February 11, 2013
The catholic pope announced
Pope Benedict XVI on Monday announced he will resign on February 28, a Vatican spokesman told AFP, which will make him the first pope to do so in centuries.
The last pope to resign voluntarily was Pope Celestine V
in 1294.He did not want to be pope in the first place. Celestine V gave his reasons as:
the desire for humility, for a purer life, for a stainless conscience, the deficiencies of his own physical strength, his ignorance, the perverseness of the people, his longing for the tranquility of his former life.
Benedict XVI said:
After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry.
A new pope is usually elected when the old one is dead and often not to his (assumed) liking. His resignation will allow Benedict to influence the election of his successor.
That may be the real reason behind this surprizing step.
The Supreme Guidance Council of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood convened immediately and is thought to suggest the upcoming head of Al-Azhar, Abdul Rahman al-Bar, as its papal candidate. Vatican aids thought it unlikely that al-Bar would gather enough support in the Vatican to make it into the final selection.
The election of a pope is always a highly political process. Various states will try to push their favorite candidates and agendas. The ideal candidate though will not be considered. That would be a tall black African woman, married and with children.
Posted by b on February 11, 2013 at 07:12 AM | Permalink
Almost off topic but I read somewhere that Pope Ratzi, according to historical projections, is thought to be the penultimate Pope before the Rapture. I'm sort of sorry I probably won't be here to see it.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 11, 2013 7:50:44 AM | 1
due to recent connection outages the church has lost its highest level connection to god, connection restarting in 10,9,8.... can the resigning pope become pope again? (can he run again?) or what is the next step for someone who was pope?
Posted by: simon | Feb 11, 2013 8:01:16 AM | 2
Small mistake there, the last resignation was Gregorius XII in 1415, almost 600 years ago ;)
Posted by: Rhysa | Feb 11, 2013 8:04:25 AM | 3
how about a stout South American or Mexican madre? That's where all the Catholics ARE
Posted by: scottindallas | Feb 11, 2013 8:15:15 AM | 4
@ 4 but they are infected with 'liberation theology', we wouldn't want a 'liberation' Pope - fighting for justice and siding with the weak, meek and down-trodden - in the Vatican, do we :) ?
Posted by: thirsty | Feb 11, 2013 9:02:03 AM | 5
If the pope would actually follow the bible, the Catholic Church would actually be worth a damn.
Posted by: Fernando | Feb 11, 2013 9:24:10 AM | 7
There is a lot of discontent within the rank and file catholic congregation with regards to the Vatican vis-a-vis Syria. The Pope failed to show leadership or condemn what Israel and it's Jihadists were doing to the old historic churches. The killing of many priests was the final straw. This Pope was being blackmailed or the Zionist had a hold over him. I think he has seen the light and wants to go now while he still has some respect. The war in Syria will finish shortly the Russian and Armenian Orthodox church with Iran Shia backing were the only religious organisation backing the Christians of Syria. He served his purpose, he signed an extensive agreement between the Holy See and the Zionists giving them authority over sites and finance which do not belong to Israel. Damn him.
Posted by: hans | Feb 11, 2013 9:46:21 AM | 8
I saw this invisible entity in the sky's reflection in the mirror and it read 'DOG.' My K9 went bonkers.
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 11, 2013 10:41:05 AM | 9
Or they realized they have to do something spectacular to survive. The main issue the catholic church has not been able to solve is the sexuality of their followers. I do not see they can solve that, it is so central to this religion.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 11, 2013 11:07:10 AM | 10
September 12, 2006 - University of Regensburg in Germany
‘Show me what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached’.'
There is more to it, but quoting something out of context isn't good thing, therefore the whole speech is here:
"Cardinal Rat", that old Nazi, is part of global neo-feudal forces that spreading agenda of "civilized" world and its elite that is armed to the teeth against perceived enemy and own population.
There is more of this inflammatory statements which put in context of War on Terror (or Islam) revel more of Rat's role. Holy See is global crusader without arms but equally lethal for weak, impoverished and exposed to those lethal forces. An armed wing is of course NATO who is constantly in search for own purpose and new markets.
As for next Pope it certainly won't be someone like Albino Luciani or Pope John Paul I who was an honest, decent man known also as the "Smiling Pope". His sin was that he was soft on communism and his father was committed Socialist. After 30 days newly elected Pope was found dead!? Opus Dei (and the like) and Security States doesn't like a smiling people.
Who followed? Pope Woytila an ethic Pole, vicious reactionary to the bone. What followed? Solidarnost, which was financed by Western security services and fall of the Warsaw Pact.
“Cardinal Rat’s” a role and a purpose had expired. I'm certain pedophilia isn't big deal for a sociopaths - it is actually a normal, even desirable.
It would surprise me to see next Pope some a cardinal from China or India. Pope has become geopolitical function more than anything else. The West is on hunt for next victim.
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 11:33:05 AM | 11
error, it should be:
"It would not surprise me to see next Pope some a cardinal from China or India."
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 11:37:13 AM | 12
@Rhysa - Small mistake there, the last resignation was Gregorius XII in 1415, almost 600 years ago ;)
I wrote: "The last pope to resign voluntarily was ...."
Gregorius XII was made to resign.
Posted by: b | Feb 11, 2013 11:47:20 AM | 13
This pope was weak on the pedophilia issue because he himself is homosexual and his secretary 'Gorgeous Georg' Gänswein was said to be his lover. There are lots of rumors in the church about this.
