What passes for wit in Rome
Hell is a place where sinners really do burn in an everlasting fire, and not just a religious symbol designed to galvanise the faithful, the Pope has said. Addressing a parish gathering in a northern suburb of Rome, Benedict XVI said that in the modern world many people, including some believers, had forgotten that if they failed to “admit blame and promise to sin no more”, they risked “eternal damnation – the inferno”…God had given men and women free will to choose whether “spontaneously to accept salvation … the Christian faith is not imposed on anyone, it is a gift, an offer to mankind”.
Sorry, jefe, that won’t wash. You can’t call it a gift, you can’t call it an offer, and you certainly can’t say it is not imposed on anyone when it is accompanied by threats, specifically, by threats of being burnt in a fire forever. You can’t do that. Think about it. Seriously – think. Say you’re out for a walk one day and a very large guy comes up to you and offers you a sandwich along with the information that if you refuse it he’ll take this very sharp razor he has handy and carve you up. Would you view that sandwich in the light of a gift, an offer, something that was not being imposed on you? I don’t think you would, jefe. I think you would wonder what the hell was in that sandwich, and want very badly not to accept it and certainly not to eat it, and you would also want to get away from the large guy. Well, that’s how we feel about you and your big pal. We don’t like you, we don’t like your threats, and we don’t view what you’re ‘offering’ as a ‘gift’. Go away; shut up; stop threatening people; stop doing your best to frighten people; repent.
Vatican officials said the Pope – who is also the Bishop of Rome – had been speaking in “straightforward” language “like a parish priest”. He had wanted to reinforce the new Catholic catechism, which holds that hell is a “state of eternal separation from God”, to be understood “symbolically rather than physically”.
So that’s why he mentioned the inferno?
Agostino Paravicini Bagliani, a church historian, said the Pope was “right to remind us that hell is not something to be put on one side” as an inconvenient or embarrassing aspect of belief. It was described by St Matthew as a place of “everlasting fire” (Matthew xxv, 41). “The problem is not only that our sense of sin has declined, but also that the world wars and totalitarianisms of the 20th century created a hell on earth as bad as anything we can imagine in the afterlife,” Professor Bagliani said.
Oh no they didn’t. That’s the point, you bastards. Of course the world wars and totalitarianisms of the 20th century created unparalleled horrors, but they didn’t create eternal torture. Eternal torture is, actually, worse than the horrors of the 20th century or any other real-world tortures, because they don’t stop, ever. That is in fact very very very much worse than anything that happened in the 20th century – and yet you punitive sadistic evil bastards sit around in your embroidered outfits telling us all that’s what’s going to happen to us. What a good thing many of us don’t believe you – but some people, as you know better than I do, do believe you. No, that doesn’t mean it’s okay because they won’t be afraid because they’re the ones who believe – they’ll be afraid anyway; they’ll be afraid they don’t believe enough; they’ll be afraid their belief will fail them. You shits. I don’t wish eternal punishment on you, but I wish your consciences would bother you.
“free will to choose” – but don’t choose on the basis of reason or evidence or disbelief in the supernatural or you’ll risk coming up with the wrong choice.
I would also venture to say that there have been many around the world over the last 2 millenia who have dealt with Christian empires and missionaries and might, just might, take issue with the glib notion that “the Christian faith is not imposed on any one”.
“hell is an idea first born on an undigested apple-dumpling” – Ishmael, in “Moby Dick”
It is my opinion that teaching the existence of Hell is a form of terrorism because it is seeking to influence people’s behaviour by means of fear. Unfortunately it seems to have been the most successful form of terrorism in history because not only has it been used to control people for many centuries but it also helps to maintain ignorant and reactionary attitudes even today.
It is exactly as much a gift as the “protection” offered by organised crime. Pay me/love me (which includes paying me, if you’re faithful) and we will ensure nothing happens to you/you will go to heaven. If you don’t, we will destroy you and/or your property/you will go to hell forever. Organised crime at least dispenses both protection and destruction; you see what you’re paying for. Religion just fucks with your mind, except not all the negative things are as imaginary as the positive ones; religion can and has tortured and killed you in this world if it thinks you’re not obedient enough for the next one. If Ratzinger wants to look good, he should avoid comparison with Mafia bosses; they win hands down for honesty and straightforwardness.
