Monday, May 02, 2005
Pope, continued
Johnathan - This is a continuation of all of the comments posted on this thread.
Okay... first of all, try paying attention to my original argument (I've reposted it as the first comment under this post). Let's take a look at why I called her ignorant, shall we?
Obviously, you've read her original post. She claimed that Catholics looked to the Pope as some sort of idol. I argued that this simply isn't true. Catholics look to the Pope as an inspiration and an example of good things to do in life, just as any other faith would look to their pastors/preachers for the same thing. Just as you may not agree with everything your minister teaches you, there are things most Catholics don't agree with that the Pope/cardinals/bishops/priests teach. This is especially true here in America. There were other things posted (i.e. the Pope being a problem in society, Catholics being less faithfull than other denominations, etc.) that I also refuted with evidence. So AGAIN (since you missed it in my previous comment), I only called her "ignorant" because she presented her argument as if it were fact WHEN IT IS NOT. I called her "ignorant" because she did not ask questions, but rather made false accusations. That, my anonymous friend, is uninformed and therefore ignorance. Don't believe me? Look it up.
Next... I'm on a high horse? How is that? Because I apologized numerous times for possibly causing any offense? Because I tried to stay informative rather than confrontational (and even offered to answer any questions anyone might have)? I even apologized for getting a little confrontational... But if you were accused of believing in things that you didn't actually believe in, wouldn't you get a little angry and defensive? Even so, I still apologized for it and explained my reasoning. Am I on a high horse because, in my first argument, I pointed out that all religions have their problems (not just Catholicism)? Am I on a high horse because I THANKED her for taking the time to read my argument? Or am I simply on a high horse because I called her "ignorant"? If that's the case, then anonymous, you need to re-read the first (main) paragraph of this post and my previous comments (and pay special attention to the apologies, this time).
Now on to your question. I agree; men do not have the power to judge and therefore do not have any real say over who's truly holy and who's not (this is even true when considering the Pope's holiness... I realize that in my first argument, I said that the Pope's actions determine his holiness... But I also pointed out that I believe it is God's place to decide and not mine; God will look upon the Pope's actions and faith and decide whether or not he was truly holy or not). I believe Saints are designated to be examples for how to live good, moral lives. Many Saints were martyrs. What better way to go out than to go out defending your faith to death? No, they were not infallible; they were still human... but I'm pretty sure there is something to be said for what can be learned by emulating their lives (or at least trying to). The Church is just saying, "Hey, look at these guys... they had good things to say or did great things... let's try to follow their example."
Could you do me a favor and inform me of what verse it is you're referring to about all Christians being God's saints? I'm not saying you're wrong on that; I'd just like to know where it is (because it's a big book and I don't have time to dig for it right now, haha).
And as always, sorry for any offense taken. Don't ignore the entire argument just because I said one thing you didn't like, though. ¶ 11:16 PM
Okay... first of all, try paying attention to my original argument (I've reposted it as the first comment under this post). Let's take a look at why I called her ignorant, shall we?
Obviously, you've read her original post. She claimed that Catholics looked to the Pope as some sort of idol. I argued that this simply isn't true. Catholics look to the Pope as an inspiration and an example of good things to do in life, just as any other faith would look to their pastors/preachers for the same thing. Just as you may not agree with everything your minister teaches you, there are things most Catholics don't agree with that the Pope/cardinals/bishops/priests teach. This is especially true here in America. There were other things posted (i.e. the Pope being a problem in society, Catholics being less faithfull than other denominations, etc.) that I also refuted with evidence. So AGAIN (since you missed it in my previous comment), I only called her "ignorant" because she presented her argument as if it were fact WHEN IT IS NOT. I called her "ignorant" because she did not ask questions, but rather made false accusations. That, my anonymous friend, is uninformed and therefore ignorance. Don't believe me? Look it up.
Next... I'm on a high horse? How is that? Because I apologized numerous times for possibly causing any offense? Because I tried to stay informative rather than confrontational (and even offered to answer any questions anyone might have)? I even apologized for getting a little confrontational... But if you were accused of believing in things that you didn't actually believe in, wouldn't you get a little angry and defensive? Even so, I still apologized for it and explained my reasoning. Am I on a high horse because, in my first argument, I pointed out that all religions have their problems (not just Catholicism)? Am I on a high horse because I THANKED her for taking the time to read my argument? Or am I simply on a high horse because I called her "ignorant"? If that's the case, then anonymous, you need to re-read the first (main) paragraph of this post and my previous comments (and pay special attention to the apologies, this time).
Now on to your question. I agree; men do not have the power to judge and therefore do not have any real say over who's truly holy and who's not (this is even true when considering the Pope's holiness... I realize that in my first argument, I said that the Pope's actions determine his holiness... But I also pointed out that I believe it is God's place to decide and not mine; God will look upon the Pope's actions and faith and decide whether or not he was truly holy or not). I believe Saints are designated to be examples for how to live good, moral lives. Many Saints were martyrs. What better way to go out than to go out defending your faith to death? No, they were not infallible; they were still human... but I'm pretty sure there is something to be said for what can be learned by emulating their lives (or at least trying to). The Church is just saying, "Hey, look at these guys... they had good things to say or did great things... let's try to follow their example."