The catholic church has a difficult problem. To stay relevant in the northern parts of the planet it has to liberalize. To stay relevant in the south it has to stay conservative (there is lots of competition in the South from conservative Evangelicals and Muslims).
Liberalization theology would be a way out. It would be welcome in the north and south. But with Ratzinger staying alive and influential while his successor is chosen the chance for that movement to gain is very small.
Posted by: b | Feb 11, 2013 12:00:13 PM | 14
"That would be a tall black African woman, married and with children."
Why does she need to be tall?
Posted by: вот так | Feb 11, 2013 12:16:35 PM | 16
"The main issue the catholic church has not been able to solve is the sexuality of their followers"
I believe American singer Billy Joel gave us much information in that regard. But, as I assume Pope Pius knows, sooner or later it comes down to fate.
Posted by: Mooser | Feb 11, 2013 12:34:04 PM | 19
"Why does she need to be tall?"
Are you kidding? Can't you see what a knock-out she'll be, what awesome authority and presence, she will have, in the Papal vestments?
Short might work, but she'd need one hell of an aura of holiness to make up for it, or nobody would see her in a crowd. Tall always works better for authority. I've been looking up and seeing that my whole life.
Posted by: Mooser | Feb 11, 2013 12:44:12 PM | 20
Interesting. I just read something what’s called, ”Saint Malachy Prophecies about 112 popes until the end of the world”
“St.Malachy, the first Irish saint, had a vision of the next 112 popes. We've had 111 since, and are on the verge of seeing No. 112, which Malachy says will be the final pope before the end of the world as we know it.”
Ostensibly, the 111 prophecies were very accurate! Congratulation St.Malacy. This is the last Pope before Armageddon.
“The prophecies of Saint Malachy end like this:
In the persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock among many tribulations after which the seven hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people.”
Another doomsday. In highly dogmatic institutions where the time has stopped this doesn't come as surprise. As someone who is lover of ancient civilization, and by reading their belief systems, of the Fertile Crescent I can only say that all monotheistic religions has stolen everything from those ancient civilization. There are based on lies and fictions. This include also what is known as falsely named as Greek civilization and Philosophy.
OK, folk get ready this must be serious. Get secure shelters, pile food stuff up, ammunitions and rifles, fuel, medicine, long term surviving kits etc.
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 12:44:57 PM | 21
A pope can do a lot more to determine his successor by blocking the advancement of uncongenial candidates within the church, while still in office. Benedict is now the proverbial lame duck.
Remember that Ratz is 85 years old, the same age as John Paul was when he died. And recall his eulogy of John Paul:
"The Holy Father was a priest to the last, for he offered his life to God for his flock and for the entire human family, in a daily self-oblation for the service of the Church, especially amid the sufferings of his final months."
Unless he's succumbed to senile dementia, he probably doesn't care to follow that particular example.
Perhaps he prefers to sit in the sun and listen to the sound of childish laughter.
Posted by: ugolino | Feb 11, 2013 12:50:22 PM | 22
@11: Neretva, how can someone born in 1927 be an old Nazi?
Posted by: k_w | Feb 11, 2013 12:56:45 PM | 24
The Pope: I guess having a twitter account and 6 - to - 15 million followers (I have no idea about the true number and don’t wish to know more) isn’t enough to hike you up into the position of a popular religious world leader. ;)
Here in Switz. this Pope was not liked or admired while subservience was nevertheless paid.
There has been talk of ‘keeping the community’ while somehow cutting off from Rome.
Of course it can’t be done, as the hierarchical structure determines everything, without it, all collapses. Still, the rumblings are serious. (re. Pedophilia, etc.)
I have even heard mutters about ‘independent Catholics’, a iconoclast forward looking idealistic grass roots movement in the shadows. In this social landscape, these ppl are also from the Black Block, Anarchists, traditionalists (elderly ppl) and schism Protestants. Yeah. Weird.....
Don’t forget this in CH and Catholicism has taken a very severe beating. It is underground.....To this day, in 2013, Catholics are not allowed to march in public, while gay pride, fed-up nurses, striking tram divers, moms for a home salary and free day care, farmers, occupy the streets. Protestants run public presence but generally under a mixed umbrella e.g. “protestants for care and love and fair pay” - I just made that up, but it is that kind of thing.
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 11, 2013 1:05:16 PM | 25
you can call him young or old. he is what he is...Nazi, just as Pope Pius XI was. He is not the only one.
Take for example this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Waldheim evidently he commited war crime on Balkan. Later, he was the President of Austria.
Yet, knowing everything about him the West and SU pick him as the Secretary General of UN. I suspect he was chosen to provoke Yugoslavia Gov.
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 1:16:48 PM | 27
Noirette, you work in PR industry?
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 1:24:56 PM | 28
The first Pope to join Twitter. Probably started reading what the world is tweeting and lost all hope of human salvation...
Posted by: ralphieboy | Feb 11, 2013 1:30:02 PM | 29
Can we expect the Catholic change with the next Pope? I don’t really think so. Cardinal Marc Ouellet, formerly the archbishop of Quebec City, has the best odds of replacing Pope Benedict XVI, but he is an extremely conservative man who will definitely not want the Catholic church to change. He is expected to be a carbon copy Pope Benedict XVI.
Posted by: Shanna Carson | Feb 11, 2013 1:34:51 PM | 30
Noirette, you work in PR industry?
