http://rt.com/uk/234443-priest-yoga-satan-danger/
In 2011, the Vatican’s chief exorcist, Gabriele Amorth, said that yoga leads to a belief in Hinduism, and that "all eastern religions are based on a false belief in reincarnation"."Practicing yoga is Satanic, it leads to evil just like reading Harry Potter," he told the Telegraph.
I'm pretty sure some Hindus etc might find being compared to Harry Potter deeply offensive. So going by his "'Curse my mother, expect a punch" anti-freedom of speech logic he would be a legitimate target for religious violence.
I doubt they would be that offended, it's all made up any way! In 2000 years someone might uncover a Harry Potter book and start a religion from it. Then instead of Jesus walking on water you have harry doing wizard crap. Equally as believable I'd say!
Yeah Buddhists at least probably won't find it offensive as taking offense doesn't usually seem to be in there nature. I would still say it's fairly disrespectful and downright laughable in the context of what the Pope has been saying about Charlie Hebdo.
Religious types don't care about freedom of speech or respect, all they care about is the dominance and privilege of their own religion over others. It's okay for the pope to make disrespectful remarks to the media about other peoples beliefs, but my god....if secularists do it?
Uh huh. 🙄
Old but....
http://www.oneindia.com/2010/09/17/hindusdenounce-pope-for-being-offensive-toatheists.html
😆
Religious types don't care about freedom of speech or respect, all they care about is the dominance and privilege of their own religion over others
Oh for ****'s sake.
Go on Molgrips? Do explain instead of getting sweary 🙂 Edmanucate me, I dare you.
Religious types? You're going to dismiss almost all of humanity with a monumentally ludicriously poorly informend statement that is about as sweeping as it is possible to be?
And you want a proper response? Go troll someone else.
Religious types? You're going to dismiss almost all of humanity with a monumentally ludicriously poorly informend statement that is about as sweeping as it is possible to be?
The pope speaks for all true Catholics does he not? 😆 Catholics make up a fairly hefty proportion of religious types, so I will stick to making sweeping comments about them thanks.
The pope speaks for all true Catholics, does he not?
Where does it say that?
Wonder how many times Gabriele and his chums have complained about people showing religious intolerance (when it was aimed at his own)
<edit>
he may have a point tho"all eastern religions are based on a false belief in reincarnation"
Fixed"all [s]eastern[/s] religions are based on a false belief in [s]reincarnation[/s] god/s"
From that article:
The doctrine of infallibility relies on one of the cornerstones of Catholic dogma: that of petrine supremacy of the pope, and his authority as the ruling agent who decides what is accepted as formal beliefs in the Roman Catholic Church.
So in matters of Catholic doctrine. Do all catholics actually believe every off the cuff remark the Pope makes? Have you spoken to one?
However - the original quote was not from the Pope was it?
Do all catholics actually believe every off the cuff remark the Pope makes? Have you spoken to one?
True Catholics will.
However - the original quote was not from the Pope was it?
It will have been said under his authority at that level.
True Catholics will.
Oh yeah?
PS did you actually read that wiki article?
Statements by a pope that exercise papal infallibility are referred to as solemn papal definitions or ex cathedra teachings. Also considered infallible are the teachings of the whole body of bishops of the Church, especially but not only in an ecumenical council[13] (see Infallibility of the Church).According to the teaching of the First Vatican Council and Catholic tradition, the conditions required for ex cathedra papal teaching are as follows:
"the Roman Pontiff"
"speaks ex cathedra" ("that is, when in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority....")
"he defines"
"that a doctrine concerning faith or morals"
"must be held by the whole Church" (Pastor Aeternus, chap. 4)[14]
For a teaching by a pope or ecumenical council to be recognized as infallible, the teaching must be:A decision of the supreme teaching authority of the Church (pope or College of Bishops)
Concern a doctrine of faith or morals
Bind the universal Church
Be proposed as something to hold firmly and immutably
Oh yeah?PS did you actually read that wiki article?
