The Pope’s Denial Problem

NEWSWEEK

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Jbright9 @ 02/01/2009 11:59:19 AM

    People have fled the Catholic church in droves. I used to love Charlton Heston until he became the voice of the NRA. I used to love Mel Gibson until he let his radical religious ideas become public.

    I used to be religious until I started reading and studying the Bible and church history. If there is a God, he doesn't care a bit about this stuff except I do believe he would care about how we treat each other.

    • Posted By: jimgreen @ 02/03/2009 4:31:36 PM

      I think moving away from the church has certainly made Europe a nicer place. Maybe it will happen in the US too?

  • Posted By: Artfully @ 02/01/2009 12:31:03 PM

    Since this is Super Bowl Sunday, I will say it this way: GO JUDAS!!!
    Any religion that has as its main symbol an instrument of torture and death is obviously suspect and twisted.

    • Posted By: jimgreen @ 02/03/2009 4:29:58 PM

      Jesus walked into a motel, laid 3 nails on the counter and said, "Can you put me up for the night?"

  • Posted By: starwatcher777 @ 02/01/2009 8:41:41 PM

    It seems that Newsweek is giving a larger and larger role to opinion pieces. As a Non-believer (Not atheist, just a person who looks as most religions as wishful thinking) I can't seem to motivate myself to care.

    I do have a question to some of the more faithful here though (First of all I do not ask this in a sense of hate or derision, I am merely curious)

    Are you as a believer, able to agree with the viewpoint that there is a positive correlation between people who choose to believe in some religion and people who will twist or ignore empirical reality that is at odds with some belief said person has?

    Furthermore, do you believe that the magnitude of them ignoring empirical reality is greater then when a secular person ignores reality because it clashes with said persons pre-set beliefs?

    Do you belief their are any rational or secular reasons to belief in your or any religion?

    Why is faith a good quality to have? I myself find the idea of believing in something with no apparent rational reason to a little disconcerting, probably why I never adopted a religion.

    MY apologies for any offense I have given. Also for my bad grammar, i kicked a few back earlier

    • Posted By: jimgreen @ 02/03/2009 4:26:56 PM

      To answer your questions as someone who is deeply religious, yet also a Computer Engineer.

      >>Are you as a believer, able to agree with the viewpoint that there is a positive correlation between people who choose to believe in some religion and people who will twist or ignore empirical reality that is at odds with some belief said person has?

      Yes, I agree with this. There are far too many religious nutcases around.

      >>Furthermore, do you believe that the magnitude of them ignoring empirical reality is greater then when a secular person ignores reality because it clashes with said persons pre-set beliefs?

      It definitely causes more harm when religious folk ignore reality than when secular folk do.

      >>Do you belief their are any rational or secular reasons to belief in your or any religion?

      No, there are no rational or secular reasons. Though one may be better mental health - I studies found less depression in religious folk.

      Why is faith a good quality to have? I myself find the idea of believing in something with no apparent rational reason to a little disconcerting, probably why I never adopted a religion.

      >>I like the philosophy, intellectualism, music and art present in my religion. The debates about existentialism, and calming or moving experiences of my religion. How my religion is basically the pursuit of the Universe (God!) so Physics, Chemistry, etc., are all valid denominations because they seek to explain God. How different denominations of my faith include monotheists, non-theists, henotheists, etc. How everything is up for debate. Unfortunately, many religions do not share this diverity. Also, I may have a broader view of my religion than do my co-religionists, becuase I am from a pastoral order, so am more connected to this stuff, than lay people.