Why on earth would you think that? I'm lost?
You seem vaguely smart, - not more, sorry - so most likely can't ignore that various authoritarian movements are keen on recuperating the Catholic Church following (Europe, Americas a different scene)? And that is an issue worth discussing, beyond the standing or characteristics of the present or next Pope?
If you intended it as a compliment, well, I'm just as mystified.
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 11, 2013 1:42:48 PM | 31
The Pope is right: we do churchin one way; if you don't like it, join another or start another or don't go.
Posted by: ruralito | Feb 11, 2013 1:48:02 PM | 32
@ 23: Neretva'43, thanks for that bit of humor. Nice to revisit that Carlin piece from time to time.
Posted by: ben | Feb 11, 2013 2:15:20 PM | 33
"You seem vaguely smart, - not more"
In today's neo-feudal system of values being smart isn't necessarily positive trait of one individual, moreover if she/he is an alien of the nation. It is not easy for those who are not an aliens. The problem is compounded even more in totalitarian and Machiavellian political systems, in corporate world is prohibited.
Obedience is what "they" are looking for!
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 2:27:38 PM | 34
@b - 13
Oh, indeed, I did not spot that word. My bad !
Posted by: Rhysa | Feb 11, 2013 2:43:12 PM | 35
I don't care too much about the catholic church.
But Ratzinger isn't an old Nazi. He was way too young then.
In my minds eye his major flaw was to do the right thing for a pope. Rather than looking and acting outwards he tried to repair the church (which already was in trouble) from inside.
That he acted rather conservatively can't be held against him. The catholic church *is* conservative and he was (more or less democratically) elected to become pope although he had been the chief of the instituation that was formertimes called "inquisition".
BTW: Reading about (doubtlessly american assumptions) concerning this or that scandal in los angeles being a (or even the) trigger for Ratzinger amuses me as typical american hybris. Frankly, over here in Europe we do not even know about a los angeles (or whatever) scandal (other than cops shooting citizens which seems to be rather normal for the us ...). But then for americans if a garbage can falls over in iowa is considered important but if St. Peters dome in Rome exploded 97% of the americans wouldn't know about it and the other 3% would wunder in which state "Rome" is.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 2:50:41 PM | 36
Black lesbian time now!
Posted by: Michal | Feb 11, 2013 3:24:24 PM | 37
36) There were/are enough scandals in Europe. The scandal in Germany is huge and is getting worse. And of course Ratzinger who was in positions of responsibility and oversight has been involved. Basically the church hushed everything up and gave the culprits a different job.
Something has got to give. Either the catholic church admits that the chastity they demand from the people they employ is humanly impossible or they go the way of the dodo. The church has lost the power to silence its victims.
Of course Ratzinger was too young to have been a conscious nazi. The catholic church can be accused of not really fighting the nazis, the nazis were fighting the church though. There was stuff like national socialist marriage with germanic rituals and all religious organisations were dissolved in 1933. Basically the nazis were in competition with religion.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 11, 2013 3:34:57 PM | 38
what do you call a pope who resigns?
Posted by: ruralito | Feb 11, 2013 3:44:10 PM | 39
@27: Okay, the article about Waldheim proves Ratzinger was a Nazi? Like Pius? Come on ... Do you know who placed the Waldheim files in the UN office?
Posted by: k_w | Feb 11, 2013 3:45:14 PM | 40
My point wasn't that the catholic church is wunderful.
You see, when Hindus don't kill cows and driver around them so as to not harm them we smile. The principle, however, is similar to the cath. church, to protect life and in particular unborn life, that is innocent life that can't defend itself.
Concerning child abuse the church did what pretty every large organisation does. This doesn't mean that it's OK, it just means that maybe there are certain mechanisms in humans that seem to invariably take power in certain situations (although they are bad).
Basically Ratzinger had two options: He could either strive to modernize and liberalize the cath. church or he could go "back to the roots". Both options had major disadvantages, the latter probably seeming more natural to a church and to a large institution. I mentioned the fact that he was elected wih a reason; he was *known* to be very conservative and nobody voting for him could expect a modern, liberal pope.
Tragically - and that is a major point of interest to me - the world (and such the expectations) around the church is widely defined by very american priciples: Rude capitalism, senseless liberalism to the point of stupidization and brutal lack of responsibilty (because that is what unconditional democracy comes down to. Nobody is really responsible although everbody talks a lot about responsability).
In such an environment *everybody* and *every creed* besides "american/modern values" is doomed to fail. The cath. church could preach and live pure love and would lousily fail.
Looking at Ratzinger I see a man who by his very position is responsible for a lot of bad things. But also a man who was/is consistent and really standing for his values. Last but not least I see a man who is capable to let go personal power. In short I see a man who easily tops 98% of all politicians and large corp. types.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 4:14:07 PM | 41
BTW: I wouldn't give too much about a book by Germans and Austrians about that topic.
Simply because they are strongly limited by law in their views on the topic (which again is a major issue concerning the topic itself).
If in Europe, and in particular, in Germany or France one doesn't stay within rather tightly scripted boundaries of "history", one gets punished by law and is confronted by irrepairable damage of ones career.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 4:35:06 PM | 43
"Tragically - and that is a major point of interest to me - the world (and such the expectations) around the church is widely defined by very american priciples"
No, it always has been in service of empire. Vatican and Popes were instrumental in legalization of conquest and holocaust of indigenous population of the land what we call today Americas. The church crime is enormous and legalization of slavery in one of many of them.
