If the vatican was in nyc

  • Thread starter Thread starter osddso
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

osddso

Guest
i read that the Pope is against the war on terror. i read that he is also against the war in iraq. my logic is this…now, going with what i read, IF it is true, and the Pope is against the war in iraq and on terror would his stance be different if the vatican was located in nyc instead of italy?

i have friends in the marines, and i tried joining but i have too many tattoos (cant be tattooed above the neck line or below the sleeve line and im tattooed from under my chin to my finger tips). they all get so offended because all the news shows is bad stuff. they dont show the marines handing out blankets, pillows, supplies so these people can live and be free. all the good they are doing. i dont want to get attacked for asking this, but the Pope does realize that we help them over there. we give those who renounce evil supplies be as comfertable as possible…

again this is all just my logic and thought. i am not perfect. i dont mean to be judgemental at all.
 
Sad as it seems, I think the Pope gets the leftist press coverage of the situation. Europe has become so socialist and is inundated with muslims, I wouldn’t be surprised if he was given false information.
 
DihydrogenOxide said:
Sad as it seems, I think the Pope gets the leftist press coverage of the situation. Europe has become so socialist and is inundated with muslims, I wouldn’t be surprised if he was given false information.
Click to expand...
Yes, tis well known one can’t move over here with the huge press of Muslims and socialists in the streets. And, of course, all Popes have a lifetime subscription to Avanti. 😛
 
DihydrogenOxide said:
Europe has become so socialist and is inundated with muslims, I wouldn’t be surprised if he was given false information.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately this is so true. How sad it is too, for a continent that was once so rich in faith, turn to this.
 
Could it be the Holy Father is against the war on terror and the war in Iraq, but not against individuals caught up in it?

If Christ can protect His truth that comes from His Church, can’t Christ protect how the leader’s of the Church view world events?

Because you do not agree with the Holy Father is no reason to ‘speculate’ on how he arrives at his decisions, in my honest opinion.
 
I think the pope has to appear neutral. We’re a good scapegoat. Critcism of us is safe. I imagine he doesn’t want to appear to take sides and irritate anyone. Except us, of course.

Just the same, I wish he would be quiet about it. He is a pacifist European, who hasn’t had his papal apartments and own churches blown to bits. It may be a different story if the Vatican is ever threatened and attacked.
 
Ceil-1 said:
I think the pope has to appear neutral. We’re a good scapegoat. Critcism of us is safe. I imagine he doesn’t want to appear to take sides and irritate anyone. Except us, of course.

Just the same, I wish he would be quiet about it. He is a pacifist European, who hasn’t had his papal apartments and own churches blown to bits. It may be a different story if the Vatican is ever threatened and attacked.
Click to expand...
So you don’t think the Vicar of Christ can feel compassion for those attacked without a direct attack upon him or where he lives?

:tsktsk:
 
I see none of you has seen fit to pose the actual words of our Pope upon which OP bases his skewed analysis. If you would like to debate the Pope’s actual statements on the topic, please post a link to them. Otherwise, what in the blazes are you babbling about? “I think the Pope says so and so and I don’t like it.” that is a legitimate discussion?
 
Ceil-1 said:
Could anyone live up to your standards, PuzzleAnnie?
Click to expand...
I fully agree with Puzzleannie.
Any claims/assertions should be supported by the source document where we can read what the Pope actually said and then we can have a debate.
 
Would the Pope be against the war on terror if terrorists attacked the Vatican? I would assume so.
 
im not being mean against the Pope. im not saying “who is he to say…”

im just saying.

because ill tell you right now, my friends in the marines (i tried joining, my whole family were marines, all the generations except 2 that were in the army, i was rejected because i have too many tattoos) do a lot of good over there. they give those in need supplies. they hand out blankets, they make sure that those who are hungry get food. they make sure food and life supplies and medicine are handed out to those who need it. you drop off supplies and the local warlords or terrorist leaders will steal it all and kill whoever is in their way.

its hard. i know. im not trying to speculate. im just trying to understand. i mean i know if the Pope is for the war, its gonna look he is only on the basis of a bitter rivalry dating back to the crusades.
 
Pope Benedict, like Pope John Paul II before him, is against war. War doesn’t kill just the belligerents but also (and mostly) it is the innocent, non-fighting civilians who are the largest victims of hostilities. The Pope is not concerned about the politics behind the actions; his role, as the Servant of the Servants of Christ, is for the least of his brethren, the innocent. For this reason, the pope should be against war.

Would you really trust, as bishop and pope, a man who advocated war of one nation against another?
 
One could also equally ask, are the people cosest to such a situation always in the best position to make decisions and judgements about it?