    • Posted By: RangerDan @ 02/01/2009 9:35:12 PM

      Starwatcher - Empirical reality is subject to the irrationalities of the person(s) creating the thought. The problem I have is that we as a species have had very little time as a "smart" society and really have discovered very little about our cosmos. A small group of us set foot on our moon nearly 40 years ago, which may have been a big step for man, but it is hardly an important milestone given the vastness of our visual universe. I believe that given our relatively recent relations to the apes that we have not progressed nearly enough to profess a yes or no answer to the existence of God. And furthermore I am extremely suspect of anybody that would venture a no answer to that question. I find it short sighted, simple, and a bit arrogant for a trained scientist to proclaim there is no God. My answer to your question about a positive correlation is yes of course there is for some people. But not for all. My answer to your question of magnitude is, I can only look at the magnitude of the effects caused by an individual's refusal of empirical reality. Has damage to humans been caused by religious refusal of empirical reality. Of course, but the same is true of secular dis-belief. Do I believe there are any "rational" reasons to believe in god. Well the statement goes: "At first there was nothing, and then it exploded." That tells me that we as a species don't know enough yet. And everything we do has a cause and effect. Something started it. I think it was a supreme being.

      • Posted By: nimodahooligan @ 02/03/2009 11:45:24 AM

        or we are part of a living being, such as the solar system is a mere atom, and the universe is a living entity. expelling energy, creating energy, moving, flowing, changing, and growing. and why would this be hard to comprehend? we have after all discovered microscopic living, breathing, functioning life on many many microscopic levels....why couldnt we be a microscopic part of a bigger picture? which we are, everyone pretty much agrees on that in one form or another...

        i used to love looking into microscopes and viewing aemeba (miss-spelled), and the closer you looked, the more you found and noticed. it an atom is a solar system, and there are X amounts of solar systems in just one galaxy, and there are X amount of galaxies that we know of (that are even visible with our current technology, the universe is big, inconceivably big), and we are on the verge of discovering other dimensions and possible universes.... for all we know we (the universe) could be some booger that got picked and wiped under a desk and we are merely comprised of all the necessities for life and energy (all of which surrounds us, and our solar systmes, and our galaxy).

        i think its so complicated that is simple. there was, and is no, grand "designer"...only natural, spontaneous, miraculous life. there is not much order withing our universe, our galaxy, our solar system, and especially here on earth. and if some hyper intelligent, pan-dimensional being created EVERYTHING...youd think they would be smart enough to put some kind of order to it all. thats one thing that we hav figured out as a species...as we grow as civilization, as we grow in intelligence, we bring order to the world around us... there is no order to be found in the cosmos...

        and IF there is a god, deity, supreme being...im positive they have bigger more exciting projects to keep an eye on rather than a little blue and green noisy planet with a bunch of self oppressing, violent, feeble minded little ants like us...

        this post is so off topic its not even funny.

        • Posted By: catspaw @ 02/03/2009 3:19:42 PM

          But is it truly off topic, or is this what the article wants us to think about. Just maybe, we are all being trained to guide a new planet? Of course it will many many life times, and living in many different worlds and deminsions.

  • Posted By: PalmBeach50 @ 02/02/2009 7:25:52 AM

    Nothing suprises me anymore about the Catholics. I was born and raised one, and couldnt run fast enough after my confirmation. They make up their own rules as they go along anyway.
    Fact; The Pope knows no more about God than a Bishop, Athiest or Muslem, or me for that matter. For that reason, the only people that his opinion matters to, are his cult followers.

    • Posted By: jimgreen @ 02/03/2009 4:12:41 PM

      I agree. The problem with religion is the sermons. Religions that don't have sermons as a regular feature have much less violence.

  • Posted By: Concerned Canadian @ 02/03/2009 2:39:20 PM

    Pope Benedict is the worst Pope the Vatican has seen in centuries. Time to go back and elect friendly old Italian cardinals for Pope from now on. Pope Benedict was once enrolled in the Nazi Youth Army under Hitler. Whether it was against his will or not , it still reflects badly on the Roman Catholic church that they are led by a Pope who has a Swastika tattooed somewhere on his body. That's no good in my opinion.

    • Posted By: jimgreen @ 02/03/2009 3:43:34 PM

      Can we elect one of those guys from Goodfellas as Pope? They were always sitting around in the kitchen eating pasta and ordering hits.

