Germans Prefer Dalai Lama to Pope Benedict, Says Study

  • Thread starter Thread starter RobDH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RobDH

Guest
“Germans like the Dalai Lama more than they do their native-born Pope Benedict XVI, according to a survey published on Saturday.”

dw-world.de

I wonder if this survey was taken before, or after, the recent Papal documents concerning the TLM and other “controversial” topics.

If you scroll down the article page, you’ll see another poll where you can express your opinion concerning Benedict vs. the Dalai Lama.
 
It’s never been a popular message to pick up your cross and follow Jesus, to not sin when your intellect is already darkened by sin. Modern society preaches truth is subjective and sexuality is for selfish ends. The Pope has the responsibility to proclaim the truth, all of it, e.g. the Church alone of institutios has the fullness of the truth.
 
First of all, the concept of “Germany” is only a little over one hundred years old. There are extreme differences between regions and states in Germany, much more so than in the United States. In the southern part of Germany, Catholics are anywhere from 40% to 100% of the population - Bavaria, where Pope Benedict is from, is about 70% Catholic; the most populous diocese is Hamburg, at about 6 million, and it is less than 7% Catholic. By and far, “Germany” is a Protestant/atheist country, with a stronghold of Catholicism in the South. For the most part Bavarians don’t like other Germans, and the other Germans don’t like Bavarians. As a matter of fact, the only state to vote down the German constitution after WWII was Bavaria (but it was imposed upon Bavaria anyhow). Also, Bavaria has been ruled by the Christian Social Union (the offshoot of older Catholic parties in pre-WWII Germany) since 1945, and the CSU does not even bother to operate outside of semi-autonomous Bavaria.
 
I’d wager it’s because the majority of said voters don’t really know what the Dali Lama is all about. With the Catholic Church, most of the west seems to have the knowledge we’re against what many of their societies teach as undeniable rights. With Buddhism, it’s such a minority in the scheme of things that many are unaware of it’s teachings.

Of course, maybe they just prefer Buddhist wisdom. Eastern teachings are all the rage today. Even if our holy Father may be out of esteem, at least he heads an organization with the fullness of truth. That’s more than enough for me.
 
We shouldn’t be surprised. After all, the crowd preferred Barrabas over Jesus. Why should His vicar be any different?
 
Another illustration of the gross ignorance of many of the “better educated”. They prefer the Dalai Lama to the Pope “to provide advice on how to live”? Maybe they should look up the Dalai Lama’s advice on such topics as homosexuality, abortion, etc. : very similar to the advice given by the Pope, which I’m guessing is the reason most of these “educated” people reject him.

Buddhism the “most peaceful religion”? Tell that to the thousands in Burma, Sri Lanka etc, who are currently being tortured and murdered with the blessing of, and sometimes even at the direction and insistence of, Buddhist “monks”, because they refuse to embrace Buddhism.
 
Petergee said:
Buddhism the “most peaceful religion”? Tell that to the thousands in Burma, Sri Lanka etc, who are currently being tortured and murdered with the blessing of, and sometimes even at the direction and insistence of, Buddhist “monks”, because they refuse to embrace Buddhism.
Click to expand...
Must be because Buddhism is depicted as pacifist, etc etc.

But even so, here in Japan, there were so-called warrior monks (Sōhei-僧兵) in the Middle Ages who fought in political wars between different temples, between Buddhist sub-sects and over imperial appointments to the top temple positions.They got caught in the various civil wars of the Kamakura Era and later, held considerable power that various Daimyos either collaborated with them or sought to destroy them.

The time of the Sohei were finally put to an end in the beginning of the 17th Century when Tokugawa Ieyasu finally defeated the last of his enemies and took control of the country in 1603.
 
patrick457 said:
Must be because Buddhism is depicted as pacifist, etc etc.
Click to expand...
Yep, I must admit that the Buddhists’ PR leaves the Catholics’ feeble attempts at PR for dead. I’ve even heard militant atheists say “I hate all religions… oh except for the Buddhists, they’re OK.” In fact Christianity has a far stronger pacifist streak than Buddhism.
 
I know people in Frankfurt and Bremerhaven and they are relatevists to the nth degree.
 
Michael_C said:
I know people in Frankfurt and Bremerhaven and they are relatevists to the nth degree.
Click to expand...
“relatevists” and relatevism is what Buddhism represents, it is an “intellectual” pholisopohy that allows one to follow any number of paths and supposes to leave one and others alone to follow thier consciences - it is a philosophy that doesn’t have any ‘set’ standards or morality codes but a variety understandings/truths to pick from. You can be a ‘good’ Buddhist by just letting others do as they please without worrying about changing yourself. (don’t get me wrong there are many upstanding Buddhist). In Buddhism all change in oneself you do it on your own, by searching within oneself, your benchmark is yourself.