I'm pretty sure they've probably covered eastern religions leading to Satan under infallible teachings. 😆
You can educate me if I'm wrong though. Also, in regards to "must be held by the whole Church" some would argue the pope isn't accountable enough to the church - "The Catholic Church is ruled by an entirely dysfunctional hierarchy. The Pope does not even have a cabinet. In principle he decides everything." - Professor Hans Küng
Yeah Buddhists at least probably won't find it offensive as taking offense doesn't usually seem to be in there nature.
http://time.com/2956180/burma-mandalay-race-riots-sectarian-violence-buddhist-muslim/
Tom_W1987 - Member
The pope speaks for all true Catholics does he not? Catholics make up a fairly hefty proportion of religious types, so I will stick to making sweeping comments about them thanks.
Tom_W, you're being an idiot. I don't care what your religious beliefs are, nor do I remotely mind when people discuss religion on here, even in the most vehement terms. What I do mind is complete ignorance, bordering on trolling.
First of all, the Pope did not say anything, and likely wouldn't, about yoga or anything else. If it was said at all the way it was reported, it was said by the chief exorcist, as your own quote in the original post makes clear.
And contrary to bigoted belief, the pope is not sitting in the Vatican pulling everyone's strings. In fact, the chief exorcist has a habit of shooting his mouth off about things, and most people don't pay the remotest bit of attention - even within the RC Church.
Finally, your link to the wikipedia article about papal infallibility has no relevance here at all, as infallibility has to do with particular doctrinal statements made with respect to ideas pertinent to the core of the Christian faith, and only applies when the Pope intentionally speaks for and about the universal tradition.
So please, as molgrips has said already, go troll somewhere else.
Tom_W1987 - MemberI'm pretty sure they've probably covered eastern religions leading to Satan under infallible teachings.
You can educate me if I'm wrong though.
Alright then. Read the statements on other religions in the documents of the Second Vatican Council, or even the Catechism; both of which are publicly available.
If you want to ridicule something, at least know something about what you're ridiculing.
Alright then. Read the statements on other religions in the documents of the Second Vatican Council, or even the Catechism; both of which are publicly available.If you want to ridicule something, at least know something about what you're ridiculing.
I'm assuming they don't say that practicing other religions doesn't lead to Satan then, that core historical tenant of Catholicism? I'm also assuming that if the pope doesn't agree with Mr Exorcist guy, then he has been duly punished for making offensive remarks about other peoples beliefs?
It's like trying to get a straight answer out of a politician.
From what I can make out in this video (which is only just over a minute long) Catholics seem to be very tolerant of other religions, it even seems they actively encourage them:
Sorry Tom you are trying to start an argument based on a four year old quote/story. I'm not even sure the current pope was in office at that time?
Come back when you have something more current we can disagree with you about 😉
I think this thread breaks the forum rules, tbh. I'd report it but I don't think it's necessary - you've made yourself look enough of a tit as it is.
that core historical tenant of Catholicism?
Historical tenet? You mean something from a long time ago? I.e. not now?
First story was published in 2015.
I think this thread breaks the forum rules, tbh. I'd report it but I don't think it's necessary - you've made yourself look enough of a tit as it is.
So you're saying Catholics won't go to hell if they convert then? This is news to me. Can you link me to anything?
What the 'h' are you talking about? What core historical tenant?
I don't like many politicians either, but if you go up to one and tell him/her that that he/she doesn't like cycling when in fact he/she has never said anything of the sort, then he/she is bound to get a bit agitated and confused, and, frankly, to think that there isn't much to answer.
I don't think you can take one odd priest as representing an entire religion, even an extremely hierarchical religion such as the RC church is.
And contrary to bigoted belief, the pope is not sitting in the Vatican pulling everyone's strings. In fact, the chief exorcist has a habit of shooting his mouth off about things, and most people don't pay the remotest bit of attention - even within the RC Church.
I now have a picture of father jack in my head.
So you're saying Catholics won't go to hell if they convert then?
No, I'm saying you don't know what you are talking about.
SaxonRider does though.
http://www.ibtimes.com/pope-francis-can-he-heal-chasm-between-roman-catholic-church-hindus-1136345
I'm assuming the pope will discipline this priest then to help heal the divide mentioned in the first article?