Also, those who commented that Europe was too socialist. Has it ever occurred to you that by the same logic Catholics from outside of America dismiss American Catholic opinion because it is too capitalistic, or militaristic, or whatever? Political factions never or very rarely identify completely with a Christian viewpoint, which is what the Vatican is trying to uphold.

I think too, we could also safely say the Pope is against terrorism. But that is not an invalid view because he has likely never been in a position where becoming a terrorist seems like a good idea.

The fact that marines, and others, involved in the war on terror do good things is hardly the main point in the War on Terror. That is not actually why they were sent there - there are lots of other ways to provide humanitarian aid if that were the whole point. What the Pope comments on is a military operation, and should be understood as such.
 
osddso said:
im not being mean against the Pope. im not saying “who is he to say…”
Click to expand...
OK, “Who is he to say…”
What exactly?

What exaclty has the Pope said that there are objections to?
osddso said:
its hard. i know. im not trying to speculate. im just trying to understand.
Click to expand...
Agreed. So let us look at what exactly the Pope has said rather then base argument and objection on rumor and innuendo.
 
But the Catholic Church of America’s official position on terrorists from Latin America (illegal immigrants) is to clothe them, feed them, give up your job to them, let their gangs take over your communities,let all Americans learn spanish to appease them, etc.

It is their position that the United States of America and it’s citizens exist solely to take care of all the creatures from Latin American countries regardless of how they will destroy the world once they take over this superpower.

It is their position to keep the United States of America and its people ignorant of all the negative aspects of a Latin American culture by portraying all illegal immigrants as poor, humble, hard wording, religious, honest,…everything that Americas aren’t.

Basically, they insult the intelligence of the average American with this potrayal and expect every American Catholic to sacrifice himself and his family to the Latin American takeover of the United States.
 
MumboJumbo said:
But the Catholic Church of America’s official position on terrorists from Latin America (illegal immigrants) is to clothe them, feed them, give up your job to them, let their gangs take over your communities,let all Americans learn spanish to appease them, etc.

It is their position that the United States of America and it’s citizens exist solely to take care of all the creatures from Latin American countries regardless of how they will destroy the world once they take over this superpower.

It is their position to keep the United States of America and its people ignorant of all the negative aspects of a Latin American culture by portraying all illegal immigrants as poor, humble, hard wording, religious, honest,…everything that Americas aren’t.

Basically, they insult the intelligence of the average American with this potrayal and expect every American Catholic to sacrifice himself and his family to the Latin American takeover of the United States.
Click to expand...
Whoa! This is off-topic but I must respond. You’d better cite where the “Catholic Church of America” (I assume you mean the USCCB?) says that we have to give up our jobs for Latin Americans, let the gangs take over our communities, hide all negative aspects, etc. Calling illegal immigrants terrorists is really extreme, inaccurate, and offensive. And aren’t we supposed to feed and clothe the poor? Didn’t Jesus talk about that?

Destroy the world? Come on, seriously? And when you say “creatures from Latin American countries” I really hope you are referring to pets, coyotes, etc. Because if you are calling the people “creatures” that’s, not to throw the word around lightly, racism pure and simple.
 
MumboJumbo said:
…
Click to expand...
Having seen your performance in other threads, I am concerned your intent here is to derail the thread into another foreigner bashing thread.

Guys, let’s keep this on track.
What exaclty has the Pope stated concerning the war on terror that is objectionable?
 
Here is what Pope Benedict has had to say on the issue (exact quotes are in bold):

As a Cardinal, the new pope was a staunch critic of the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. On one occasion before the war, he was asked whether it would be just. “Certainly not,” he said, and explained that the situation led him to conclude that “the damage would be greater than the values one hopes to save.”

“All I can do is invite you to read the Catechism, and the conclusion seems obvious to me…” The conclusion is one he gave many times: “the concept of preventive war does not appear in The Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

Even after the war, Cardinal Ratzinger did not cease criticism of U.S. violence and imperialism: “it was right to resist the war and its threats of destruction…It should never be the responsibility of just one nation to make decisions for the world.”

Yet perhaps the most important insight of Ratzinger came during a press conference on May 2, 2003. After suggesting that perhaps it would be necessary to revise the Catechism section on just war (perhaps because it had been used by George Weigel and others to endorse a war the Church opposed), Ratzinger offered a deep insight that included but went beyond the issue of war Iraq:

“There were not sufficient reasons to unleash a war against Iraq. To say nothing of the fact that, given the new weapons that make possible destructions that go beyond the combatant groups, today we should be asking ourselves if it is still licit to admit the very existence of a ‘just war’.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top