JAMES:

The fact that you have no replies to the abundant facts I cited is decisive, tells everything, of course. All you can do is mention a historian notorious for his sycophancy to established figures as perhaps exculpating ONE pope rather than the Catholic Church. The latter's collaboration with Nazism, even AFTER the War, is too large a fact to go away.

I think NS readers will mke up their own minds from our exchange.

"The majority of the protesters against the pope's visit were white middle class liberals. Fact, not generalisation." Lox

Do demonstrate the empirical method you used to assess the ethnicity, political status, class and choleric levels of the 28,000 people who signed even the NSS petition, never mind the others.

We all know what 'spoiled' means Lox, even as you choose to apply it specifically. You have no hope of showing if, to whom, or to what degree it applies in the context in which you are using it. It is, in short, a prejudiced stereotype used pejoratively.

It goes without saying that you have now concentrated on denigration, 'cleverly' disguised as generalisation, and clumsily avoided the main content of my post. From what I read here this appears typical of struggling religious apologists.

My thoughts regarding comparisons were based on the frequently-aired notions of 'worseness', which have centred either around numbers of paedophiles in the community, the world in general or in other religions. They have been for the most part shown to be inaccurate and, seemingly, expressed by some Catholics seeking to dilute or defuse the continuing scandalous revelations.

Catholicism? Protestantism? Islam stealing the show? Are their gods, these pretenders to knowledge haven't a clue. So don't listen to them. Arguably we could do without the lot of them, with their constant moralizing, the miles of abstruse but empty narrative, their irrevocable bloodshed, their threats, their crimes against humanity and their lives of guilty denial.

And a plague upon all of the establishment architects - the airbrush-wielding, selective sanitizers who, for the sake of tradition and to maintain some sort of 1950s status quo, back up the creeping apologists and refuse to allow us all to believe that we can think for ourselves.

The Catholics want to titillate themselves over some pantomime or other? Fine. Let them pay for it. There is a case however for making a stand against the never-ending hypocrisy seemingly contained within this bizarre institution, by making it quite plain that whilst some people wish to be led by the nose a vast majority do not and neither do they want their lives defined by it.

Gods or not gods, how long before a website springs up as a cathartic forum for all those who have been victims of this church, or of religion generally?

I still pray for the conversion of England, but I fear it may be a wait. Current demographic trends suggest that while our immediate future will probably be more religious than the dismal present, it likely won't be Catholicism filling the void created by the collapse of the Church of England.

We know who we are - secular, modernist, progressive, libertarian.

The problem is the Catholic church doesn't recognise itself - a congregation of repressed, delusional, medieval voodoo fans who can't see their ridiculous idolatry, hypocrisy and denial for what it is.

The Catholic Church insists on referring to the Church of England as 'Protestant', but it isn't. Both branches rote-recite the Nicene Creed during their main congregational worship: "We believe in one holy, catholic and apostolic Church". This confused me no end the first time I attended an Anglican service in my 20s after a lifetime of forced RC attendance.

Protestant churches, typically non-Episcopalian, have very different forms of worship and often a very different approach to the Bible, especially the Old Testament. The CofE is a broad church, encompassing smells and bells; happy-clappers and everything in between, but Protestant it isn't.

'Are there gods' even.

Geography, demographics and education should be completely remote / divorced and nothing to do with religious belief!!
Isnt it time we divorced any thoughts of the religion of the state...

We have been told that the popes visit is going to cost 1.5 million and we the tax payer will get most of the bill. But the National Secular Society has stated that a Scottish newspaper has obtained a blueprint of the security arrangements, and the estimated cost for just the one day Scottish visit to be £10 million. Another newspaper, on good authority has estimated £70 million.

The average cost of a new secondary school is around £20 million. But the government has told us, we cant build your school at this moment in time as we don't have the funds at present.

It saddens me and makes me very angry that my hard earned money is being wasted on this circus.

The real problem with Roman Catholicism is its semi-Pelagian soteriology that refuses the Free Grace of God in Jesus Christ. By rejecting the clear Pauline teaching on justification by faith through grace presented in Romans, the Bishop of Rome shows himself to be no more 'Christian' than Mohammed, Russell, Dawkins or Buddha. The Protestant Reformation was unequivocally the greatest thing that ever happened to the British Isles. For the Papacy deny us this and to seek to impose an heretical neonomian doctrine of works on an historically Protestant nation is pure evil. The Bishop of Rome should take his bigotry elsewhere.

The most disconcerting thing about this is the how Boyle seems to have overlooked simple, historical fact. He fails to mention the near constant wars between Catholic kingdoms, in England's case with Scotland and France. He also fails to mention that any who worked for the betterment of mankind that didn't fit with Catholic scripture were persecuted, Da Vinci and Galileo being the two most obvious cases.