The Church challenges one to change the world by changing oneselves, but if you are unwilling to change yourself then you see the Church as oppressive to pointing toward ideas of right and wrong in areas of morals - otherwise the truth. (don’t get me wrong there are many imperfect Chritians, in fact that is requirement for memebership, 1Tim 1:15* A faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief*.) In order to change oneself in the Churches view you must not only understand your need to change but realize for change you are dependent on grace only found in faith and given of God. Your are responsible for the bad you do, but dependant on God to change.

In Buddhism there is no concept of sin, so it is relative only to your own concept what is needed to be good. A standard easy to meet.
 
RobDH said:
“Germans like the Dalai Lama more than they do their native-born Pope Benedict XVI, according to a survey published on Saturday.”
Click to expand...
I’m not sure whether that’s a bad thing or a good thing…to tell you the truth I regard that as a compliment to the Holy Father. If a thoroughly secularized country hates him, he must be doing something right.
 
Bennie_P said:
“relatevists” and relatevism is what Buddhism represents, it is an “intellectual” pholisopohy that allows one to follow any number of paths and supposes to leave one and others alone to follow thier consciences - it is a philosophy that doesn’t have any ‘set’ standards or morality codes but a variety understandings/truths to pick from. You can be a ‘good’ Buddhist by just letting others do as they please without worrying about changing yourself. (don’t get me wrong there are many upstanding Buddhist). In Buddhism all change in oneself you do it on your own, by searching within oneself, your benchmark is yourself.

…

In Buddhism there is no concept of sin, so it is relative only to your own concept what is needed to be good. A standard easy to meet.
Click to expand...
I think you’re being a bit tough on Buddhism. What you describe may be what some Western moral relativists like to thinkthat Buddhism teaches; but in fact Buddhism does teach quite a strict, if imperfect, moral code of behaviour. It’s true that Buddhism has no concept of sin in its deepest and most essential sense, of an offence against God requiring God’s mercy and salvation; but Buddhism does not support the idea that there is no objective right and wrong.
 
HI friends,

I’m a Buddhist & when I was searching the web for the “Germans Prefer Dalai Lama…” article I saw this link … & thought I should see what is the response of the catholic community…

So i see that there is lot of hot air towards Buddhists & Buddhism… any way … I feel that nothing I say here will make a difference … Buddhist teachings say that when one clings to a belief as much as to reject all ideas against it & reject all other teachings… that person is called having “Thamba”(in Pali language[language of the Buddha])… that is like a strong stick buried firmly in the ground… so as not to be moved by any thing…!!!

So my friends…
I just want you to listen if you have the time to some audios of a Buddhist monk… He is a coaction born & raised in Europe but who was fascinated by Buddhist teachings & became a monk in his younger days….

You will find many topics in this page & in the consecutive pages …. I think you will like to listen to what he has to say about Buddhist view on sexuality, homosexuality, euthanasia,… etc

bswa.org/modules/mydownloads/viewcat.php?cid=4

Bye for now…

May all beings be well and happy

Ramindu
 
Well lets think of this in another way. THink about this; Benedict has only been the pope for the past 3 to 4 years compared to his Buddhist conterpart who has hold his titular religious position for much longer. Lets face it people are more familar with Dalai Lama than they are with Benedict. I bet if that same study were conducting in Poland with Benedict’s predecssor vs the current Dalai Lama it would be different.
 
Sagefrakrobatik said:
Well lets think of this in another way. THink about this; Benedict has only been the pope for the past 3 to 4 years compared to his Buddhist conterpart who has hold his titular religious position for much longer. Lets face it people are more familar with Dalai Lama than they are with Benedict. I bet if that same study were conducting in Poland with Benedict’s predecssor vs the current Dalai Lama it would be different.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget about image. JPII was very charismatic, photogenic. BXVI, well, not so much.😃
 
Ahimsa said:
Don’t forget about image. JPII was very charismatic, photogenic. BXVI, well, not so much.😃
Click to expand...
Interestingly, Pope Benedict’s general audiences draw more people then John Paul II.

JP2 used his audiences as a photo-op, but Benedict actualy speaks and teaches during his. People went to see John Paul II, they go to hear Benedict XVI.
 
Caesar said:
Interestingly, Pope Benedict’s general audiences draw more people then John Paul II.

JP2 used his audiences as a photo-op, but Benedict actualy speaks and teaches during his. People went to see John Paul II, they go to hear Benedict XVI.
Click to expand...
That’s rude Caesar. I love our new pope, but it is unfounded and uncharitable to insinuate that the previous pope “used his audiences as photo-ops.” Also, he taught quite a bit while he was pope.
 
PJPII used his audiences to teach also. The Theology of the Body came from 5 years worth of Wednesday audiences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top