wazua Sat, Nov 16, 2024
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In | Register

Pope Benedict XVI
Ric dees
#1 Posted : Tuesday, September 14, 2010 12:57:16 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 3/6/2008
Posts: 632

Pope Benedict is visiting the UK, the first state visit by a pope in..well ages, a hugely controversial figure and the protesters are up in arms here as they don't want him here reasons due to his stand on the following?

1) The pope, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was a member of the Vatican II Council in the 1960s,(can google for more info) an ultra conservative scholar and by far the best brains to have occupied the Vatican top throne in 300 years, he lifted the excommunication on SSPX Bishops who had been excommunicated by Pope John Paul and one of the Bishops was quoted as saying the Holocaust did not take place - huge controversy.

2) With times changing, surely as a leader of more than a billion people, his view on contraception/condoms should change with more people dying of Aids in Africa more than any other part of the world, is it time the Catholic Church played a role in this.

3)Stem cell research, is an embryo a human being?? Stem cell research is hoped to bring cure to among others motor-neurone diseases etc

4) The sexual molestations by bishops or bishops-gate scandals as it is commonly referred, the pope issued a decree that all sexual molestation charges by bishops should be investigated within then church, he said the priests should be " protected" so what about the children involved?? who will protect them??

The Catholic faithful is waning, this does not seem to affect the Pope, he infact wants a more lean Catholic faithful..

What are your views about the above especially the ones that are closer to home, sexual molestation by biahops and use of condoms/contraceptives, isn't it time the Catholic Church stepped into reality??


The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence; it is to act with yesterday's logic.
KulaRaha
#2 Posted : Tuesday, September 14, 2010 1:30:02 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/26/2007
Posts: 6,514
Defense of Joseph Ratzinger
Hitler Jugend: Joseph Ratzinger has explained that his membership in the Hitler Youth was mandatory — it wasn’t his personal choice to join and he certainly didn’t join out of any personal conviction that the Nazis were right. Despite being a member, he refused to attend any meetings. Attendance would have reduced the cost of his schooling at the seminary, yet this did not deter him.

Resistance: According to Joseph Ratzinger, it was “impossible” to resist the Nazis. Being so young, it wasn’t plausible for him to do anything against the Nazis and the atrocities they were committing. Nevertheless, the Ratzinger family did object to the Nazis and as a consequence were forced to move four times. It’s not as though they passively and quietly accepted what is going on, as many other families did.

Military: Joseph Ratzinger was a member of an anti-aircraft unit protecting a BMW factory that used slave labor from the Dachau concentration camp to make aircraft engines, but he was drafted into the military and didn’t have any choice in the matter. In fact, Ratzinger also says that he never fired a shot and never participated in any combat. Later he was transferred to a unit in Hungary where he set up tank traps and watched as Jews were rounded up for transport to death camps. Eventually he deserted and became a prisoner of war.


Criticism of Joseph Ratzinger
Hitler Jugend: Joseph Ratzinger’s claims about the Hitler Youth are not true. Compulsory membership was first defined in 1936 and reinforced in 1939, not in 1941 as he says. Ratzinger also says that he was “still too young” at the time, but he was 14 in 1941 and not too young at all: between the ages of 10 and 14, membership in the Deutsche Jungvolk (a group for younger children) was mandatory. Yet there is no mention of Raztinger belonging. If he had managed to avoid the required membership in the Deutsche Jungvolk, why did he suddenly join the Hitler Youth in 1941?

Resistance: Both Joseph Ratzinger and his brother, Georg, have said that “resistance was impossible” at the time and, therefore, it’s not surprising or morally culpable that they also “went along.” This is also not true. First, it’s insulting to the many who risked their lives to resist the Nazi regime, both in organized cells and on an individual basis. Second, there are many examples of those who refused service in the Hitler Youth for a variety of reasons.

Whatever the Ratzinger family did and whatever Joseph Ratzinger’s father did, it wasn’t enough to be arrested or sent to a concentration camp. It doesn’t even appear to have been enough to warrant being detained and questioned by the Gestapo.

Military: Although it is true that Ratzinger deserted the military rather than continue fighting, he didn’t do so until April 1945, when the end of the war was quite close.


Resolution
There is absolutely no reason to think that Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, is now or has ever been secretly a Nazi. Nothing he has ever said or done even remotely suggests the slightest sympathy with any of the basic Nazi ideas or goals. Any claim that he is a Nazi is implausible at best. However, that is not the end of the story.

While Ratzinger was not a Nazi in the past and Benedict XVI is not a Nazi now, there is more than enough reason to question his handling of his past. It appears that he hasn’t been honest with others — and probably not honest with himself — about what he did and what he could have done.

It’s simply not true that resistance was impossible at the time. Difficult, yes; dangerous, yes. But not impossible. John Paul II participated in anti-Nazi theater performances in Poland, yet there is no evidence of Joseph Ratzinger even doing this much.

Ratzinger may have done more than many others to resist, but he also did far less that some. It’s certainly understandable that he wouldn’t have had the courage to do more and, were he any average person, that would be the end of the story. But he isn’t an average person, is he? He’s the pope, a person who is supposed to be the successor of Peter, head of the Christian Church, and symbol of unity for all Christendom.

You don’t have to be morally perfect to hold such a position, but it’s not unreasonable to expect such a person to have come to terms with their moral failings, even the moral failings that occurred in youth when we don’t usually expect a great deal. It was an understandable mistake or failing not to do more against the Nazis, but still a failing that he hasn’t come to terms with — it sounds rather like he is in denial. In a sense, he has yet to repent; yet he was still considered the best of all the candidates for the papacy.

http://atheism.about.com...vi/i/RatzingerNazi_2.htm
Business opportunities are like buses,there's always another one coming
muganda
#3 Posted : Tuesday, September 14, 2010 6:38:03 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 9/15/2006
Posts: 3,905
Hmmn, it's easier to criticize the Pope because of what he stands for or represents to some.

When growing up, we were often reminded that Pope is not synonymous with saint. A read of history shows much more controversial Popes and a good share of inspiring Popes.

But a Pope is a Pope to those who choose to believe so. Just like God choose a mother to bear a child, and the mother always remains a mother to a son. And that's the beauty of growing up, you can choose what you believe.


I believe, at the end of time, a Pope would stand judged, as would any other man.

Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Copyright © 2024 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.