SS4
Established Member
DRINK!
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The Pope
- Thread starter starrymarkb
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I have had an e-mail from the English College in Rome, running to no less than eight pages in length, in response to my request for information on two former popes who resigned. This only covers the matter of Pope Celestine V who resigned in 1294.
I shall only give a brief synopsis of this and it appeared that on the death of Pope Nicholas IV in 1292, the convening of the body to elect the new pope had carried on for two years with no candidate being chosen. Desperation seemed to be the order of the day in 1294 and a Benedictine monk known well to the assembly was nominated. He pleaded not to be considered and said that a deeply simple and contemplative life was one he sought and said his simple upbringing meant that matters of state and papal theological guidance were above him. However, such was the need to elect a new pope after this two-year period, that he reluctantly accepted the papacy. However, it was obvious from the start that his enforced papacy was totally wrong and his attempts to clarify ongoing matters that needed papal clarification were an abject failure.
After a period of only five months and nine days, Pope Celestine V resigned the papacy. He was the last pope to bear the name Celestine.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Fifteen minutes later, I then received a second e-mail from the English College in Rome. This runs to no less then 24 pages in length and gives the full history of the Western Schism.
The part of this relevant to this thread covers the matter of Pope Gregory XII who was the last pope to resign the papacy in 1415. He had been elected in 1406, but there were Royal House factions who saw two different chosen candidates with cardinals in both camps and Pope Benedict XIII was also stated to be the pope at the same time. I shall not bore you with any details, having just read the full 24 pages, but in order to resolve this matter, the Council of Constance was convened and the need for a strong single papacy to guide against the possible invasion threats in both the south and the east from possible invaders and to unite the European nations into one body to ward off these threats.
The result of the Council of Constance was that "resignation" of the papacy of both popes was demanded with an added threat of being deposed as an added incentive. This effectively brought an end to the Western Schism.
Pope Gregory XII was the last pope to resign in 1415.
I shall only give a brief synopsis of this and it appeared that on the death of Pope Nicholas IV in 1292, the convening of the body to elect the new pope had carried on for two years with no candidate being chosen. Desperation seemed to be the order of the day in 1294 and a Benedictine monk known well to the assembly was nominated. He pleaded not to be considered and said that a deeply simple and contemplative life was one he sought and said his simple upbringing meant that matters of state and papal theological guidance were above him. However, such was the need to elect a new pope after this two-year period, that he reluctantly accepted the papacy. However, it was obvious from the start that his enforced papacy was totally wrong and his attempts to clarify ongoing matters that needed papal clarification were an abject failure.
After a period of only five months and nine days, Pope Celestine V resigned the papacy. He was the last pope to bear the name Celestine.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Fifteen minutes later, I then received a second e-mail from the English College in Rome. This runs to no less then 24 pages in length and gives the full history of the Western Schism.
The part of this relevant to this thread covers the matter of Pope Gregory XII who was the last pope to resign the papacy in 1415. He had been elected in 1406, but there were Royal House factions who saw two different chosen candidates with cardinals in both camps and Pope Benedict XIII was also stated to be the pope at the same time. I shall not bore you with any details, having just read the full 24 pages, but in order to resolve this matter, the Council of Constance was convened and the need for a strong single papacy to guide against the possible invasion threats in both the south and the east from possible invaders and to unite the European nations into one body to ward off these threats.
The result of the Council of Constance was that "resignation" of the papacy of both popes was demanded with an added threat of being deposed as an added incentive. This effectively brought an end to the Western Schism.
Pope Gregory XII was the last pope to resign in 1415.
Last edited:
Butts
Veteran Member
In common with our Monarch he lived through WWII and is of a similar age. The last living links with this era are drawing to an end.
Makes you wonder how long The Queen will keep going.
BlythPower
Member
Geezertronic
Established Member
Wyvern
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 1,573
Something to do with kiddie-fiddling?