  • Posted By: jimgreen @ 02/03/2009 3:36:25 PM

    Re: who spread the vile libels that blame the democratic United States for the theocratic terrorist attacks upon it.

    The US did have a hand in creating and funding the Taliban. The US does share blame for 9/11. It is wrong to motivate and fund religious lunatics to attack others (the USSR) that one may have a beef with.

  • Posted By: Daphne Kenward @ 02/03/2009 3:13:08 PM

    I agree that this POPE is not ver nice person, a member of the Hitler youth can only be a bad Omen.

  • Posted By: JoanR @ 02/03/2009 2:05:14 PM

    The Pope also embraces Islamic fundamentalists for whom Holocaust denial ( while promising a new one) is fed to infants. Not as PC as Hitchens rant, but true all the same.

  • Posted By: boscobear @ 02/03/2009 9:54:17 AM

    The Pope is looking everywhere for support for the Catholic Church's stand on gay rights, birth control, women priests and any belief that supports holding people down. He is increasingly showing his loss of touch with realiism--can anyone say demientia?

  • Posted By: Nowforsomemoretruth @ 02/02/2009 1:33:53 PM

    Never mind this for now. Its been days since KY was crippled by the ice storm, and unlike Hurricanes, another shot of aortic air is on the way. WHERE IS THE MEDIA COVERAGE ON THE INADEQUACY OF THE RESPONSE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO HELP THESE FOLKS IN THE COLD???? WHERE IS THE COVERAGE ABOUT WHY POWER HAS NOT BEEN RESTORED????? When it was Bagdad or New Orleans, the media was losing their minds. Where are they now???

    • Posted By: sms29s66 @ 02/03/2009 9:00:11 AM

      Just remember, Bush was not responsible for 9-11 because he had only been in office since January. That set a precedent. Obama will not have to take the rap for anything until at least 9-12-09.

  • Posted By: peterpiper @ 02/03/2009 5:28:37 AM

    I agree and it is a bit frightening that it is being overlooked by the world.

  • Posted By: grogs7 @ 02/03/2009 1:26:08 AM

    It seems a bit simpler to me. Jesus, the guy Catholics strive to be like, made a point to accept people that generally were outcasts. Think of these people that the pope has brought back into the fold like the tax collectors of Jesus' time. Yeah, it makes the pope and the church look bad - but since when is that new to Christianity and Catholicism? Jesus started it.

    So remind me why excommunication even exists within the Catholic church?

  • Posted By: ajmiller22 @ 02/02/2009 10:05:44 PM

    I am gratified by Mr. Christopher Hitchens' excellent article in defense of the minority of which I am a member, and his appropriate criticism of the misguided recent decision by the Pope. There is no logic that can explain the Pope's decision to forgive blatant evil in the guise of religious conviction. And as Mr. Hitchens indicates, the Pope not only forgives Holocaust deniers, but empowers the distortion of human values from Hutton and Mel Gibson.

  • Posted By: DragonScorpion @ 02/02/2009 8:28:36 PM

    I would LOVE to see Hitchens debate the Pope. Hitchens would expose the lack of integrity that the Church hierarchy has shown down through the many decades & centuries. The Pope would have a difficult time debating a man of Hicthens' intellect & irreverence to the dogma. Without the smoke & mirrors, the man behind the curtain simply doesn't have much power...

    Excellent article by Mr. Hitchens, though I do disagree about the "vile libels that blame the democratic United States for the theocratic terrorist attacks upon it". We may not be "to blame" for 9/11 & other terrorist attacks upon the U.S. and U.S. interests, however, one cannot claim in an intellectually honest way that such hostilities toward the U.S. are not a direct consequence of our foreign policies down through the decades -- from nearly blind support of Israel, to our propping up of dictators in Iraq, Iran & Saudi Arabia, to our arming & playing both sides against the other, to our interloping in the domestic affairs & economic stability of various countries in the Middle East, all to serve our own geopolitical & economic interests. It isn't an excuse for them, merely an explanation of causation.