Ultimately it appears that his objections to English nationalism seems to be based on the fact that England, and subsequently Britain, went of and did their own thing.. like come up with the idea of representative democracy, the abolition of slavery and a multitude of scientific and social advancements, many of which the Papacy still objects to.

It seems to me that the Catholic Church is afraid of a Europe which is unified by secular ideals as it would be a Europe in which the Pope would have little influence over nations.

It’s fascinating to see all the elitist theological and pseudo-philosophical twaddle that’s being wheeled out by the Christians to justify the bona fides of the particular sect that they belong to, but while the Catholics and Protestants shape up for an intellectual re-run of the Thirty Years War, in Britain, at any rate, the Muslims are quietly stealing away with the prize. Whether or not we approve of the trend, Christianity in Britain is slowly dying away, and the only major religion that is doing well (in terms of attendance by believers at places of worship) is Islam. What plans do Herr Ratzinger and his henchmen have in mind to reverse the incoming tide of Islam, one wonders? Could it be that living as they do in the past, they have all along been aiming at the wrong target?

James:

I do't think I need any advivce from you how to conduct myself in debates I future. In this contest you were beaten game, set and match.

Of course, you had a truly dreadful position to defend: I'll give you that. The Catholic Church was hand-in-gliove with the Nazis before, and even AFTER the War. And the Church created the possiblity of the Holocaust with 2000 years of vicious anti-Semitic propaganda, daily. It is impossible to exculpate it.

Christopher Hitchens in his recent book "god is not Great" , gives a graphic account of the huge, intimate and crucial collaboration between the Nazis and the Catholic Church. The Church made a concordat with Hitler, congratulated him on his birthdays with the uttermost sycophancy, even making it a special holiday, and opened the parish registers to the Nazis to facilitate the extermination of the Jews by determining who was Jewish. After Hitler, the Catholic Church provided false passports and hiding places for Nazi war crimnals so they could escape to live in the extreme right-wing dictatorships of Latin America supported by the Church. Hitchens details all this.

Nazis were overwhelmingly, even in the leadership, Christians - contrary to the unconscionable lie spread by the churches after 1945 that they were pagan or atheists. In fact, few Nazis dabbled in paganism, and Hitkler ridiculed them. Nazis were especially tough on atheists. German historical scholarship has established the Christian allegiance of the Nazi leaders and rank-and-file. (see Richars Steigmann-Gall's 2003 book "The Holy Reich", Cambridge University Press).

The Catholic Church had in fact a good possibility of preventing Hitler's coming to power. This is because Hitler on the brink of power only had the voting support of a third of German voters, and if five or six per cent fewer had voted for him, his credibility as a candidate for Chancellor would have been far weaker. A Catholic Church that took a tough stand against Hitler before 1933 would certainly have made a difference.

Doing a deal with the most villainous ruler in history, praising him in the most worshipful tones, and then saying, after his downfall, that he "reneged" on the deal, is all too familar a Church apologia. It is, frankly, utterly disgraceful, to say the least.

Was opening the parish registers to help Nazis decide who was Jewish, thus facilitating the extermination of Jews, part of the deal? Was, after Hitler, enabling Nazi war criminals to escape to South America part of the deal?
And, of course, there is also the little matter of the role of nearly 2000 years of fierce anti-Semitic propaganda by the Church. There was anti-Semitism (like many other species of racial prejudice) in the pre-Christian Roman world. But Christianity's coming to power made matters infinitely worse for the Jews. Now the State was in the business of cruel, systematic persecution of their race, in ways that recall the Nazis. The Roman State, and the Fathers of the Church, spread the most vicious, lurid slanders against Jews, specifically accusing them of Christ-killing and being followers of the Devil. This obviously poisoned the minds of Christians over many centuries and created the conditions where Hitler could commit the Holocaust.

There were German race theories outside Christianity, but for the masses, it was Christianity that led to hatred of Jews.

It is true not all Christian countries were involved in the Holocaust. But millions of Christians other than Germans participated, and all Christian societies were tainted by the evil of anti-Semitism. This had the most dreadful consequences for Jews: because of fierce anti-Semitic feeling, America, Britain and other democratic countries were unable to give refuge to more than a fraction of the Jews under dire threat of extermination by Hitler.

re: gurt
the CofE very much is protestant.
Even the most perfunctory look at the history of it or its core beliefs show that (except during the henrician reformation while the 6 articles were enacted)
the early church of england during the reigns of henry edward and elizabeth was shaped by protestants and is a form of protestantism

its a fundamentally different beast from catholicism even though there are some catholic sympathetic groups in it.