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 4:36:11 PM | 44
I'm afraid I'm again being mistaken to defend the cath. church. I do not. What you mention there, for instance, is doubtlessly one (of the many) major crimes of the cath. church.
My point was *todays* environment - in which, no matter what they wanted or did, he cath. church (and any other major institution) were doomed unless it joined the senseless modern democratic games (that, behind a thin veil, are no different or better that the way popes in the 13. century or large corporations nowadays act).
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 4:42:59 PM | 45
Very cryptic comment, but I know that Hannes Heer had lot of problems, as well as organizers of German Army Exhibition.
Posted by: neretva'43 | Feb 11, 2013 4:43:11 PM | 46
Ratzinger - with the exception of his resignation - in his long life has never made a step outside of the safe church career path, straight from his rural religious family to the holy see.
That child abuse happens is not the core of the problem for the catholic church - most child abuse presumably happens in families - the core problem for the church is that they should admit that their ordained priests and bishops (and popes) are fallible humans with a sex life who should be critized, controled, judged and punished (and allowed to have a sex life) like any other human.
In that respect Ratzinger's resignation is a step in the right direction
Posted by: somebody | Feb 11, 2013 5:47:30 PM | 47
43/45 so today's large corporations use the methods of the inquisition, burn witches and insist the world is flat?
And yes, it is illegal in many European countries to incite racism, deny the holocaust, promote pornography or insult religious feelings.
And no, Hannes Heer did not have problems with German law, he was attacked by right wing groups. Same right wing groups who would like to deny the holocaust, refuse to admit the German military committed crimes and would love to incite racism.
Actually, Mr. Pragma, you are beginning to sound like a member of the Society of St. Pius.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 11, 2013 6:08:05 PM | 48
From what is known Ratzinger had no career path in mind other than wanting to do theological research rather than preaching.
Of course, their attitude towards sex has proven problematic again and again and there should be an open discussion in the church how to do better. Sure enough, there are other problems, too.
I do by no means agree with Ratzinger on all or even many points (and I'm not an in any way active church member).
I do, however see a man who has and lived his credo, stood for his views and argued from very solid grounds (well, if one can accept theological considerations as such), profoundly reseaching his matter with a mind that was acknowledged as sharp even by many who didn't share his views.
And I see a man who did, as far is known, never abuse his positions for personal profit or advantage.
One would have a hard time to find a politician, shareholder or top manager of whom the same could be said.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 6:13:25 PM | 49
"43/45 so today's large corporations use the methods of the inquisition, burn witches and insist the world is flat?"
Are we speaking of today or is this about somehow, somewhere and be it 500 years ago, finding something ugly?
"And no, Hannes Heer did not have problems with German law, he was attacked by ..."
Possibly. I did not talk specifically about some writer but about a general situation. Fact is that in France, Germany and Austria one will be brutally punished if one researches in another direction than the official one, god beware, to apply standard scientific standards.
"Actually, Mr. Pragma, you are beginning to sound like a member of the Society of St. Pius."
Ad hominem? How poor of you!
In case, you are still interested in facts: I do not even know those Pius brothers except (vaguely) that bishop (?) Williams who gained notoriety by expressing his views on the "holy matter".
If you find me being factually wrong, feel free to criticise me. If, however, you simply want to mute unwelcome opinions by ad hominems you picked the wrong person.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 6:40:04 PM | 50
49) I wonder, did he ever have to stand for his - very main stream - views? You know Bavaria used to be predominately catholic, and predominately very conservative catholic? He started to study in a church seminar at age 12, did he ever have a view of his own? This idea of integrating faith with reason taken from a 13th century theologian? Which means reason is stuck to faith, basically the earth is flat? At a time when Islam knew the exact shape of the world and Greek knowledge was there to be forgotten?
Posted by: somebody | Feb 11, 2013 6:50:23 PM | 51
Sure he did.
One example that comes to mind is that he had many clerics against himself in his very diocese because he put himself strongly and clearly against the easy going regarding sexual standards of the church.
Now, sure, one can discuss, whether his views on that matter were good and wise. But that wasn't the question.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 6:54:59 PM | 52
you must be joking. It is possible that people stop to take you seriously - which is their right, and no one will employ you. you are then condemned to live on social security however, can still use public libraries and spread your theory on the internet.
Let's see what happened to the holocaust denying Bishop Williamson
Posted by: somebody | Feb 11, 2013 6:59:12 PM | 53
Sorry, no, somebody
it's not funny at all, if you are a 70+ years old scientist and brutally beaten up and finding yourself in a hospital. Nor is it funny to find a very promising science career completey shattered and yourself in a court farce for nothing but doing a chemical analysis.
And, you see, *that* is my point. I don't care about the holocaust or about whether there were 6 or 6 million dead. My interest is not to have it look nicer or uglier. Whatever happened, happened.
But it disturbes me strongly that *anything*, no matter how small, outside the official (and brutally enforced) line is verboten.
It's rightout ridiculous when an famous israeli (!!!) historian radically cuts the number down from 6 Million to less than 25% of that - and at the same time, people go to jail and find their lives shattered for saying the same as that renowned israeli history expert.
The church was dead wrong when it enforced a "result" (like the "flat earth") rather than allowing independent and open-ended research. And in the same way it is dead-wrong to enforce a result nowadays ("holocaust", 6 Mio.) rather than allowing independent and open-ended research.