“Vatican officials said the Pope – who is also the Bishop of Rome – had been speaking in “straightforward” language “like a parish priest”
Or like the Redemptorist Missionary priests who each year visited, for one solid week, every conceivable parish and put the fear of God into the parishoners. Even grown men were afeared.
“Redemptorists are well known for preaching Parish Missions. This means visiting Catholic homes, talking with people and praying with people; and then gathering people together for the ‘preached week’ of the Mission – a time of challenge, renewal and strengthening. Redemptorists also give retreats – helping Christians recharge their spiritual batteries.
Redemptorists worldwide are engaged in Publications: proclaiming the generous mercy of God through the written word, helping people with a wide variety of pastoral books, leaflets and booklets.
The “flock” [their terminology] though are not as sheepish, and are at long last wising up to them. So they have gotten even more wiser. They now resort to using different prostelyizing, methodologies, like the media to spread their straighforward hell and damnation theories.
There are a number of things I don’t quite understand about this curious story, starting with the fact that the article begins by saying that the pope wanted to state that hell is not just a religious symbol, and then quotes “Vatican officials” as saying that he wanted to reinforce the new catechism, which holds that hell is to be understood “symbolically rather than physically.” Well, is it symbolic or not symbolic?
Personally, I think the psychology behind this “fear of hell” business is that it rests on the rather natural fear of death. All animals (I’m not so sure about plants) have an instinct to avoid death as long as possible, and in humans this expresses itself, in consciousness, as a fear of death. The Christian view is that faith in JC (whatever that is) is the only way to “overcome death” (as Paul constantly emphasizes). So “hell,” in the Christian view, is just what happens naturally to anyone without the true faith.
So Christians like “il papa” see themselves as giving us the “good news” — not so much threatening us with hell-fire as pointing out to us the one true answer to our natural fear of death. It goes without saying, of course, that none of this doctrine has the least bit of evidence in its favor — it’s all just another expression of that same fear.
This is so bizarre, I don’t know where to begin. Whatever earthly metaphors the painters and poets might devise to depict hell, the RC theological idea is at minimum just the complete absence of love, which follows from the choice of the damned to reject love. I suspect that the pope, who as a theologian should know this, has decided to teach about hell in metaphorical terms for the “benefit” of those simple catholics who wouldn’t be impressed enough by the theological idea of “the absence of love” to let it affect their lives. This then is exacerbated by the media who jump all over the sensational story that will infuriate progressive readers while reassuring pre-modernists. The real problem with pope lying (by the way, lying is not a sin unless you are testifying against someone) is the real psychological damage it does to believe in this crap. You have all hit it on the head: you cannot command love. However, it remains plausible that completely rejecting love in one’s life and living a life of hatred must be a living hell. Then, why does the pope seem to be such a hater?
“Vatican officials” as saying that he wanted to reinforce the new catechism, which holds that hell is to be understood “symbolically rather than physically.” Well, is it symbolic or not symbolic”
The following is from the NEW CATECHISM which was taken the Vatican site.
IV. HELL
1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbour or against ourselves: “He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.”
610 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.
611 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self- exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”
1034 Jesus often speaks of “Gehenna” of “the unquenchable fire” reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.
612 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he “will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,”613 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!”614
1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.”615
The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”616 Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where “men will weep and gnash their teeth.”617
1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;618 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:619 Father, accept this offering from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.620
The above makes for very depressing reading. I actually thought it was bogus on first skimming through contents. It also makes me shudder to think that when I was a child other children were told that if they were bold that they would end up in the flames of hell, and would have burns akin to mine. I was the perfect yardstick. Children were invariably afraid to befriend me, I was synonymous with all that was bad and evil.
“Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.”
