# Good Pope/Bad Pope **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 2, 2005, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332 "2005-04-02T00:33:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Scarface\_Z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/50afbb/32.png) [@Scarface\_Z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scarface_Z)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/41 "2005-04-02T22:12:52Z")
> [@](#): > > Also, didn’t he even kiss his would be assassin? :smack: , it was the assassin that kissed the pope’s hand. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/42 "2005-04-02T22:37:46Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > -More than any other single figure, this is the man who toppled Communism and pulled the rug out from any hope for the legitimacy of totalitarian regimes. While no single figure can claim a large portion of this vicotry, he has a larger share than most. Surprised by how quickly all of the Soviet Bloc fell? Then you probably weren’t paying enough attention to this Pope Can you elaborate a bit on what, exactly, he did to help topple communism? None of the articles I’ve seen so far give specifics. ---
**Author:** ![roger\_thornhill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@roger\_thornhill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/roger_thornhill)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/43 "2005-04-02T22:40:38Z")
I think it was playwright Alan Bennett who said that the English will forgive old people anything they might once have one for the achievement of growing old. Clive James (a hard-bitten Aussie with none of that kind of namby pamby sentimentalism) wrote a great piece in The Observer when Nazi architect Albert Speer finally died in 1981: "…Speer cheated the rope, cheated the world and yet further insulted the shades of innocent millions. Those of us who live by our brains should remember his example, which serves to prove that intellect confers no automatic moral superiority. Otherwise we will meet him again in teh Infernal Regions, and be once more confronted with that look of puzzled concern, as if there were something difficult, ponderable and equivocal about the rights and wrongs of tearing children from their mothers’ arms, piling their little shoes in heaps and pushing their twisted corpses into ovens. To hell with him…" ---
**Author:** ![roger\_thornhill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@roger\_thornhill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/roger_thornhill)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/44 "2005-04-02T22:41:46Z")
…might once have **done** … ---
**Author:** ![Scarface\_Z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/50afbb/32.png) [@Scarface\_Z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scarface_Z)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/45 "2005-04-02T22:51:34Z")
> [@Loopydude](#): > > I do not remember that, actually, and am having trouble finding a cite. I’m not saying you’re wrong, just that I would be interested in reading about it, so if you could provide pointers, I would thank you very much for them. No problem. Unfortunately, this article from the the New York Times [In Vatican, Unease with Bush Vies with Qualms on Kerry](http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00A17FF3D590C778EDDA90994DC404482&incamp=archive:search) is too old to get from their website. However, I did get it off my library’s online data base. I can E-mail the whole article if you like, but here are some of the most relevant quotes: > [@](#): > > While many American Catholics oppose Senator John Kerry because he supports abortion rights, church officials and observers here say that if the people who run the Vatican could vote, they would be as divided as Americans are – and might even tilt toward Mr. Kerry. > [@](#): > > At the same time, Monsignor Parolin and other officials noted that American Catholics should vote according to church doctrine – a statement that neither endorses nor rejects the conservative American bishops’ position. While the church’s social doctrine spells out opposition to abortion, it also discusses obligations like defending the poor. > [@](#): > > There are other issues – especially the war in Iraq, which Pope John Paul II has spoken out against – that weigh heavily. > [@](#): > > ‘‘At the end of the day the Vatican is a European institution,’’… He noted that at least half the Vatican staff is European, ‘‘drawn from the same background as people working in foreign ministries of Germany or Italy.’’ > ‘‘In that circle Bush is overwhelmingly an unpopular figure,’’ he added. > [@](#): > > Vatican departments dealing with theology and the family, several experts said, appear to favor Mr. Bush because of his opposition to abortion. Other departments, dealing with diplomacy and poverty, tend to lean toward Mr. Kerry because of the Iraq war and the view that Mr. Bush has generally sidelined diplomacy. > [@](#): > > One Vatican official did offer theological guidance: that it is not necessarily a sin to vote for a candidate who supports abortion rights. The official said in an interview that it would be a sin to vote for such a candidate with the express intention of expanding abortion rights. But if the voter is acting on his conscience taking into consideration all moral questions, it would not be a sin, he said. > [@](#): > > ‘‘It’s not a question that we don’t think abortion has the moral weight that is ascribed to it,’’ the official said. ‘‘Absolutely, but it is difficult to say that a person commits a sin if they vote for a pro-choice politician.’’ > While Mr. Kerry’s abortion stand puts him at odds with church doctrine, several Vatican officials said they were unclear whether Mr. Bush would be in strict accordance, despite his opposition to abortion. Experts with close ties to the Vatican cited not only the war in Iraq but Mr. Bush’s strong support for capital punishment, also opposed by the church. > The experts note that, in church doctrine, abortion is a particular sin: that because abortion robs the innocent of life, it differs from capital punishment or war. At the same time, several experts said, this does not imply endorsement by the Vatican of the American bishops’ warnings against voting for Mr. Kerry. Maybe I got carried away, those are pretty much all the relevant quotes, in fact that’s the bulk of the article. But for lack of a site, although, try this link [Lexis-nexis](http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=cbed45d271588ecd1cfba77c7141c61c&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=5f09b05b8d9d6251815af4fde95d8ea4) . It’s the link to the database my library uses; I didn’t think to see if it was accessible to non-members. Let me know if it works; it would certainly make my citing easier if it works. ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/46 "2005-04-02T23:26:15Z")
Sorry but I can’t respect him one iota, any one who refers to noncatholics as “gravely deficient” and gays as “Objectively Disordered” and to their efforts for civil recognition of their relationships, “Homosexual marriages are part of a new ideology of evil that is insidiously threatening society” …is not worthy of respect. His views of human sexuality and women are primitive beyond belief along with his opposition to the study of cognitive neuroscience which he says is “beneath human dignity.” ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/47 "2005-04-02T23:35:57Z")
Cool. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/48 "2005-04-02T23:42:53Z")
I think he always meant well, but he had a lot of ignorant and bigoted beliefs that made him more of a hindrance than a help to human progress generally. Come to think of it, that’s how I feel about Catholics generallyh. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/49 "2005-04-03T00:20:30Z")
If you haven’t caught the news yet, the pope just died. RIP JPII. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/50 "2005-04-03T00:22:13Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I repeat: Sinead O’Connor was right. Fight the **real** enemy! This message brought to you by a generalized bad mood and overconsumption of Scotch. :o _Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa._ ---
**Author:** ![Scarface\_Z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/50afbb/32.png) [@Scarface\_Z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scarface_Z)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/51 "2005-04-03T01:09:55Z")
Albeit not as noble a quality as pacifism or strength, but how often do you find a pope with a good sense of humor? [He just likes funny hats](http://www.aciprensa.com/Banco/images/jpii-sombrero.jpg) [Again with the hats](http://www.aciprensa.com/Banco/images/jpii-02.jpg) [Pope pretends he’s a superhero](http://www.aciprensa.com/Banco/images/jpii-29.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/52 "2005-04-03T02:10:43Z")
> [@Icerigger](#): > > Sorry but I can’t respect him one iota, any one who refers to noncatholics as > “gravely deficient” and gays as “Objectively Disordered” and to their efforts for civil recognition of their relationships, “Homosexual marriages are part of a new ideology of evil that is insidiously threatening society” …is not worthy of respect. > > His views of human sexuality and women are primitive beyond belief along with his opposition to the study of cognitive neuroscience which he says is “beneath human dignity.” You got cites for those quotes, especially the one about non-Catholics being “gravely deficient?” I’ll grant you his views on gays, sexuality in general and women were horrible, but I don’t recall him ever insulting non-Catholics. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/53 "2005-04-03T02:22:36Z")