No, I'm saying you don't know what you are talking about.SaxonRider does though.
Is it acceptable for senior members (the chief exorcist bloke) to make remarks that could offend other peoples religious beliefs? If so, why? You clearly don't like me making half arsed offensive comments about Catholicism. 😆
*pulls up chair*
Even by our usual standards here, this is a daft one.
TomW, I don't think it is entirely fair that you have gone back and edited a number of your posts to 'flesh them out' a bit after others have responded to them.
In any case, that aside, the exorcist could well be disciplined by the pope if he has said something stupid - although the quote you provided came from a few years back (as was pointed out above).
The Vatican, however, like most organisations, generally doesn't discipline its people for the purposes of public entertainment. And in any case, I doubt the media would be interested in covering the Church actually doing something [i]right[/i].
Incidentally, molgrips has said nothing about his religion one way or another, so your suggestion that he is a Catholic is not appropriate.
In any case, that aside, the exorcist could well be disciplined by the pope if he has said something stupid - although the quote you provided came from a few years back (as was pointed out above).The Vatican, however, like most organisations, generally doesn't discipline its people for the purposes of public entertainment. And in any case, I doubt the media would be interested in covering the Church actually doing something right.
They seemed quite happy to attack Charlie Hebdo for public entertainment. The pope should speak for all moderate Catholics and condemn these extremist remarks in the name of religious tolerance.
Incidentally, molgrips has said nothing about his religion one way or another, so your suggestion that he is a Catholic is not appropriate.
Would that be offensive? I'll apologize then. Sorry Molgrips, I wents back and edited it.
Tom has been drinking I think.
They seemed quite happy to attack Charlie Hebdo for public entertainment. The pope should speak for all moderate Catholics and condemn these extremist remarks in the name of religious tolerance.
Send him a letter. Maybe he will.
Send him a letter. Maybe he will.
It looks like plenty of Hindus are pissed, I think he will have noticed.
Your thread title says the pope specifically but you quote another. In the Catholic Church you are going to find those with more traditional views, some archaic. It's much like the priest and indeed many members of congregations are against the ordination of women as Bishops in the Anglican church.
The Harry Potter thing...there's never the same gripe from the anti-Rowling religious folk about Lewis and Tolkien, yet they've got equal amounts of wizards and so on. All roughly the same theme too - good vs evil, the struggles/weaknesses of the characters and so on...
That puzzles me.
thegreatape - Member
The Harry Potter thing...there's never the same gripe from the anti-Rowling religious folk about Lewis and Tolkien, yet they've got equal amounts of wizards and so on. All roughly the same theme too - good vs evil, the struggles/weaknesses of the characters and so on...That puzzles me.
The criticism of HP from Catholic quarters came from the same exorcist quoted by TomW in the first post. It supposedly had to do with the clear delineation between fantasy and reality present in both Tolkein and Lewis that did not exist in Rowling. BUT... I doubt the exorcist ever actually read the books, AND of the few Catholics that heard him, none with half a piston firing in his or her head gave it a second thought.
Your thread title says the pope specifically but you quote another
Well to be fair, I seem to remember the priest is apparently quoting the pope. So until he issues a rebuttal... 😛
As clumsy and unhelpful as the Catholic exorcist's comments may be, there's a very significant difference between criticising someone's religious beliefs and openly mocking them.
If you said to me 'Mate, your helmet's not enduro enough, have you thought about one of these Bell Stokers like I've got?' that's not offensive.
If you said 'That helmet makes you look like a right *&#@ & *#@' and then started encouraging people to point and laugh at me, I probably wouldn't be terribly amused.
Thanks SaxonRider
If you said 'That helmet makes you look like a right *&#@ & *#@' and then started encouraging people to point and laugh at me, I probably wouldn't be terribly amused.
I think talking about one of the biggest religions in the world and indirectly comparing it to Harry Potter falls into the latter category. As would comparing atheists to Nazis, although that was a different popernator.