Pope Benedict to seek immunity and protection from Italian President Giorgio Napolitano on February 23
Pope Benedict, Joseph Ratzinger, has scheduled a meeting with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano for Saturday, February 23 to discuss securing protection and immunity from prosecution from the Italian government, according to Italian media sources.
continues/
Pope Benedict to seek immunity and protection from Italian President Giorgio Napolitano on February 23
Pope Benedict, Joseph Ratzinger, has scheduled a meeting with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano for Saturday, February 23 to discuss securing protection and immunity from prosecution from the Italian government, according to Italian media sources.
continues/
Stonesourscotty
Member
People Like Ratzinger that Protect paedophiles should be Executed in a very public place for us all to enjoy there just as bad as the people commiting the crimes also the Catholic church should pay taxes there a bigger tax cheat than Amazon!
Butts
Veteran Member
Why not just be done with it and "Burn Them at the Stake" in true ecclesiastical tradition :roll:
Geezertronic
Established Member
I agree, nothing is too bad for those proven guilty of such heinous crimes or for those who protect them. There should be nowhere to hide and no protection, as Subhan Anwar has found out.
Presumably your reasoned and civilised approach also includes paediatricians.:roll:
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
....and you have confidence that the politicians will return the sanction of the death penalty back onto the statute book, to enable this matter to which your posting alluded to, to occur ?
Or do you propose vigilante action to have free rein ......or even the forced implemention of Sharia Law to enact the required punishments?
Last edited:
SS4
Established Member
In true ecclesiastical tradition we can fix the "evidence" to fit the outcome we want too
Geezertronic
Established Member
If convicted of a crime, then yes. Obviously you are neglecting the fact that they don't sexually abuse kids as part of their job :roll:
I think that anyone who abuses kids gets what they deserves, whether you agree or not is up to you
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Did I say anywhere in any of my postings that I made a comment expressing a particular point of view that might have even remotely suggest an opinion on the matter that you state...
The comment that I made was with reference to the judicial sanctions that are currently law under the statute book and of the need for politicians to have to vote in favour of a return to the death penalty which appeared to be required by a poster earlier in the thread. Nothing more...nothing less. I have never made a comment on this thread which would give anyone reading my postings that I have expressed an opinion of personal preference on this matter.
Geezertronic
Established Member
Did I say anywhere in any of my postings that I made a comment expressing a particular point of view that might have even remotely suggest an opinion on the matter that you state...
The comment that I made was with reference to the judicial sanctions that are currently law under the statute book and of the need for politicians to have to vote in favour of a return to the death penalty which appeared to be required by a poster earlier in the thread. Nothing more...nothing less. I have never made a comment on this thread which would give anyone reading my postings that I have expressed an opinion of personal preference on this matter
And did I say anywhere in any of my postings that I suggested you were expressing a particular point of view on this particular subject instead of the comments in your 2nd paragraph
Giugiaro
Established Member
Almost... give a compliment to the spanish christians for this:
[youtube]250eOE6exGM[/youtube]
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Would this have anything to do with the incident that occurred in Gwent in 2000 when during the group hysteria fostered by the News of the World campaign amongst the less educationally endowed, someone painted the phrase "Paedo" on the front door of a paediatrician. causing the police to have to call a local meeting to explain the difference between the word paediatrician and the word paedophile.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Working on that premise of public execution for the head of a religion that had seen such offences committed by its clergy, would you also include the Queen as the Head of the Church of England for offences committed by their clergy ?
With regard to the matter of tax evasion that you state, can I enquire as to the names of the countries in which you say that this has occurred.
Wyvern
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 1,573
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,856
That would depend if she knowingly and willingly covered it up, which I can't imagine happening with a monarch. I also can't imagine that it has been as severe and as prevalent as it has with the Pope and Catholic Church.
And let us not forget (even if it is slightly off-topic) that, however much it may suit the press to try to convince us otherwise, tax avoidance is not a crime, simply playing the rules. Tax evasion is a crime, and I suspect neither Amazon nor the RCs have been accused of it generally.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Let me put on record that I have no thought whatsoever that Her Majesty the Queen has any connection whatsoever with the matter in question. I was just drawing a comparison between titular headships of religious organisations as a riposte to that forum member who seems to espouse his belief in public executions, that seem to be the norm in certain Muslim countries that espouse the particular Wahabi version of the Islamic beliefs, for such titular heads as bearing the legal responsibility for offences committed by those who represent their own religious beliefs in a publicly accepted office.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As ever, you state matters if clarification with a keen mind. You will note that I mentioned the word "evasion" rather than avoidance, as this appeared to be the charge levied by the forum member who was seeking retribution for the offence mentioned in his posting.
Obviously, I am aware, as you are, of the differences between these two terminologies.
PaxVobiscum
Established Member
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ames-Bulger-child-killer-Robert-Thompson.html
Another victim of the "nothing is too bad for paedos" brigade. I most definitely do not agree with the approach the Roman Catholic Church has taken, but given the hysterical reaction from some quarters you can almost see why they did.
Geezertronic
Established Member
I would consider your presumption a hysterical reaction as well
SS4
Established Member
Whilst taking the customary silo of salt that comes with a daily mail article this one is far from the realms of implausibility. It seems to me that it's a cross between a media witch hunt and vigilantism, neither checking for facts. It's perhaps a better reminder of an equally disturbing notion of guilty whether or not you've done the crime.
As the Peado-Finder General from monkey dust said
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
May I quote another example of a miscarriage of justice. Stefan Ivan Kiszko, a Rochdale-born 23 year old tax clerk was arrested on a charge of the murder of 12 year-old Lesley Molseed and critical to the prosecution case was the joint evidence of four teenage girls who claimed that he had exposed himself to all of them when they were in a group together. He was found guilty and had served 16 years in prison, being attacked by inmates prior to being separated from the main body of the prisoners and began to develop signs of severe depression. He had maintained his innocence from the start and refused to change his plea in prison in order to obtain a better life.
After 16 years, events changed dramatically and the reopened case showed great flaws in the evidence against him as DNA testing had greatly been improved in those 16 years. The four girls, teenagers at the time of the original trial, made a statement that their story was lies and they had agreed to fabricate the story "for a laugh". None of them expressed any remorse for what they had done. Stefan Ivan Kiszko was pardoned and was released in 1992, but such was the toll on him over that 16 year period that he died in 1993.
The real murderer, Ronald Castree, was convicted in November 2007 after having his DNA found on the underclothing of Lesley Molseed which was an exact match to that found on a prostitute that he had savagely attacked.
Had the death penalty still been on the Statute Book, Stefan Ivan Kiszko would have been hanged for the murder that he had not committed.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
To revert back to the title of the thread....
The Conclave of Cardinals is now in session to choose the next Pope. No-one in the media seems sure from what continent the next one will come from. I would like to see one to come from either Africa or from South America.
The Conclave of Cardinals is now in session to choose the next Pope. No-one in the media seems sure from what continent the next one will come from. I would like to see one to come from either Africa or from South America.
SS4
Established Member
No doubt it'll be someone who toes the Party line. The religious aspect is really just a tool to keep the masses in line (Marx discovered this in the 19th century but the message still hasn't sunk in)
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
You are suggesting the hard-line "conservative" ethos that the past incumbent so espoused as "the party line". Is there any such thing as a "liberal" wing in the Vatican that you would see taking over?
I am very minded of the African bishops position in the Church of England as being a very good comparison to that of the Vatican in being a very strict adherence to core values.
You mention Karl Marx, but communism in Russia was in existence but a small period of time when compared to that time period of existence of the Russian Orthodox church. Would you describe the Russian Orthodox Church as anything but "conservative" when its views on certain matters in the recent news have been brought to the fore ?
If you actually take Marx' words in context you will see that he did not mean what you state. His phrase about opium is referring to its use as a relief of pain, not as a means of control or stupefaction. The pain to which he referred was that of economic suppression. So, in Marx' actual view, religion was a useful tool for the proletariat in helping them cope with their downtrodden state, not a tool for maintaining that state. Of course he suggested that people should eventually abandon religion, but only because his state of happiness relied on removal of illusions. "Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions"
- Status