Could you do me a favor and inform me of what verse it is you're referring to about all Christians being God's saints? I'm not saying you're wrong on that; I'd just like to know where it is (because it's a big book and I don't have time to dig for it right now, haha).
And as always, sorry for any offense taken. Don't ignore the entire argument just because I said one thing you didn't like, though. ¶ 11:16 PM
Comments:
<< Home
NOTE: THIS IS MY ORIGINAL ARGUMENT FOR THE THREAD CONCERNING THE COMMENTS MADE ABOUT THE POPE, WHICH HAS BEEN DELETED AND STARTED ANEW here.
I haven't been on in a while, so I didn't see this discussion. So thanks to a friend for pointing it out to me. I, being Catholic, can maybe enlighten you guys on your grey areas and answer some of your questions (even though they weren't really questions... more like accusations... but whatever).
First of all, the idea of the Pope being an idol is just silly, I think. The Catholic Church and it's followers believe in no such thing. As Victor said, he's simply an emmisary of God, just like any other pastor or priest. Second, no, his position does not make him Holy. His acts do (though I don't know that it's really our place to judge his holiness... that's God's). The reason so many people mourned for the loss of the Pope is because of the many many MANY things he did for the world. He didn't just show compassion for Catholics; he showed compassion for EVERYONE. He helped relations with Islam and Protestants and just about everyone. His teachings to the WORLD involved peace. If you didn't catch it in the news, leaders from other religions mourned his death, as well. Members of many faiths came to give their last respects in the week of his funeral and attended his funeral. So what if you don't agree with all of his interpretations? You can't deny that he strived for peace among all mankind. People didn't mourn simply because he was Pope; they mourned because the world had lost one of the biggest seekers of *true* peace it had seen in a long, long time.
Next, John Paul II was not "merely" the leader of the Catholic Church. As I said before, he spread his good will to ALL people, regardless of faith. And when you're in a position as great as "Pope," you tend to get a lot more media coverage and can therefore be an example to a greater number of people. I don't think he was trying to influence us all with his interpretations of Scripture (well, he may have been influencing Catholics, but not all faiths); I think he was trying to influence us with his example of peace and tolerance :P
The Pope being the problem in society? Yeah, maybe in the middle-ages/Renaissance. But again, I don't know if you caught it in the news years ago, but John Paul II *formally apologized* for the past corruption that exsisted in the Catholic Church. If that's not a sign that those problems have been recognized and stopped, then I don't know what is. Does the Pope still sit up in his room and go to war against infidels in the Middle East? No... he teaches peace, remember? But our Protestant President has claimed to be fighting in the name of Christianity. Does the Pope still label people "heretics" and order them to be burned at the stake? No... but members of ALL religions are guilty of discriminating against those who do not believe the same way they do. As far as "screwing people over because they're greedy," again, that's not just limited to Catholic churches... I know many Protestant ones who take advantage of their parishioners and gorge them (and come on... Islam is a religion that promotes wealth). The fact of the matter is, it is unfair to make accusations like that about the Catholic church when we are trying to make ammends for the corruptions of our past... ESPECIALLY when the problem has spread to many other denominations. (And if you want to go on about the sex scandals with Priests, I'll be quick to point out that the only reason THAT was blown out of proportion was for the same reason the Clinton scandal was blown out of proportion: media loves dirt, especially on big targets, such as Catholicism and the President. I'm willing to bet that there are many Protestant pastors and preachers of other religions who've commited sex scandals with their parishioners... it's just the media doesn't care about small town folk and only wants to spend time focusing on the big fish.)
As far as Catholicism not believing in faith as being personal... I don't know what Catholics you've been talking to, but religion is personal no matter what your faith is. Everything I believe in has had a lot of deep thought and consideration poured into it... So assuming that I (or any other Catholic) just believe things because the Pope tells me to isn't a very wise assumption. Preachers interpret Scripture for you every time you go to church, so why can't the Pope/Cardinals/Bishops/Monks/Priests? Just because someone helps you to understand the Scripture a little better doesn't all of a sudden render it "unpersonal." There are things that I don't 100% agree with that the Church teaches, but just like any pastor does for you, my Priest has helped me to further understand Scripture and clarifies things that I may have not discovered on my own.
And just because you don't believe in the Pope doesn't make you any more spiritual than me. The Pope's passing caused me to re-evaluate many things in my life and actually increased my spirituality. So again, such a statement is rather close-minded.
Victor, you have some valid points. Thank you for giving some educated feedback concerning the Pope as a figurehead. And I'll agree that the Bible has probably lost some of it's original intent through translations. That's why there have been folks in the past who've tried to return to the original writings (Aramaic, I believe?).
Anyway... I hope I helped to clarify some things for you guys. Next time, try asking questions before you start making accusations. I could go on and on about some of the things I've heard about other faiths... but I ask questions, instead, so as to not appear ignorant. Sorry if that offends you... just sayin...
Thanks for your time.