“Gravely deficient” may have something to do with [this](http://www.urbandharma.org/bcdialog/bcd3/times900.html). Seems a fairly standard-issue assessment of other doctrines in regards to conservative Christian concepts of salvation. The fact this Pope deigned to acknowledge other Christian sects, however flawed, cas serviceable vehicles of salvation is remarkable in itself, and about as ecumenical a statement on the subject as one is likely to get out of the Vatican, I would imagine. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/54 "2005-04-03T03:43:30Z")
The “gravely deficient” phrase comes from, _Dominus Iesus_, Cardinal Ratzinger’s memorandum to Catholic religious teachers, reminding them that the RCC does not embrace a policy that all religions are equal paths to God. It is the English rendering of a theological technical phrase from Latin (which makes it no less insulting), but it was never issued as a personal belief of the pope (or even of Ratzy, for that matter). ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/55 "2005-04-03T03:47:44Z")
If it’s not at least expected to be a personal belief, why publish it? ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/56 "2005-04-03T03:58:07Z")
A statement at the end of the [Dominus Iesus](http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=3022#VI) reads: > [@](#): > > The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience of June 16, 2000, granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with sure knowledge and by his apostolic authority, ratified and confirmed this Declaration, adopted in Plenary Session and ordered its publication. Why would the Pope ratify and confirm the message if it wasn’t something he felt worthy of belief himself? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/57 "2005-04-03T04:10:00Z")
I was pointing out the difference between technical terms in a theological discussion and the sort of personal belief that prompts one to pray or to act. However, if the phrase offends you, by all means feel free to be as insulted as you wish. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/58 "2005-04-03T04:28:40Z")
Oh, I’m not personally offended or anything, I’m just trying to figure out why one shouldn’t assume the content of the _Dominus Iesus_ isn’t meant to reflect the personal beliefs of the Pope and/or Ratzinger, since the latter composed it, and the former gave it the official stamp, as it were. I understand that “gravely deficient” wasn’t promoted as a “personal belief” that must be held by generic individuals, and perhaps that’s what you meant. It hadn’t occurred to me that the author and cosigner of the document might not be expected to believe all of what it says themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/59 "2005-04-03T04:40:57Z")
Bad Pope: You’re going to _Hell_, Sinner! _Confess, or be damned!_ Good Pope: We’re only trying to help. If only you’d confess, your soul will be saved. Would you like some espresso? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332/60 "2005-04-03T13:16:05Z")
> [@Qadgop the Mercotan](#): > > (Bolding mine). While I pretty much agree with you overall on this issue, I have trouble with the idea that the issues you cite there are _petty differences_. To me, they represent a real fundamental disconnect between world views (his and mine, anyway). I’m thinking long term. By 2100, I’m betting that discrimination against gays will be as unthinkable as slavery seems to us today. Likewise, I’m convinced that ordination of women is inevitable. The church is like a huge ship and cannot make big turns quickly. That time will come. In the meantime, I look at John Paul II in terms of what culture existed in his life. If I assign say a 1-100 scale of importance: Preaching the Trinity: 1000 (Agree with him-infinitely most important) Teaching to love your fellow man: 100 (agree with him) Standing up for human rights: 90 (agree) Inspiring the youth of the world: 90 (agree) Opposition to war: 90 (agree) Stressing the value of the individual 90 (agree) Taking action to stop abuse in the US church: 70. (I think he did what you can expect. The crisis started before his papacy. When it blew up, he summoned the US bishops and told them to clean house. What more could he do?) His role in toppling communism in Poland: 80 (agree) Anti-abortion 20 (disagree. But we would both agree that unwanted pregnancies should not take place) Opposition to contraception: 10 (disagree. But his opposition is largely academic. It is routinely ignored.) Opposition to euthanasia: 5 (disagree in part. Jack Kevorkian was all to eager to do the deed. With proper pain medication, there should be no need to end a life prematurely. Only when pain is unbearable would I disagree with him) Ordination of women: 10 (disagree. I think the shortage of male candidates will eventually topple this prohibition) Gay rights: 20 (disagree. But I see this as a long term issue and eventually the Church will come around) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-pope-bad-pope/297332.md?page=4)