    Blowback is a consequence of hegemony. Imperialism has ALWAYS come at a great price to the Empire. Perhaps it is a price we are willing to continue to pay, however, one cannot legitimately expect the other side to not resist.

  • Posted By: jameskbachman @ 02/02/2009 7:22:45 PM

    Come now, Mr. Hitchens, get yourself into a face-to-face debate with the Pope instead of taking potshots at him from afar. You would then have more (or less) credibility. Or are you afraid to face the one you accuse? Surely the Pope would have time to talk things over with such a distinguished intellectual as yourself. Or are you afraid the Pope will strip you of your intellectual fame? And have you ever heard of tolerance of differing viewpoints?

  • Posted By: albinoluciani @ 02/02/2009 6:11:03 PM

    www.bishop-accountability.org/abusetracker for daily verified & vetted coverage on the ongoing criminality of the Roman "La Cosa Nostra" Curia & USCCB (Unremoved Sexual Criminal Cabal Bishops), to date having cost laity at least $12 Billion Documented Diverted Global Laity Offetory Plate Dollars, with no real correction, no end in sight, and child endangerment still widely pervasive in the Roman Catholic Church, from many hundreds of documented/unremoved cardinal & bishop office holding enablers, aid & abettors, perpetrators, racketeers, obstructors of justice, perjurers, & defrauders. This SCHISM issue is a small side show in comparison to the deep and perhaps mortal wounds going in the continued child/minors' sexaul assault scandal and cover up. The laity ARE voting with their feet, and NOT returning, (hence massive closures of parishes throughout the world). St. Peter Damien remains correct in his assertion "STOP DONATING LAITY!". Edmund Burke reminds each of us: "The only condition for the triumph of evil (Nazis or Crooked Pedo Curia) is for good men (or women) to do nothing!" Remember, the Curia's Motto Remains = ISAIAH 28:15!
    Ratzinger, Leveda, Mahony, Law, Burke, O'Malley McCarrick, Schonborn, Rivera, Hummes, Re, Bertone, Scola, Sodano, Pell, Maida, Egan, George, DiNardo, Rigali, Sambi, Keeler, Foley, etc. are the problem, and each must be removed, each canoncially censored, & each house arrested in a Gulag, in no EXCOMMUNICATED, like Marciel, proven serial pedophile and founder of the pedo cult the Mexican Legion Of Christ/Regnum Christi, immediately; if not sooner. Fiat Lux & Veritas! Albino Luciani, MURDERED POPE, Not Smiling, From Heaven

  • Posted By: Neddy470 @ 02/02/2009 3:03:44 PM

    Apologies for the double post, browser troubles.

  • Posted By: Neddy470 @ 02/02/2009 3:01:56 PM

    While the rest of the article provides a fantastic critique, it's the last two paragraphs or so that hammer home why Benedict would rather cozy up to the "devil he knows" rather than any greater angel of non-racist inclusion. Because, as bigoted as those Germans may be, they will stand with the church against outsiders. Mr. Hitchens has made it clear he will not, and has made it clear that the sooner the church destroys itself the better, so why should Benedict placate him?

  • Posted By: Neddy470 @ 02/02/2009 3:00:49 PM

    While the rest of the article provides a fantastic critique, it's the last two paragraphs or so that hammer home why Benedict would rather cozy up to the "devil he knows" rather than any greater angel of "non-racist inclusion." Because, as bigoted as those Germans may be, they will stand with the church against outsiders. Mr. Hitchens has made it clear he will not, why should they placate him?

  • Posted By: boscobear @ 02/02/2009 1:13:10 PM

    By his lastest actions in trying to reconcile with the extremist Bishop, further increases the meaningless of the Pope Can he be recalled?

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse