Habemus Papam!

[MrGongGong]

Does that make you a pen friend, POD?

"POD" ?
That's what the other members of Black Sabbath called Ozzy (Prince of Darkness)

[Padraig]

amateur, I would place no bars on repentance. Well, not in most cases.

[french frank]

"Francisco" has a better resonance to it for me than the Anglicised "Francis". Presumably this is what he calls himself.

I think he might call himself rather more familiarly Paco (or Pancho).

[scottycelt]

I do not know how much if any truth there may be in any allegations made against the present Pope and, like anyone else in a just society, he should be treated and regarded as innocent of each and every one of them until proved guilty of any of them, but you do yourself no favours in referring patronisingly to "the usual issues like 'gay marriage'"; do you seriously believe that an organisation like the Catholic Church (which is a large international one even if the extent of its following appears to be widely exaggerated in some quarters) can indefinitely remain wholly inflexible about not only gay marriage but also the rôle of women inside and outside the Church, the insistence upon celibacy and unmarried status of priests, use of contraception, abortion rights, homosexuality, legal divorce, the rights of Catholics to become and be regarded as non-Catholics after leaving the Church and all the rest of it while secular laws on most of these things in most places progress and change? How realistic a position do you really think that this is for the Catholic Church to adopt and maintain? All of these are not merely "usual issues"; they are very important issues that affect society and the position of Catholics and their Church within that society. Most people who appear to support the Church's obdurate head-in-sand approach to such matters tend to brush aside any question of what Christ himself might have thought about them which, again, does them no favours, I think.

You still don't get it, ahinton.

The Catholic Church is simply not going to dump its moral stance on 'the usual issues' in favour of modern secular mores or convenience. It never has done and it isn't going to start now. It just isn't going to happen. Just forget this strange, somewhat naive notion. Sorry if this is so upsetting for you but you must know the truth or you are likely to get uptight even more.

To object to a simple phrase like 'usual issues' is absurd, ahinton. Abortion 'rights', contraception and 'gay marriage are the usual issues that non-Catholics like yourself constantly raise and it is the Catholic Church which realises the importance of these issues more than most.

Nobody is forcing you to accept Catholic doctrines. You are welcome to lead your own life exactly as you see fit free from any interference from the Church.

Please accept that Catholics are perfectly entitled to do likewise. Has it ever even occurred to you that some of your own beliefs may be anathema to others?

It could just be possible, you know.

[Serial_Apologist]

You still don't get it, ahinton.

The Catholic Church is simply not going to dump its moral stance on 'the usual issues' in favour of modern secular mores or convenience. It never has done and it isn't going to start now. It just isn't going to happen. Just forget this strange, somewhat naive notion. Sorry if this is so upsetting for you but you must know the truth or you are likely to get uptight even more.

To object to a simple phrase like 'usual issues' is absurd, ahinton. Abortion 'rights', contraception and 'gay marriage are the usual issues that non-Catholics like yourself constantly raise and it is the Catholic Church which realises the importance of these issues more than most.

Nobody is forcing you to accept Catholic doctrines. You are welcome to lead your own life exactly as you see fit free from any interference from the Church.

Please accept that Catholics are perfectly entitled to do likewise. Has it ever even occurred to you that some of your own beliefs may be anathema to others?

It could just be possible, you know.

What if ahinton hasn't got any beliefs?

[scottycelt]

"In 1998 Rupert [Murdoch] received a papal knighthood, thanks largely to his $10m donation to Los Angeles Cathedral ...."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/jul/15/catholicism-pope-benedict-xvi

Pass the sick bag.

Don't you read any other newspapers ... ?

Have you something against donations to Los Angeles Cathedral and Papal Knighthoods?

Are you so allergic to Old Rupey that the mere mention of his name makes you feel nauseous ... ?

Finally, do you have a distinct habit of demonising everyone and everything that does not share your Marxist view of the world.?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Are you so allergic to Old Rupey that the mere mention of his name makes you feel nauseous ... ?

Sums me up!

[Ferretfancy]

The most important part of the Pope's appearance on the balcony last night - missed by the various commentators on the TV channels as far as I can see - was that no Catholics listening to the Pope last night, should they die in the near future, will now have to go through Purgatory. His blessing granted a "plenary indulgence" on all who were listening or watching. That means if you are good you will from last night go straight to Heaven without having to go through Purgatory. Now, wasn't that nice of him and wasn't it a shame that the translator did not tell us the good news?

