: The salient question, which I believe none of us ahve asked, is, Who is the CE speaking for? Is it the word of the Pope, or is it the word of the College of Cardinals, or is it an independent publication unrelated to the RCC. If it is the word of the Pope, is he speaking ex cathedra? correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the doctrine only binding if he speaks ex cathedra?
Good question. Perhaps Frenchy knows. I do know that the Pope is regressive when it comes to matters sexual (homosexuals, contraception, sex for priests) and gender (no female priests), and I disagree heartily with his view on abortion. Any religion that says animals don't have souls also loses me as a fan, especially when coupled with a belief that animals are here to serve US in our so-called journey to perfection; sorry, but any journey to perfection which does not advocate compassion for animals (for their own sake, not ours) is a journey in need of a new map.
: The reason I ask is because there's a movie showing in America right now which was boycotted and attemptedly censored by a group called the 'Catholic league' or something like that, for being anti-Catholic. When I heard this I said, "This movie is anti-Catholic, and I'm not going to see it or patronize such garbage." Then I hear from a Catholic friend of mine that the Catholic LEague is an independent bunch of people, unafiliated with the RCC, and they have absolutely no authority to speak on behalf of Catholicism. I feel pretty pissed off right now that the League was able to pull the wool over my eyes, implyingg that the Chruch condemned the movie, and I would like a little more information.
Like McSpot's said, that's "Dogma," but it also happened to "Priest" and "The Last Temptation of Christ." I haven't seen Dogma; Priest was not that good all-around, but I thought TLTOC was a very reverential film, and a very good one at that. Martin Scorsese the director is both a religious catholic and a super director. Of course, TLTOC depicted Christ imagining himself having sexual relation, so -- in keeping with the RCC's twisted view of human sexuality -- of course the Catholic League et al went nuts.
: :Frenchy, I view you the same way. Of course, the Roman Catholic church also stands for good things, and it does good works,
: Very, very much. Liberation theology, remember. I've taken to using "liberation theology" as a kind of mantra to dispel anyone's criticism of reliion in general or Catholicism in particular. Mother Theresa was a Catholic. So were Archbishops Romero and Camara. American Catholics including such figures as Father Berrigan, were instrumental in ending the Vietnam War.
Liberation Theology represents the best of Catholocism; too bad Rome rarely gives it its blessing. Where was Rome when Romero and those nuns were killed in El Salvador, or those Jesuits in Guatemala? If I was the Pope, I'd have been issuing broadsides against the U.S. Gov'ts support of the murderous Latin American regimes instead of the tepid responses Rome managed to muster.
: :and you too have expressed dismay over the suffering of others, so I'm not throwing a blanket condemnation over you and the R.C. church. My criticism is that the good the R.C. does is not balanced well against the bad it does.
: Not true. The RCC is not really any of the things you portray it as. Several Popes have gone on record as endorsing tolerance for other religions, and for recognziing that all religions have good insights. Pope John XXIII was one of teh greatest men of the century. Social welfare and charity in this country and many others were largely the creation of the Church and remain so to this day. Progressive and socialist governments all across the world have been disproportionately associated with Catholicism. Nicaragua under teh Sandinistas, which you've claimed to admire, synthesized socialism and Catholicism in their philosophy. the Catholic chruch in Brazil was a major force ofor social change and welfare. Etcetera.
True, though, with regards to human sexuality and animals and women and the environment. I could also recount the evil Popes of history and the Church's bloody crusades and inquisitions and pogroms, but we can chalk all that up to the general, bloody past and focus on the here and now. The here and now presents us with a mixed bag, a Pope who speaks out (mildly) against capitalism and materialism, yet who continues to deny women equal status in the Church, continues to depict homosexuality as a sin, and condemns his followers in poor third world countries to even greater poverty in his destructive stance against contraception.
: Graham Greene once said that Catholicism and conservatism were incompatible bedfellows. He also said,
: "Communism is more than Marxism, my friend, just as Catholciism is mroe than the Roman Curia....Both Catholics and Communists have committed great crimes, but at least they have not stood by like an established society, and been silent. I would rather have blood on my hands than water like Pilate."
Graham Greene shoulda been the Pope.