Nonsense, he's not poking fun at Hinduism, nor is he encouraging anyone else to. He is a monotheist and believes in the 'one true God'. To him, anything that takes attention away from that god must originate from that god's enemy.
Nonsense, he's not poking fun at Hinduism, nor is he encouraging anyone else to. He is a monotheist and believes in the 'one true God'. To him, anything that takes attention away from that god must originate from that god's enemy.
So only theists are allowed to criticize other theists then? Using Harry Potter in the same sentence as their religion is showing respect for hundreds of millions of Hindus? Harry Potter, a literary work of fiction and the supposed truth that Hindu's hold close to them? That shows respect? Hahah, right.....that's a disguised jab if I ever saw one.
Not that I actually believe anyone's faith deserves any kind of respect though.
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=4269
It's old, but does this smack of respect for other peoples religious beliefs?
You're going to dismiss [b]almost all of humanity[/b] with a monumentally ludicriously poorly informend statement that is about as sweeping as it is possible to be?
Objection!
A while back BBC presented a documentary about the history of Christianity, where archeology or historian whoever they were, rationalised the fact that although Jesus was born a Jew he founded Christianity but there was a period of Jesus life that was not recorded. Apparently, according to the documentary, Jesus was in Afghanistan gaining his knowledge or learning ... then went back to preach in middle east somewhere there etc but was later nailed to the cross by Romans due to some backstabbers hatred of him. When his body was brought down and put in the cave he was apparently saved by someone ... long story short ... Jesus went back to Afghanistan and remained there until his actual death.
The documentary in way was saying that Jesus learned/gained his knowledge from the far east and if he was in Afghanistan chances was that he learned from the local religion there but put a twist based on his own interpretation i.e. he could be learning from the Buddhists, Jain or even Hindus.
There you go ... a bit of documentary from BBC.
I am very happy to be reminded that the Vatican has a Chief Exorcist. I often forget that the entire set-up is like a cross between the Da Vinci code and The Thick of It, but with more Latin.
🙂
bwaarp please improve the quality of your trolling - it's getting a bit desperate.
It is hilarious/ridiculous that the Vatican has a chief exorcist though.
It is hilarious/ridiculous that the Vatican has a chief exorcist though.
Ah but you see, he's an exorcist [i]allegorically.[/i]
It's entirely possible that his title is traditional, I'm sure there are plenty of other institutions where people hold titles because historically there's always been someone in that position. Though I don't really see why it's any more hilarious / ridiculous than anything else the church claims.
I've just spotted that the article was published in 2010, so it's hardly breaking news. Doesn't seem to be anyone actually offended though, despite what the attention-grabbing headline claims.
I'm sure there are plenty of other institutions where people hold titles because historically there's always been someone in that position.
[url= http://www.royal.gov.uk/royaleventsandceremonies/swanupping/swanupping.aspx ]May I be the first to mention The Royal Swan Uppers? [/url]
Honourable mentions going out to the Swan Uppers of the Vintners' and Dyers' livery companies also.
But there are definitely swans for them to up, even though it is utterly, comically pointless. So it's a bad comparison unless the Exorcist actually does exorcisms....
🙂
Maybe it's a typo and he makes sure all the bishops keep in shape by working out regularly?
he's an exorcist allegorically.
Wooooah!!!! Cougar, we'd love to believe no-one does exorcisms because they aren't batshit crazy, but he's done over 50,000 according to [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriele_Amorth ]Wikipedia[/url]. Unless his entire existence is an elaborate practical joke of some kind 😯
50,000?
He must be working like a man possessed.
I dunno, I'm not religious but even if I was a catholic I don't think I'd take the Pope's chief ghostbuster too seriously. Unless played by Ernie Hudson
Some Catholics definitely do believe in the power of exorcism, just last the year the archbishop of Burgos in Spain admitted he'd ordered a 17 year old girl be exorcised, the ritual was apparently carried out 13 times: http://www.elmundo.es/espana/2014/12/05/5481d26522601dc8548b456c.html
Given that an archbishop is a very senior role in the Catholic church (Pope -> Cardenal -> Archbishop) I think it's fair to say the Pope does agree with exorcism, or at the very least permits it.
