The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
While he's not slamming the law itself, he has accused it of making the Catholic church unable to continue without accepting gay people and women into the positions it has previously maintained that they shouldn't be in.
Now it's important to understand the history of this before going straight for the throat and accusing the Pope of sexism, it's pretty important to the Church historically not to have women priests and they've only really just come around to accepting gay people.
Not that it comes from the bible anyway, but then a lot of the things in the bible have been mis-translated (having 3 kings at the crib for instance, there is no mention of number or of royalty) including gay relationships (which were around at the time and no-where in the bible explicitly says anything against them).
Does it surprise me? No. The current Pope (and most of the Vatican it seems) is very old fashioned and believes that this point of view will save the church rather than anything more forward thinking.
So, thoughts, comments? Does he have any point at all or is Pope Benedict just going with the current consensus of the Vatican?
> The Old Testament has 3 small bits in the whole of the scriptures
> that say something about it being immoral (and that's if you
> translate it one way instead of another) and there are an equal
> amount of them eluding to homosexual relationships that are
> fine.
I think the whole abomination thing is pretty clear enough to sum up God's feelings on the subject. It's also quite funny that you elude to alledged homosexual relationships as if their status as gay relationships is as unequivocal as the written view on homosexuality.
> The main problem is not picking or choosing bits from the bible,
> it's translating from the ancient Hebrew or Greek, with some
> phrases being unclear.
Although every time it is translated, that bit of scripture seems to be translated into something extremely similiar?
There is a third option though and that is to just accept that many thousands of years before Jesus, man was already creating religions and beliefs in every single civilization around the world.
Surely the biggest clue to the existence/non-existence of a specific God would be to compare notes with the aliens (assuming they don't shoot first and ask questions later)
In fact, the C of E have a big spiritualist following. Certainly makes sense if you think about some of the ideas of what ghosts are, if they're trapped spirits waiting to pass over to the afterlife then there has to be an afterlife and that implies that there is a God, likewise the Catholic Church is still actively carrying out Exorcisms and there are Catholic priests in the UK who are registered Exorcists.
The other thing to consider is to separate out 'Church' and Religion, where Church is taken to mean the body of people who run the current Church. You can be religious and follow the bible without following the 'Church'. And if you look at all the popular western religions they all stem from the same set of scriptures originally, with different interpretations splitting them, sometimes even the smallest of ideas causing splits.
Monty Python's Life of Brian is a very clever film for showing how this worked in a very simple way and I think it's probably this that the Archbishop of the time was most scared of. I mean, if they were to ban it then it just shows how little faith the Church puts in the followers own faith and ability to separate a parody from what they consider to be the real story. Beside this, the film raises some very good points of discussion and I believe this is healthy.
and Machie - yes, I remember the debate, I thought this topic might raise some more and encourage people to post, hence posting it now.
I don't go to church, although sometimes feel a draw to it (albeit that I would only be attending a C of E church). With my "Ghostie Stuff" as many like to poke fun at, how can I fully believe everything in the Bible, or what Christianity teaches.
Religions should be allowed to evolve, but at the same time I don't believe it should be bullied. Sexist as they may be (or have been) the Church have their own age old rules and traditions. If you don't like their values and feel it is wrong, perhaps it is not the denomination of that religion for you.
The Government/Society will pick on the church rather than any other religion in the UK because generally they concede. As Jimmy Carr says, "what's the worse they'd do, hold a fete?". If the government narked off Muslims for instance, our relationship with them is already tempermental across the country and wouldn't dare forcing them to open up.
I recently bought a Bible, so may give it a read soon!
I'm a fan of science fiction so I'm not religious. I share Gene Roddenberrys vision of the future, where we are all atheist/agnostic and shops open on a sunday.
I don't really know what to say about this topic though. I mean are religions allowed to evolve? Will the pope of the future finally accept evolution, Harry Potter and the first alien priest?
Way I look at it is, let people get on with their own lives. If god is going to punish homosexuals, then let them be. You can't preach at someone or punish someone if they don't follow your religion. There's a difference between understanding a religion, and actually following it. A-Level RE is great for this sort of stuff ;)
The Old Testament has 3 small bits in the whole of the scriptures that say something about it being immoral (and that's if you translate it one way instead of another) and there are an equal amount of them eluding to homosexual relationships that are fine.
The New Testament has nothing at all on the subject, and this is considered as the guide for Christianity, surpassing anything earlier.
The main problem is not picking or choosing bits from the bible, it's translating from the ancient Hebrew or Greek, with some phrases being unclear.
And if every Christian took the Old Testament as the law then all males would be circumcisd too. Now that's something to wince over!