Sorry for that Inquisition business folks. Same for the forced mass conversion to christianity, the burnings at the stake, the crusades, and all that other nonsense the church got carried away with…
But all you homosexual, pro-abortion types are still going to hell! We’re not sorry about that… not yet anyway…
Does this appology hold water for anyone? Anyone?..
I think it does.
Eh, it’s a start.
Enlighten me. I fail to see how.
It’s a little bit like being caught at doing something you are not supposed to. You admit culpability but offer no attonement. How will the church plan on attoning for it’s sins?
I’m affraid I don’t have much “faith” in their acts of contrition. It’s wonderful thing when you can go and confess all your sins to a priest and after a half a dozen Hail Marys walk away with a clear concience. Handy little trick that.
Well, I don’t think our current Pope or too many people who are alive these days participated in any of these things. I would also guess that there aren’t too many people alive who have suffered from them.
So to whom should this payment be made?
On the other hand, I think that the Pope speaking on behalf of the organization known as the Catholic Church is doing a positive thing by pointing out that these actions were wrong, and shouldn’t be repeated.
There is also an argument to be made that the Catholic Church has been around long enough to have encountered most of the pitfalls of organized religion. Hopefully it is wary enough not to repeat.
i don’t see any disagreement here. So far we seem to agree that this is better than nothing, and that it is less than complete.
Let’s acknowledge the forward step which they have taken, and which must have been extraordinarily difficult for a religion which has so much intertia fighting against such a move. At the same time, we cannot allow anyone to get the idea that this will suffice, and that all is forgiven.
One step at a time.
Quicksilver,
What would you have the Pope do?
He issued an apology. What more do you want?
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
Well, permit me to draw an analogy.
In the 12th century through the middle ages, not being Christian was tantamount to herassy. You were either converted or punished. Usually both. Why? You were not following the teachings/beliefs of the church.
Cut to today. As a practicing Catholic woman, you may find yourself faced with a decision about an abortion vs having an unwanted child. The position of the church is clear in this matter and you will doubtfully get much support from your religious community if you choose the former.
I guess I’d like to see the church say - We’re sorry and we’ve learned from our mistakes. We have no right telling women what they can or cannot do with their body and all that we can do is support them in their decision. We cannot and will not ostricise them for making a choice that is contrary to our doctrine.
Now, I know abortion is a tough one. There’s that whole obsession with the soul the church can’t seem to shake. But couldn’t they be forward thinking for a change as a way of appologizing for the countless lives they destroyed.
Wouldn’t that be something to see.
Unfortunately, I have been unable to find a text of the speech, and the bwlow is based only on the news reports I have heard. If anyone knows where the text can be found, in English, please post a reference.
From the reports I’ve heard, the apology was pretty vague. In very general terms, he said that Christians has done some very un-Christian things. He did not name any specific events, such as the Church’s actions during the Crusades, or its inactions during the holocaust. He did not name any specific people, allowing one to interpret the speech as referring to individual Catholic laypeople, rather than anyone of official standing within the Church.
The speech as given seems to be a great start. Getting specific about details is the way to improve on it.
Actually Quicksilver I’m not sure I follow you.
Abortion is a pretty controversial issue, and I’m not sure how you could draw a parrallel between the Churches attitude toward abortion, and the Inquisition.
“The whole soul thing” as you put it is a pretty basic tenet of most religions.
The question comes down to if you are destroying human life and a soul by having an abortion.
I think it’s perfectly valid for a Church to have an opinion on this issue.
I mentioned getting specific about the actions which were done, and about the people who did them. QuickSilver would also like to see specifics about other Church doctrines, such as homosexuality and abortion.
Personally, I think that “changing a doctrine” is very different than “apologizing for an action”, and that this speech is very unlikely to develop into anything that would satisfy QuickSilver. On the other hand, it could be argued that the Crusades was also a doctrine. So who knows what the future may bring?
The historical parallel is interesting. John Paul is a popular pope who is now making an apology late in his “term”. The next pope could take that to the next step, like John XXIII did when he convened the ecumenical councils, after Pius XII had apologized for some of the church’s divisiveness.
The catholic church moves slower than plate tectonics.
rocks
Now I have not read an actual transcript of the apology, so bear with me. I feel like this should not really be a debate though. Wasn’t he really just asking for forgiveness from God, not from us folks? If so, it really doesn’t matter what we think or if we feel he has done enough to satify our interests.
If you are correct, and you may well be, then why make the appology so public. If he is asking forgiveness from god for the past sins of the church then why not do it in private like most people who believe in prayer.
The entire stunt just smells of a publicity stunt. I’m sure the church is not above a little publicity. Hey, who doesn’t want to portray a new image for the new millenium?!
Scylla -
I don’t object to the church having an opinion on any topic, whether it be abortion, homosexuality, Tomayto or Tomaato. Opinions are good.
