The Queen v The Pope

If you think "all things concerning Celtic F.C." are related and relevant to the Church, you ain't the one who should be telling people to open their mind.

It's true what they say about Green Huns, isn't it?

EDIT - we're off on a tangent here. Have you any defence for the Church beyond "we're Tims by ra way!"?

 

I guess the integretion of Catholics and Protestants should be dismissed from the history books, I'll get the memo out asap.

Green huns... what are you smoking?

 

Integration, exactly. Inclusive. For all. Means I can use a condom and still support Celtic without being told to "direct [my] support towards another club"

Work it out, I can wait.

And I take it then you don't have a defence besides "we're Tims by ra way"?

 

I wish you to humor me on this "Green hun" stuff, I don't take hints.

 

Nope, you don't have a defence. Thought so.

 

Well I don't take hints, so go ahead and explain that one to me

 

I am simply baffled by your lack of logic, the Catholic Church has a part in our history, deny it and that is simply ridiculous; supporters ought to show respect, this is a club for all indeed, but not for people who demonstrate hate, the only one who has shown any disdain I think has been you with such slanderous terms as "green huns", etc... so "buck up" and swallow your hate, same goes for everyone else. You needn't be a man of faith but be aware of the roots of faith and show honor and respect for it, not say what shameful instititutions they are; I once again highlight my point that if you cannot do these things, other clubs have principles you can go to which will gladly take you.

PRD, I don't hate you, I do not even know you. * Bless.

 

You're claiming Celtic are and have been permanently entwinted with a religious sect, and stated clearly that those who do not respect said sect are not welcome at Celtic and should find a new club. Sentiments no different from the average currant bun.

Now then, are you going to keep on derailing the discussion or are you going to offer a defence for the Church that doesn't (pathetically) involve football?

EDIT - Nope, you aren't.

Just because it is old, does not make it good. Our club may have roots with Catholic peoples, but that does not mean it has roots with the Church nor does it mean I can't be opposed to institutions that have caused - and are causing - all sorts of problems based on a lie.

One would assume opposition to wrongdoing in society by established powers is far more true to our roots than an old man in a funny hat who calls himself the voice of *.

The Church - and any other organised religion - is in the end a thing of sexual and religious chauvanism and ultra-conservative, corrupt, Clerical dictatorship. No thank you, I say.

 

That stirs up a song that I just love to sing from time to time: [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQni4WkpTek[/YOUTUBE]

 

* me, posted this last night pished. 4 pages as well.

Just trying to get my head around all these * who try and control the masses. We have so many people from this country who would literally lay down their life for these two. Baffles me to *.

 

Auh', that is such a fascinating, well-thought out counter-argument, I actually facepalmed.


A real reply, if you please.

 

I couldn't resist, you know it was going to happen sooner or later, the consequences of having a Polish-Catholic goalkeeper on the team and CATB singing a song about him.

Anyway, you submit that "Our club may have roots with Catholic peoples, but that does not mean it has roots with the Church nor does it mean I can't be opposed to institutions that have caused - and are causing - all sorts of problems based on a lie." You cannot seperate the founder, a Marist Catholic brother, from the rest of the Church. He swore an alliegance to that order, and thus the Catholic Church, to carry out her goodwill to follow *. The Marist Brother's Mission Statement can be found here: The Marist Brothers - Who we are. Brother Walfrid was a part of this, and perhaps one day you may be as well.

 

Firstly, you do grasp this issue goes beyond the history of Celtic, yes?

Secondly, Brother Walfrid lived in the 19th century. We live in the 21st. He lived in a different world from us. He was a good man, and good men will be good men with or without the cloth. It's because he was a good man that he did good works and that is why he is remembered.

In the modern world, it is a nonsense to have the leaders of organised religions - like the Papacy - claiming divine rule, infallability gifted from *, to be denying people the most basic of instincts, to deny them contraceptives that save lives, to oppose womens rights to control her own body, to oppose global seperation of Church and State, to encourage homophobic doctrine and acts.

To continue to teach and empower the fundamental lie that is organised religion.

It has no place in a truly evolved human society. It is in the way of real, essential and overdue change.

 

I will expand on an argument later, as I am leaving... but perhaps, and sadly, the "FTP" chants did not only come from the folks at Mordor, and that is a day when we, as Celtic Football Club, have lost.

 

Can someone with more patience than me explain to this guy the difference between football and the discussion I'm trying to have?

 

I have never met either of then so i'm afraid I could not comment

 

For me - Neither

 

aye, so apparently, because he follows the doctrine of the organization he runs and has a personal belief on contraception means he has a mean streak in him. While I agree with u that it is unrealistic and that contraception should be availiable and distributed extensivlely in Africa, it doesnae make him less intelligent to oppose this. I agree completely that the vow of celibacy is wrong and married men should be allowed to become priests. Seems to be headed that way anyhow due to the lack of priests coming through... Although I dont necessarily follow or agree with the Church's stand on *, i can see where it comes from and understand it completely. The Catholic Church holds * in a sacred light, one above these animal instincts, and is meant for two people in an intimate relationship, holding it in a higher regard.

 

Just to throw in some things to straighten out any hyperbole. The papacy does not claim infallibility, but tradition in the Church states that some explanations that are most basic to Catholic religion can be seen as truly correct by definition, otherwise some foundations the Church was built on fall apart. That is why infallibility has only been claimed I believe three times in the 2000 or so years the Church has been around. The pope also doesn't claim divine rule, if what you mean by that is he believes * chose him to rule. He's elected. The Church also does not "deny" people the most basic of instincts. Nobody forces a priest to become a priest, only he can choose to do that and he knows going in the advantages and consequences.

I agree that the anti-contraceptives idea is a little outdated, but I just wanted to point out some exaggerations that I feel like are fueled a bit by some feeling of superiority or greater intelligence over anyone who is religious. It's a matter of belief, and there is no reason to be angry over someone's beliefs.

Either way, obviously the Queen has no * chance in this thread. * needs a * in her pooper to bring her off her haughty chair.

 

The authority of the Pope stems from an idea that each Pope is the selected leader of all Christ's followers and is the successor of St Peter. This authority, if the Church is to truly claim it is the path to salvation, must by default claim divine authority. It must, and does, claim to be the direct and sole successors to the Apostles, which could only be backed up through divine will.

In 1870 the First Vatican Council decreed "If anyone says that it is not from the institution of Christ the Lord Himself, or by divine right that the blessed Peter has perpetual successors in the primacy over the universal Church, or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in the same primacy, let him be anathema ... We ... teach and explain that the dogma has been divinely revealed ... through the divine assistance promised [the Roman Pontiff] in blessed Peter"

The Second Council, in 1964, decreed that "... bishops ... are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ ... Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth ... the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching ... This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra ... "

They mentioned clearly "[the] infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed ... And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys in virtue of his office ... therefore his definitions ... are justly styled irreformable, since they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, promised to him in blessed Peter, and therefore they need no approval of others, nor do they allow an appeal to any other judgment. For then the Roman Pontiff is not pronouncing judgment as a private person, but as the supreme teacher of the universal Church, in whom the charism of infallibility of the Church itself is individually present ... The infallibility promised to the Church resides also in the body of Bishops ..."