If one likes to apply the term "Nazi" then this attitude is a good target.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 7:10:40 PM | 54
you are lying.
Williamson was sentenced in a german court. Being sentenced by a court is not "nothing".
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 11, 2013 7:12:13 PM | 55
@ BOT TAK [#]
Q: Why does she need to be tall?
R: How else would you want anyone to oversee humongous crowds? Through riot police goggles?
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 11, 2013 7:25:29 PM | 56
Mooser - 20
"Short might work, but she'd need one hell of an aura of holiness to make up for it, or nobody would see her in a crowd. Tall always works better for authority. I've been looking up and seeing that my whole life."
Haven't dated many short chicks, have you? Ball busters, every one. You don't ever want to cross one. A short chick running the Vatican would be just what they need. She'd kick papal arse and clean out the child molesters in nothing flat.
k_w - 24
"how can someone born in 1927 be an old Nazi?"
If he was born in 1927 and he's a nazi, he's an old nazi. That's just the way things are.
Posted by: вот так | Feb 11, 2013 7:34:13 PM | 57
Q: Nazi, just as Pope Pius XI was.
R: Read "The papacy, the Jews, and the Holocaust" -- Frank J. Coppa, Catholic University Press of America, 2006, ISBN 081321449
... and feel 'enlightened.'
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 11, 2013 7:44:11 PM | 59
Re: Clerical Celebacy
Without doctrinal controversy, any Pope could reform the canon laws of the Latin Rite Church dealing with priestly status to conform with those of Maronite Catholics and other Eastern rites of the Catholic church (which are also substantially similar to those adopted in the Eastern Orthodox Churches). Parish priests are required to be married at the time of their ordination but may not remarry under any circumstances. The other track for Eastern priests is monkhood - from which bishops, etc are chosen; and for which lifetime celibacy is required.
As I say this is not doctrinally controversial, only a matter of church discipline. I would however feel sorry for any serving priest who sweated it out all their lives in order to remain celibate - if there are any - only to have the rug pulled from under them.
I also doubt that this would solve the problem of an incontinent priesthood, because the problem is not only in the priesthood, but in our society as a whole, which is absolutely unbalanced on the subject of sex, to put it mildly.
Posted by: ugolino | Feb 11, 2013 7:45:28 PM | 60
Daniel Rich - 56
"How else would you want anyone to oversee humongous crowds? Through riot police goggles?"
She could sit on a bodyguard's shoulders, or possibly stand on a box - a soapbox.
Posted by: вот так | Feb 11, 2013 7:48:04 PM | 61
@ BOT TAK [#60],
Q: She could sit on a bodyguard's shoulders...
R: I don't think Kevin will be able to drag Whitney around any longer :o)
@ neretva'43 [#44]
For the record, I condone any and all actions [past, present and future] by any so called religious institution [being the fully fledged heretic that I am].
@ somebody [#48],
Q: ..., deny the holocaust ...
R: Please be truthful. First of all, that particular holocaust comes with a capital 'H'. Secondly, only Jews can claim to have been part of it [f.e., a catholic nun that spent the same amount of time in the same camp can't lay claim to it], but thirdly [what's your real agenda?], the 'holohoax' can't be questioned. Get that? Can't be questioned opnely without judicial repercussions. Neo-nazis endorse revisionists, not the other way around. Read this .PDF file The Fate of Jews in German Hands and let the information sink in [as well as This].
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 11, 2013 8:21:03 PM | 62
It is usually best to look for the simplest answer - and in this case, the reason for this Pope's resignation is ill health. We will know for sure in just a few months. Now as to the next pope and possible influences from various countries, don't forget the megacorporations which are more powerful than small countries. See this old press release :D It is dated but still very funny.
MICROSOFT Bids to Acquire Catholic Church
Posted by: Northern Night Owl | Feb 11, 2013 10:06:44 PM | 63
My main objection to the mainstream religions is their habitual insistence that offspring be inducted into the religion of parents and entrusted to the Church for further indoctrination - long before they are familiar with the notion of "informed consent" or indeed capable of, or even having the freedom to, exercise same; and all on the flimsy and unsubstantiated pretext of salvation of their dear little souls.
That really is a crime against humanity.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 11, 2013 10:47:51 PM | 64
Perhaps they can get a nice cute little altar boy to replace him.
But can you actually bless vaseline???? Holy jelly???
Maybe we oughta ask Mahoney, so he can lie about it.
And we think the Muslims are fucked up????
Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Feb 11, 2013 11:10:44 PM | 65
How people can surrender their personal sovereignty over to any religion is beyond me, given that, through the history of humanity, religion has been one of the greatest purveyors of hate and disinformation the world has ever known.
Posted by: ben | Feb 11, 2013 11:45:12 PM | 66
62) "holohoax' can't be questioned"
Of course it can and it gets questioned. It gets questioned all the time by German officials when it comes to restitution.
Mr. Pragma was pretending you get persecuted for researching the holocaust. You don't. You get persecuted for blatant racist incitement and denial of facts, and it has to be very blatant as the case of Thilo Sarrazin shows.
What might happen is that people refuse to be associated with you and you could lose your job if political correctness is in your job description.
To call that "brutally punished" is a joke. It is offensive to all the people who stood up for their beliefs and faced imprisonment or death.