I’m merely suggesting that in light of the injustices done in the past 2000 years (and some are painfully recent) would it not behoove them to lighten up a little bit on their current stance? I mean, doesn’t it show a certain amount of conceit when they admit to having commited great wrongs but still remain categorically opposed on issues that may conceivably be equally wrong. They haven’t exactly shown the greatest track record for tollerance in the past. Wouldn’t a little more tollerance now be a welcome change?
Well, I for one think what the guy said took guts, and I applaud him for it.
How many other religious leaders are saying, “We made a mistake, and we pray for forgiveness?”
Are Baptist leaders issuing prayers for forgiveness for its policies that openly supported the KKK in the '20s?
The Pope made great pains to say that the church itself was okay, but some people/leaders in the past made mistakes. A ballsy move that I can’t see anyone would have a problem.
Is it a publicity stunt? Call me nutty, but I don’t think the RCC really NEEDS the press that badly…
Yer pal,
Satan
Quicksilver:
I still don’t understand. Are you suggesting that since the Church now admits that it screwed up in the past the Pope should just say “Well, we’ve screwed up in the past, so I guess you might as well have abortions if you want?”
What’s the connection?
If the Church thinks abortions are wrong, it should take that position. Admission of errors in the past doesn’t mean the Church is wrong now, and shouldn’t take a strong position on a controversial issue.
Satan -
On the topic of PR for the RCC, I beg to differ…
There has been a tremendouse loss of followers in the past 100 years and that leak is getting wider with each new generation. I believe the church would be the first to attest to that trend.
The only reason we are seeing attempts at a New and Improved RCC is that the old trusty rusty one could not keep enough of the flock in the fold. It’s a brave new world with people mixing and matching religious customs to suite their lifestyle as opposed to tailoring their lives to live in line with the church’s 2000 year old tennates.
This trend in nothing new natch, but the realization that they may not have been the most … ummmmm… tollerant organization in the past is very much in spirit with the One World, World Economy, Why can’t we all just get along feeling of the millenium. Nothing wrong with that per se. It’s a step in the right direction. It’s just too small of a baby step for such an old institution. Perhaps an institution that’s out-lived it’s usefullness.
As for the Baptists and Anglicans and whoever else, they too will begin to attone for this or that in pretty short order. Just watch. It’s an excellent PR move and they can all certainly use the exposure.
Scylla -
Don’t get me wrong. I do see your point. If you are going to have a big ol’ social club then it would be best to have a rallying point. God seems like a good one for a religious organization.
All I’m saying is that an appology is not enough IMHO for all the crap of the past. Should the Pope fall on a sword? Well, no-one would want to witness that. Would something short of that do? Plenty of things short of that would do. Perhaps tollerating abortions is a bit much to ask with all that soul saving in the way but how about same sex marriages. Gays in the service of the church. How about taking a more active role in removing the pedophiles from it’s rank and file. How about reigning in some of those Polish RC nuns from trying to turn Auschwitz and other WWII concentration camp sights in Poland into a lovely parks for the kiddies.
How come I’ve never heard the Pope announce any specific acts of contricion the church was going to take part in? It’s very convenient to appologize for forcibly converting damn near the entire jewish population of Spain to Christianity 600 years ago. A fat lot of good it does anyone now. Kind of absolves them of any corrective measures after that much time has passed. But how about the much more recent injustices? Certainly they can still make some amends. Oh, but the church needs to really want to and I just don’t see the substance of this intent. Until I do, I am not buying the sincerety of this entire stunt. But that just my cynical nature and humble opinion.
Quicksilver,
I SUSPECT what you are saying is that you wish the church would relax it’s attitude on women’s issues, such as abortion, women priests and the like.
The Catholic church, specifically the Pope has often spoke of the sanctity of life, and the “culture of death” the world seems to find it self in. I submit that relaxing the abortion stance would go contrary to those beliefs.
Regarding women priests, the church will, of course, point to the Bible. The Bible is clear that women should not hold that role, but can lead bible group meetings, and some other functions. There is definitley important and needed roles that women are called upon to fulfill.
Addressing this “tolerance” issue…I think we need to understand that tolerance doesn’t mean unilateral approval of a subject. For instance, I will tolerate that others have different religions, and in the US these folks have the right to express their belief. I tolerate that, but that doesn’t mean I condone their religion. In other words, you can “put up” with something, but you don’t have to accept it.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
I would like to think that the Catholic Church seeks (doesn’t always succeed) to do good rather than evil. A 2000 year old institution is bound to screw up from time to time.
Has the US apologized for Slavery?
Has Canada apologized for Bryan Adams?
Has George Lucas apologized for Episode 1?
Etcetera etcetera
I would also like to think the Church stands for something other than a social club.
Contrition towards God (not towards you) really isn’t a good reason why the CHurch should change its doctrine just to satisfy your viewpoints. (that’s not an attack against your viewpoints by the way)