"The Holy See is lending its powerful help wherever it can, to mitigate the fate of my persecuted co-religionists." -- Chaim Weizmann, 1943

"The people of Israel will never forget what His Holiness and his illustrious delegates, inspired by the eternal principles of religion, which form the foundation of true civilization, are doing for our unfortunate brothers and sisters in the most tragic hour of our history, which is living proof of Divine Providence in this world." -- Isaac Herzog, 1945

"We share in the grief of humanity. When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the Pope was raised for the victims. The life of our times was enriched by a voice speaking out on the great moral truths above the tumult of daily conflict. We mourn a great servant of peace." -- Golda Meir, 1958

The pernicious attempts to paint the Church as inactive, or even complicit, in the period of the Holocaust is a form of revisionism which belongs in the same cesspit as that of those who deny the gas chambers. (And that includes prelates who do so, in case anyone's wondering.)

Martin Gilbert has an excellent essay on the topic here:

http://spectator.org/archives/2006/08/18/hitlers-pope

Hi Daulat,

In the light of the post from James at 21:36 pissing all over your post at 19:48, will you admit that you might be wrong?

I'm sick of this crap about the RC church being a haven for nazis and child molesters. I was brought up as a catholic and I've known a lot of priests. Almost without exception they were decent, kind, flawed people. What's your experience of catholic priests, Daulat? Ever met one?

Daulat Ram - Martin Gilbert is a Jewish historian, and he praises Pius XII as a righteous gentile. He's also a rather good historian, which is more than can be said for combox warriors like you, for whom all inconvenient facts are "pap", and for whom no untrue smear is too low.

"English exceptionalism," which this author dismisses so lightly, is like all other "exceptionalisms," based on a genuinely exceptional history and the right of the people to define themselves. Granted Henry ran rough-shod over his people, but the English defined themselves in radically different ways than the Europeans even in the 16th century.

Shocking as it will be to the Brits on this board, both Henry VIII and his daughter Elizabeth always described England in their Latin dispatches to other monarchs as "Res Publica Anglia" (The REPUBLIC of England). After the restoration, the tradition of England as a republic, and I might add a republic were both Henry VIII and his daughter Elizabeth were passionately proud to be monarchs of a republic, was scrubbed from English history.

English exceptionalism is about a nation were Parliament became more important in the early Modern Period were the rest of Europe was embracing Absolute Monarchy. When the Stewart Kings tried that garbage in England, Charles I lost his head and James II his throne. Be very proud of English exceptionalism, it is the force that made Democracy in the modern world possible.

Had England rejoined the Catholic Church in the 17th century (James II's personal goal) then American's experiments in democracy (often sneered at on this board) would have been sniped in the bud. Few if any nations would be even republics, let alone democracies. Slavery, which the Catholic Church routinely condemed, was put down by the actions of radicals which the pre-Reformation church would gladly have burned. John Knox (in a book often slamed as misogynist by those who've neither read it, nor bothered to learn what language it is written in) stated that it was a heresy to deny that women and men had the same political rights. The Catholic Church still doesn't accept the idea that women HAVE political right! Embrace English exceptionalism.

Be proud to be exceptional!

منتديات توب تك
منتدى
منتديات
توب تك
تكنولوجي
تكنولوجيا
توب

Hi Elizabeth, apologies for the delay in responding to your rant. It's kind of funny that you think the blog is not for me...why? Because of my opinions, or because you think I'm too reserved about expressing them? Slightly contradictory, no? If you don't like the RC churches position on morality, fine: you don't agree, so why let it bother you? You could just ignore it you know...live and let live. But perhaps I underestimate your selfless-almost evangelical-devotion to spreading the good news of your flawless insights.
No, it's not about apathetic little me-nor is it about ranting you. I'm expressing an opinion, and you seem to be getting somewhat irate. Calm down.

What I want to know is, what on earth will our friends at The Spectator make of the Boylean Project? Which will prevail - their hatred of the European Union, or their contempt for Protestantism and their ridicule of the Church of England?

"...Or, more accurately, who've been victims of some bad people who happened to be priests-just as some bad people happen to be swimming coaches or boy scout leaders." Lox

Absolutely. I'm sick to death of swimming coaches setting themselves up as exemplary guardians of morality, involving themselves in politics and social policies, and claiming that salvation and immortality can be achieved through unswerving adherence to the breast stroke, whilst drowning themselves. What a bunch of bloody hippocrites they all are! And there are far more scout leaders and swimming coaches than Catholic priests. How the various swimming associations afford the billions in compensation I shall never know.

"I don't like the monarchy, but I really can't be bothered getting outraged about how much it costs me, or the fact that some inbred who spent most of his married life cheating on his wife regularly crops up in the press to tell me that my lifestyle is unsustaniable. Frankly, life's too short."

So it's all about apathetic little you then Lox! Never mind!

"No-one's forcing you to listen to the pope or go to mass or confess."

Oh good. Where did you get the idea from that I thought this was the case then? In this country Lox public forums about religion, like this one, exist in order for anybody to air their views. There is no need at all for you to worry about mine, passion and neurosis being two different things.

You, seemingly, have some views about the monarchy, but cannot be bothered to share them. Perhaps the blog is not for you at all?