Vinteuill

No doubt scotty can correct me, but I think you will find that Purgatory was done away with by the Catholic Church some years ago. What happened to the souls who were already there was not explained.

[Mr Pee]

Don't you read any other newspapers ... ?

Have you something against donations to Los Angeles Cathedral and Papal Knighthoods?

Are you so allergic to Old Rupey that the mere mention of his name makes you feel nauseous ... ?

Finally, do you have a distinct habit of demonising everyone and everything that does not share your Marxist view of the world.?

What an evil old man, donating millions to the Church.

String him up.

[jean]

No doubt scotty can correct me, but I think you will find that Purgatory was done away with by the Catholic Church some years ago. What happened to the souls who were already there was not explained.

You're thinking of limbo.

Purgatory is still there - otherwise there wouldn't be any point in the indulgence his Holiness dispensed last night, would there?

[jean]

You are welcome to lead your own life exactly as you see fit free from any interference from the Church.

Unless you're gay and you want to get married.

Then you can expect that the Church will do its best to persuade the State not to allow it.

[Julien Sorel]

Don't you read any other newspapers ... ?

I don't read The Guardian. I Googled for Rupert Murdoch and Papal Knighthood and that was the first 'hit'.

Have you something against donations to Los Angeles Cathedral and Papal Knighthoods?

Yes.

Are you so allergic to Old Rupey that the mere mention of his name makes you feel nauseous ... ?

No. He's an obvious kind of person for an organisation that claims to be religious to honour. Being so unworldly and good and that.

Finally, do you have a distinct habit of demonising everyone and everything that does not share your Marxist view of the world.?

I don't have a Marxist view of the world because I'm not a Marxist. I'm sort of an anarchist-Marxist, but I'm open to other ideas. Phenomenology is an interest. I don't wear a habit distinct or vague because I'm not a nun. And I don't believe in demons so I don't see how I could demonise anyone or anything. "Everything" is interesting. Do you mean exorcising a table, for instance?

What an evil old man, donating millions to the Church.

String him up.

He was 67 when he received his Papal Knighthood. I doubt he thought of himself as old at the time. As for evil - I leave that to the theologians here. Are you interested in theology, Mr Pee?

[ahinton]

You still don't get it, ahinton.

The Catholic Church is simply not going to dump its moral stance on 'the usual issues' in favour of modern secular mores or convenience. It never has done and it isn't going to start now. It just isn't going to happen. Just forget this strange, somewhat naive notion. Sorry if this is so upsetting for you but you must know the truth or you are likely to get uptight even more.

To object to a simple phrase like 'usual issues' is absurd, ahinton. Abortion 'rights', contraception and 'gay marriage are the usual issues that non-Catholics like yourself constantly raise and it is the Catholic Church which realises the importance of these issues more than most.

Nobody is forcing you to accept Catholic doctrines. You are welcome to lead your own life exactly as you see fit free from any interference from the Church.

Please accept that Catholics are perfectly entitled to do likewise. Has it ever even occurred to you that some of your own beliefs may be anathema to others?

It could just be possible, you know.

Dear me, scotty!

I'm not seeking to tell the Church what it should do but pointing out that if it doesn't do it it will continue to disengage itself farther and farther from the society that it is supposed to represent; as a non-Chrustian I stoill do care about that and do not want to see it happen.

I'd love to think that the Church recognises the importance of all of these issues and hope that they debate them and consider a way forward that will work for it and for society.

I know that the Church does not force its doctrine on me, scotty; I don;t need you to tell me that. Sorry if that sounds rude; it's not meant to!

I've said nothing about my beliefs and all that I'd say about them now is that I doubt that many would consider them to be anathema because they wouldn't know what they are.

[Serial_Apologist]

Don't you read any other newspapers ... ?

Have you something against donations to Los Angeles Cathedral and Papal Knighthoods?

Are you so allergic to Old Rupey that the mere mention of his name makes you feel nauseous ... ?

Finally, do you have a distinct habit of demonising everyone and everything that does not share your Marxist view of the world.?

In my case the answers to the first three would be a resounding yes. To the last it would be no; you jump all to rapidly to conclusions, scotty.

[Flosshilde]

Surely only an Oxford classicist would think that? ‘The First World War’ can just mean that there had been an event, a world war, which had happened for the first time, as in ‘the recent war of 1914 was the first in which combatants from many parts of the world took part’. The question as to whether there would ever be a successor is left open.

I suppose it might depend on whether the 'first' was capitalised: 'The first World War' or 'The first World war' is not the same as 'The First World War'