Apparently there are 15 priests in Spain authorised to carry out the practice:
http://www.elmundo.es/espana/2014/12/08/54849f91268e3e955a8b4585.html
I think it's fair to say the Pope does agree with exorcism, or at the very least permits it.
Oh come on - those two things are HUGELY different!
Oh come on - those two things are HUGELY different!
I never said they weren't. My point is that as a practice it's definitely permitted within the church, and although not mainstream it's not something completely unheard of.
Harry Potter's not real?
Pfft, you guys!
Papal infallibility is misunderstood. It is exercised in very specific circumstances and, in relation to doctrinal matters, extremely rarely - twice in the last two hundred years.
official exorcist in 1986 retired 2000, 50,000 in 14 years is >9 a day not including annual leave/bank holidays/2 grandmothers funerals p.a.but he's done over 50,000
**** me, he's a grafter.
so the head of a major organisation permits something he disagrees with? It's a possibility I guess, but would a CEO allow something that he thought was bad for the organisation?Oh come on - those two things are HUGELY different!
Ergo even if he disagrees with it he still thinks it's a positive for the RC, still pretty dodgy ground to be on IMO
It's a possibility I guess, but would a CEO allow something that he thought was bad for the organisation?
Not agreeing with something isn't the same as thinking it's bad for the organisation.
Most of the west think it's mumbo jumbo, so ignore it anyway as per SaxonRider's comments. Those places that don't, well they get what they want - everyone's happy. Seems shrewd to me.
Most of the west think it's mumbo jumbo, so ignore it anyway as per SaxonRider's comments. Those places that don't, well they get what they want - everyone's happy. Seems shrewd to me.
Except the girl in the case I linked to tried to commit suicide - perhaps unsurprisingly treating probable mental health issues with witchcraft isn't always effective. Not to mention potentially illegal in Spain.
I said 'most'. Feel free to remove the bit about the West. It was probably a bit racist anyway.
Like i said it doesn't matter if he agrees or not, he permits it, therefore he can be seen to be condoning it for the "good" of the RCNot agreeing with something isn't the same as thinking it's bad for the organisation.
well yeah, but then catholics have to put up with Angry Atheists™ pointing out how silly/sinister it isSeems shrewd to me.
<and that the head honcho condones it>
**** me, he's a grafter.
Probably why he does not pop up on here and comment 😉
well yeah, but then catholics have to put up with Angry Atheists™ pointing out how silly/sinister it is
Of course, but they have to put up with an awful lot of shite from Angry Atheists, so I expect they are pretty much immune to it.
Anyway - banning it would caues an awful lot of people to be very unhappy with their church. Now I've never done it, but I suspect that running a church (or even a parish) is more about keeping people happy than anything else!
Probably why he does not pop up on here and comment
that and the "generous" length of your average Catholic Ceremony/ritual, not to mention all the home work...As they say the Devil is in the detail.
This thread is a cracker, well done my favourite quote:
- Well the Pope is not prone to "off the cuff Remarks" - Prince Philip he is not (although the consequences of that would be hilarious/dire) yes RC do believe (or are supposed to) what the Pope actually says - which in this case he didn't. Apparently.Do all catholics actually believe every off the cuff remark the Pope makes?
Equally @Tom in damning the RC church for a senior cleric's ramblings is cosying right up with the kind of comments that damn all of Islam due to the ramblings of a senior cleric - but in the defence of Islam, they at least don't have an established hierarchy. It's all bollox anyway, which is the most coherent comment I can make on this ^^
not really, afaik there is barely any hierarchy within islam hence all the splinter radical groups who are ideologically well away from the mainstream. RC is complete opposite where those at the top of the pyramid make announcements/decisions that affect and speak for all of RC*, not really comparable.cosying right up with the kind of comments that damn all of Islam
*officially
but in the defence of Islam, they at least don't have an established hierarchy
Yeah I know you pulled your punch slightly, but you still made the comparison.
Yeah I know you pulled your punch slightly, but you still made the comparison.
I agree with Donk - a mindless baboon could see this, including me.