55) I am quoting Wikipedia
"On 22 February 2012 the higher court dismissed this conviction, finding that the initial charges against Bishop Williamson had been inadequately drawn, having failed to specify the nature of his offence, or at what point his filmed comments came under German jurisdiction, or in what sense he could be held liable for failing to prevent their publication in Germany."
If you know different quote the source.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 1:35:34 AM | 67
to clarify: German law does not even mention the holocaust it punishes "incitement" of all kind, it also punishes the use of National Socialist symbols.
Neo Nazi have to do a lot to get punished by German law and get away with a lot of propaganda because of free speech.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 2:04:10 AM | 68
'He' will expectantly be from a third World Country, one with resources or one where the powers need someone to help call the shots; Africa, na, just too much shit going on there; the Middle East, obviously not; Asia, possible, the Philippines sounds like a good bet, although the front runner is a bit young 55 - Bugger knows why most Popes need to be verging their death beds or higher chances of dementia.
If I was a political betting man, the Asian Pacific push by the US could use an Asian, more so in the PI, the last people power movement (Yes one did occur peacefully long before the Arab spring) and the blockage/hindrances then and at the moment was driven by the Church; thus a buy-in (Getting a Pope on board) would be epic, with God on your side, the chances of fooling the fools and letting them donate to seal the deal is pretty good.
The Vatican may grumble, but it could do with some funding, as all that treasure is locked down and fleets of bubble cars cost, and the streets are not paved with gold (The walls may be). Moreover all that bad press and the kiddie fiddling could be washed away with the right decision by the right media and if they were in Asia, access to fresh young toys could be a easy as ordering from a menu and hidden, sound doable!
But this is conjecture, and Politics and religion cant possibly entwine?
Posted by: Kev | Feb 12, 2013 2:10:52 AM | 69
69) politics for the catholic church would mean self preservation. they seem to have bet on a retro conservative trend with Ratzinger, presumably assuming that they can't stop liberals from leaving anyway. so the issue is not so much the nationality but the ideology of the pope.
In Germany even nominal church tax paying catholic do not live the religion any more i.e. they choose and pick if they want to follow the teachings of the church or rather not.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 4:59:00 AM | 70
Even if the verdict was voided in a higher instance being brought to court and being punished is not "nothing".
You also forgot the fact that in Germany there are even special prosecutors for those cases (anything that can be construed as "anti-semitism"). Furthermore you forgot that such trials quite usually are farcical; for instance the attorneys are extremely limited in what they can bring forward. There were even cases where lawyers where thrown out of court and punished themselves merely for asking for unwelcome witnesses. Scientific experts have been punished for results that were not within the allowed frame. Citizens have been in court and sentenced for nothing more than doubting the holy number of 6 Mio.
Interestingly enough neo-Nazis are really quite generously tolerated and even protected by the police. Uttering doubts concerning the holy story, however, quite realiably lands you at court.
Go ahead, somebody, and spread your smartly construed 80% truths, conveniently leaving out certain parts and making things look the way you want them to look. We both know that fewer and fewer people in Europe fall for the "anti-semite" bullsh*t.
And it's very positive in my mind eye that it's getting harder and harder to mute people with "holocaust victims!" stories who are apalled by israeli mass murder.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 12, 2013 5:26:56 AM | 71
If you want to tell me that you read 348 meticulously sourced pages [of
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 12, 2013 5:51:02 AM | 72
If you want to tell me that you have read 348 pages of a meticulously sourced thesis in the blink of an eye, we both know you didn't bother. Your mind was made up and your answer ready to be rolled out.
Guess these laws are in place to preserve the truth?
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 12, 2013 6:03:03 AM | 73
This has been predicated in The Fatima Third Prophecy and the Mayan Ninth Wave. The battle for the control of the desert religions is what is happening in Syria. The Pope failure to provide leadership in this struggle and the disgruntled congregations is what has caused him to resign. The Zionist thru it's converted Jews within the Vatican and his homosexuality have been blackmailing the Holy See. He signed to Israel property, finance which does not belong to the Holy See. The victory very soon of The Orthodox and Shia Islam will turn the power of what Zionism has always thought to be it private fiefdom.
Posted by: hans | Feb 12, 2013 6:30:06 AM | 74
"You also forgot the fact that in Germany there are even special prosecutors for those cases (anything that can be construed as "anti-semitism"). Furthermore you forgot that such trials quite usually are farcical; for instance the attorneys are extremely limited in what they can bring forward. There were even cases where lawyers where thrown out of court and punished themselves merely for asking for unwelcome witnesses. Scientific experts have been punished for results that were not within the allowed frame. Citizens have been in court and sentenced for nothing more than doubting the holy number of 6 Mio."
because you just say so? either bring a source/name a case or it is not true. or - even easier - name one person who is in prison in Germany because of antisemitism only.
You would not mean this guy who threatened journalists with death by a "people's court"?
73) all I and you who are of a certain age had to do is to talk to people when they were still alive. They would tell you, all sides, in all countries, especially in private and when tired and emotional.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 6:41:06 AM | 75
I will take the Catholic Church seriously again the day that the College of Cardinals and Cardinelles gets together to elect a Popess.
