</p>

<p>In additional to who and why, there is also different versions of the bible. Everything from King James to the Good News…</p>

<p>I personally think it’s totally possible that Jesus was an alien.</p>

[Deborah_T]

<p>Re sneakers and individuals who don’t realize some people would like to help others avoid getting injured and also don’t want to get injured themselves:</p>

<p>Jealousy does not become you. </p>

<p>Couldn’t tell you the source and not taking the time to research it.</p>

[mini]

<p>" some people would argue that the Jews wrote the part about Abraham and the promise land, because it gives them entitlement over a huge chunk of land from a supposedly greater authority. On the other hand, traditional christian viewpoint would simply say “God wrote it, you fool.”</p>

<p>In either case, it is clear from the story of Jacob and Esau that the land in Israel was STOLEN from its rightful owner, and that the descendants of jacob have no reasonable claim upon it.</p>

[Deborah_T]

<p>There must be forums to discuss politics. Probably quite a few, I imagine.</p>