I haven't been on in a while, so I didn't see this discussion. So thanks to a friend for pointing it out to me. I, being Catholic, can maybe enlighten you guys on your grey areas and answer some of your questions (even though they weren't really questions... more like accusations... but whatever).
First of all, the idea of the Pope being an idol is just silly, I think. The Catholic Church and it's followers believe in no such thing. As Victor said, he's simply an emmisary of God, just like any other pastor or priest. Second, no, his position does not make him Holy. His acts do (though I don't know that it's really our place to judge his holiness... that's God's). The reason so many people mourned for the loss of the Pope is because of the many many MANY things he did for the world. He didn't just show compassion for Catholics; he showed compassion for EVERYONE. He helped relations with Islam and Protestants and just about everyone. His teachings to the WORLD involved peace. If you didn't catch it in the news, leaders from other religions mourned his death, as well. Members of many faiths came to give their last respects in the week of his funeral and attended his funeral. So what if you don't agree with all of his interpretations? You can't deny that he strived for peace among all mankind. People didn't mourn simply because he was Pope; they mourned because the world had lost one of the biggest seekers of *true* peace it had seen in a long, long time.
Next, John Paul II was not "merely" the leader of the Catholic Church. As I said before, he spread his good will to ALL people, regardless of faith. And when you're in a position as great as "Pope," you tend to get a lot more media coverage and can therefore be an example to a greater number of people. I don't think he was trying to influence us all with his interpretations of Scripture (well, he may have been influencing Catholics, but not all faiths); I think he was trying to influence us with his example of peace and tolerance :P
The Pope being the problem in society? Yeah, maybe in the middle-ages/Renaissance. But again, I don't know if you caught it in the news years ago, but John Paul II *formally apologized* for the past corruption that exsisted in the Catholic Church. If that's not a sign that those problems have been recognized and stopped, then I don't know what is. Does the Pope still sit up in his room and go to war against infidels in the Middle East? No... he teaches peace, remember? But our Protestant President has claimed to be fighting in the name of Christianity. Does the Pope still label people "heretics" and order them to be burned at the stake? No... but members of ALL religions are guilty of discriminating against those who do not believe the same way they do. As far as "screwing people over because they're greedy," again, that's not just limited to Catholic churches... I know many Protestant ones who take advantage of their parishioners and gorge them (and come on... Islam is a religion that promotes wealth). The fact of the matter is, it is unfair to make accusations like that about the Catholic church when we are trying to make ammends for the corruptions of our past... ESPECIALLY when the problem has spread to many other denominations. (And if you want to go on about the sex scandals with Priests, I'll be quick to point out that the only reason THAT was blown out of proportion was for the same reason the Clinton scandal was blown out of proportion: media loves dirt, especially on big targets, such as Catholicism and the President. I'm willing to bet that there are many Protestant pastors and preachers of other religions who've commited sex scandals with their parishioners... it's just the media doesn't care about small town folk and only wants to spend time focusing on the big fish.)
As far as Catholicism not believing in faith as being personal... I don't know what Catholics you've been talking to, but religion is personal no matter what your faith is. Everything I believe in has had a lot of deep thought and consideration poured into it... So assuming that I (or any other Catholic) just believe things because the Pope tells me to isn't a very wise assumption. Preachers interpret Scripture for you every time you go to church, so why can't the Pope/Cardinals/Bishops/Monks/Priests? Just because someone helps you to understand the Scripture a little better doesn't all of a sudden render it "unpersonal." There are things that I don't 100% agree with that the Church teaches, but just like any pastor does for you, my Priest has helped me to further understand Scripture and clarifies things that I may have not discovered on my own.
And just because you don't believe in the Pope doesn't make you any more spiritual than me. The Pope's passing caused me to re-evaluate many things in my life and actually increased my spirituality. So again, such a statement is rather close-minded.
Victor, you have some valid points. Thank you for giving some educated feedback concerning the Pope as a figurehead. And I'll agree that the Bible has probably lost some of it's original intent through translations. That's why there have been folks in the past who've tried to return to the original writings (Aramaic, I believe?).
Anyway... I hope I helped to clarify some things for you guys. Next time, try asking questions before you start making accusations. I could go on and on about some of the things I've heard about other faiths... but I ask questions, instead, so as to not appear ignorant. Sorry if that offends you... just sayin...
Thanks for your time.
I would love to tell you where the verse is in the Bible that describes "Christians" as "saints", but the truth is that it is found throughout the Bible, in many books. Try an exhaustive concordance if you'd like to read them all, or go to one of the many online resources (i.e. http://bible.gospelcom.net/) and look up "saints" remembering to take in the context and the meaning of each original root word.
# posted by 
: 3:17 PM
: 3:17 PM
The truth is, there is no specific verse that says "all Christians are God's saints." I personally feel that all Christians are (or will be) saints of God, but it's really just something that is implied. The original root of the word means "devoted" or "faithful." The word "saint" just described someone who was a strong follower of Christ (as all Christians SHOULD be). What if you run into an individual who refuses to latch onto implications?
Post a Comment
# posted by : 12:17 AM
: 12:17 AM<< Home