Posted by: ralphieboy | Feb 12, 2013 6:51:36 AM | 76
This gets boring. You demand proof but, as Daniel Rich showed strikingly, you ignore any material given.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 12, 2013 7:41:13 AM | 77
Daniel Rich #73
Oh goody you have finally come out of the closet. You now proudly announce yourself as a holocaust denialist light. It is becoming more and more easy for neoNazis to infiltrate radical blogs given the many crimes of the the State of Israel. But there are many of us who know the history. Those links you posted are simple egregious denials of that history. The holocaust really happened. The gas chambers at Auswitch cannot be denied. Many millions of Jews were systematically exterminated by the Germans between 1941 and 1945. Please go away pig. You are contaminating MoA.
Posted by: ToivoS | Feb 12, 2013 7:45:19 AM | 78
Is that so? Sure enough you can prove both, that the holocaust allegations are correct and that Daniel Rich is a "holocaust denialist light".
And let me ask you how you mean "Please go away pig"? Is that to be understood like what German alledgely said to jews in the 1940s?
A lot of people, including myself, are fed up with not only unproven allegations but, worse, being called "anti-semite" (or "pig") when simply asking for proof.
Just to avoid misuderstandings: The term "proof" does not include blatant lies (like "they made lamps out of jewish skin!" or "I survived the gas chamber only because my mother covered me with her body") nor ignorance of natures laws like physics.
If you have serious and credible proof, I'm interested in it and will look at it. Because that's what I'm interested in, not denial.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 12, 2013 8:02:17 AM | 79
Born in 1927, Nazi Germany defeated in 1945. Why could Ratzinger not have been a Nazi? Hitler Youth anyone?
Posted by: Billy Boy | Feb 12, 2013 8:13:00 AM | 80
funny how revisionnists still spam the 90's Joel hayward crap study, but NEVER tell us Hayward himself spits on it...
" Hayward has always repudiated his thesis, saying its errors were the result of inadequate scholarly preparation for such a complex topic, but Holocaust deniers initially continued to cite the thesis as evidence of academic support for their positions."
."Despite any earlier issues, Hayward clearly upholds the sound and accepted scholarly assessment of the Holocaust. In 2010 he described it as “one of history’s vilest crimes … involving the organised murder of millions of Jews”
in 2011 he similarly wrote: “The Holocaust of the Jews in the Second World War, one of history’s vilest crimes, involved the organised murder of six million Jews by Germans and others who considered themselves Christians or at least members of the Christian value system
Posted by: rototo | Feb 12, 2013 8:42:59 AM | 81
80) Billyboy a political decision is very difficult for a 6 year old. That is 1933. A kid could not chose not to join the Hitler Youth - you had to go, same way you had to go to school. Ratzingers father was a policeman employed by the state. He was unlikely to teach the kid something different from what was taught at school. The only difference to the Nationalist Socialist environment Ratzinger would have experienced in his youth would be the teachings of catholic church. And that would make a difference.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 9:02:49 AM | 82
79) Wannsee Conference - Protocol
deportation list - where are these people?
Germany's archives are full of this type of documents, it is obvious the holocaust happened, you just have to compare adress books.
Now, when you deny something that obviously happened, people begin to wonder what is your agenda. And they have got every right to question your agenda.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 9:54:02 AM | 83
Making a political decision was not a prerequisite for joining the Hitler youth, in fact the purpose of the organisation was essentially indoctrination and preparation for military service, for boys at least. Initially it could be avoided by paying a subscription but this was virtually impossible by 1939 when Ratz was 12. The group was for 10 to 18 year old boys and girls.
Boys at 10, joined the Deutsches Jungvolk (German Young People) until the age of 13 when they transferred to the Hitler Jugend (Hitler Youth) until the age of 18.
You're not convincing me that he COULD NOT be a Nazi. I'm not saying he was, I'm asking why would he not be. It's not like extreme religious views and extreme politics can never be compatible in the mind of the believer.
Posted by: Billy Boy | Feb 12, 2013 10:12:48 AM | 84
Welcome back after this elongated hibernation period. That single hasbara shot stills works wonders, doesn't it?
Q: Please go away pig. You are contaminating MoA.
R: So, this is how your freedom of speech ploy really works?
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 12, 2013 10:26:17 AM | 85
85) your freedom of speech stops where it infringes on my freedom to live. so I do wonder why you would deny obvious facts? for what end? to support whom?
there is this all time classic on the freedom of opinion
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 10:40:33 AM | 86
@ somebody [#86],
I talked to survivors. I listened to the music they had/were forced to play. Do you honestly think I deny Jews have died in camps? If you do not allow me to find answers as to why and how my ancestors have died there, than go fuck yourself.
Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 12, 2013 10:45:04 AM | 87
neretva (@28, me @31) i apologize, i was in the foulest angriest mood, somehow the mention of PR made me flame, sorry, your response @ 34 was bang on.
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 12, 2013 10:45:31 AM | 88
84)Billyboy, I think we have to discuss what the definition of a Nazi is. For me it is someone who consciously decides for a certain type of politics not someone growing up thinking what adults tell him to think and not having access to any different point of view or information.
In the case of Ratzinger's environment and family connections it is likely that he was indoctrinated as a catholic conservative, not a national socialist - there is a difference, though both ideologies fuelled right wing movements.
For example, there is no way the catholic church could have supported eugenics and derived from that euthanasia, which was at the core of nationalist socialist ideology.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 12, 2013 11:08:44 AM | 90
The MSM loves to characterize the leadership of left groups as ‘graying’, ‘elderly’, ‘on its last legs’, etc.
They never seem to notice that the hierarchy of the RC church is well past its sell-by date.
Posted by: Watson | Feb 12, 2013 11:26:08 AM | 91
Watson - 91
"The MSM loves to characterize..."
If the msm's "characterizations" are ignored, one will find themselves surprisingly better informed. Use the msm like one would use spoiled food ingredients when cooking - as an example of what to avoid.
Posted by: вот так | Feb 12, 2013 11:57:21 AM | 92
Something high in heaven didn't was somewhat irritated with the pope's decision and send a message directly to the St.Peter's Basilica
Posted by: b | Feb 12, 2013 12:35:44 PM | 93
"Haven't dated many short chicks, have you? Ball busters, every one."
While I am, after many years of living under marital law, singularly unprepared to render an opinion on temperament as related to height in the female species, it seems I had forgotten about the hat. You know, the ones Popes wear. Well, it stands to reason, you got a short Pope, you just get them a taller hat. Works the same for all genders.
Posted by: Mooser | Feb 12, 2013 8:26:03 PM | 94
I'm not interested in deportation lists because they prove what I already believe and consider logical anyway.
It is well known and widely undisputed (even by revisionists, as far as I know) that the Nazis wanted to have the jews out of the country. There are different versions, some credible even involving german-jewish groups, how exactly those plans formed, how it was done and if there were compensations or not.
Quite probably concentration camps have been sometimes (ab?)used as forced labor camps or as large scale jails but - this happening in bureaucratic Germany, after all - their primary use was to concentrate (supposedly large masses of) people; hence their name.
Now, get me well, I do not know whether they were concentrated to be killed or to be expulsed or to be put somewhere else (within 3rd. Reich) such as some eastern area. All of it is possible and I'm not ready to exclude any (although the majority of existing evidence points towrds expulsion).
To go beyond concentration camps and to alledge that jews were intentinally mass-murdered needed to be proven. (Remember? We are the good modern people who prove guilt before conviction)
And there the problems start. Of course there is an "overwhelming amount of evidence" but looking closer, almost all of it turns out to be "victims testimonies" of which again very many turn out to be blatant lies. This is not necessarily to be held against those people; after spending time in a concentration camp some form of trauma of psychological problems are quite understandable. It does, however, make it even more important to find objective evidence (which, unfortunately, is not welcome to say the least).
Logic dictates doubts. That side must be seen too.
An example: The 3rd Reich was strictly hierarchically structured. And in such a structure you would simply not find some smaller guys to kill thousands, end even less millions of people without clear order. Furthermore such a large scale mass murder would need quite some organisation which again couldn't stay completely unnoticed. In short, if there were millions of people killed then there would definitely be proof.
Again, my point isn't the result. My point isn't to propagate that German did or did not kill millions of jews. My point is that this must be found out according to well established legal and scientific standards (whatever the result may be).
The British willfully and intentionally (and crudely criminally) bombed civilian area. And this can be proven. It can be proven although it is crudely illegal to intentionally bomb civilian areas. It can be proven although the British wouldn't be proud of such a crime and although many of the British would like to deny it and to lie.
If a crime like the British bombing of civilian areas (over a couple of weeks) can be proven then, sure enough, a planful mass murder going on over years could be proven as well.
Oh and just BTW: Ratzingers father, a police man, didn't have an easy time then because he didn't like the Nazis. I think we can reasonably assume that Ratzinger, 17 or 18 at wars end, wasn't a Nazi.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 12, 2013 9:07:06 PM | 95
Did anyone mention the ongoing Vatican Bank scandal as the potential reason for the popes sudden "resignation"?
I didn't notice it getting mentioned scanning through the comments...
Ratzinger resigns, follow the vatican bank scandal
"What pronounced the death knell on Pope Benedict was his personal implication in the bribery and money-laundering practices of the Vatican Bank, comically known as The Institute of Religious Works (IOR); and how that dirty connection gave the anti-Ratzinger faction in the College of Cardinals the lever they needed to dump the obstinate German from the papal throne"
This may harken back to a scandal breaking in 2010
"Police said the Vatican Bank's chairman Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, who is known to the Pontiff, was under investigation for suspected failure to observe money-laundering laws.
The probe was launched after tax police in Rome were alerted to two suspicious transactions totaling £19million (23million euro)."
The "suspicious" transaction involved money movement to JP Morgan
This sudden resignation has zero to do with child molestation scandals
Posted by: Penny | Feb 13, 2013 7:44:22 AM | 96
95) The holocaust is fact, documented over and over. The victims tell the same story as the perpetrators.
This here is Heinrich Himmler Posen speech of 1943 on the "Ausrottung der Juden" Ausrottung means extinction.
You are a liar with a vile agenda.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 13, 2013 9:21:23 AM | 98
"The holocaust is fact, documented over and over."
I told you before and I tell you again: Show me the proof.
And by proof I mean something that would satisfy the standards of a proper court.
Some youtube video of doubtful origin is not proof. There is a reason that courts don't like audio tapes. They are too easy to fake. Actually, listening carefully one will find that the recording in that video was cut at some spots.
And no, ad hominem attacking someone whose views you don't like isn't proof either.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 13, 2013 9:49:51 AM | 99
Of course the sound track of the voice of a well known politician that can be compared to other recordings is proof.
I am attacking you for a reason. You are not voicing an opinion you lie intentionally.
Posted by: somebody | Feb 13, 2013 10:00:41 AM | 100