SYMBOLIC, OR NOT – IT IS HORRIBLE STUFF
M.T. O’L: Good source material. Roman Catholics are under no obligation to interpret the bible literally, of course, so biblical passages mentioning “fire” can easily be taken as symbolic rather than physical. Every Jesuit priest who touched on the matter during my 8 years in Jesuit high school and college told us that hell was a “psychological state” rather than a physical place.
“This is so bizarre, I don’t know where to begin”
I do! It begins with the “open window”
Hell first begins when classes are given in the respective parish Churches of expectant mothers.
Thereafter, when the happy bouncing babies have no sooner popped out of their comfort zones, do they find their frail, wobbly and bawling heads put under warerfonts, in their nearest parish. Without their consent, I should add.
Roman Catholicism decided baptism is the first sacrament of the Catholic Church. Often infants are baptized in the Roman Catholic Church with the idea that their parents and God parents are going to teach them the Roman Catholic religion. Being baptized gives us an “pen window” to know and build a relationship with Jesus Christ.
My first realisation of hell was when I discovered that “the open window” was just that, only it was multiplied by a hundred more. The view from these windows were hauntingly dull, dank, scary and real bizarre.
There’s a curious ambiguity in the word “eternal” here which adds to the confusion. Eternal can be conceptualized as timeless, i.e. the way a Platonic object, or a human being now gone but still remembered exists ‘eternally’. I guess one could fit such an interpretation well to the “symbolic” version of Hell – except that it doesn’t quite fit with a personally experienced afterlife. Which many people more ardently believe in than they believe in God. Now, conceptualizing eternal as everlasting, endless, etc. does fit well with a notion of the afterlife, but it can’t be well interpreted symbolically. Hot place, cold place, it’s presumably personally experienced.
I agree with Angelo that Benedict’s unclarity here seems quite deliberate. Playing on fear but also on a longing for some kind of eschatological justice – a time at the end when all the decent common folk who ended up being exploited and tortured and killed in this world get what they deserve – as do their torturers. Truth be said, I’d guess that everlasting torture is a tad harsh even for the Hitlers of this world. But the longing for some kind of Heaven/Hell afterlife is not purely based on fear (though the ancient Greeks had a much more humane view in that eternal torture was reserved for the really, really hideous ones. And they were quite creative about it, too. Sysiphus rolling his stone for all eternity is a lot more original than the usual horned little creatures sticking hot pokers into bodily orifices).
Theologically, such conceptions of everlasting damnation, or eternal justice, are hard to make sense of in a way that satisfies both the fears and the hopes of believers. It seems Benedict tries to anyway. But it’s sheer manipulative power-play. Typical for the course the Vatican has been taking recently.
My own belief in God is pretty much conditioned on my disbelief in a personally experienced afterlife. We’re temporal, we experience – and at some point we stop doing so, and that’s it for as far as we are concerned. The God of Benedict’s fiery afterlife seems, as OB indicated, to be a rather unsympathetic and capricious petty tyrant – a kind of cosmic Caligula. I hope such a God does not exist.
“they would end up in the flames of hell, and would have burns akin to mine. I was the perfect yardstick.”
Oh, christ, I didn’t even think of that. Did they really say that? – Yes, of course they did; stupid question. Oh, gawd – cruel to you, cruel to the children, cruel all around.
A longing for eschatological justice is one thing, and longing for eternal punishment is quite quite another. It’s the eternal part that cooks it – because quite apart from the ridiculous disproportion, it also means it has nothing to do with redemption or reform, it’s pure sick vengeance. It’s a sick, disgusting, wicked belief, and people who sign up to it are desperately in need of redemption themselves. People who assert it to others with the full power and majesty of The Church behind them are even more so. Ratzinger is in a dire state.
“So biblical passages” mentioning “fire” can easily be taken as symbolic rather than physical.
Angelo,
Yeah, effectively so that may be the case, but try impressing that argument on eight year old children, and even younger, who did not in the first instance have the privilege of being properly educated. Let alone having the prospect of going to a prominent Jesuit School.
I did not even know as a teenager how old I was let alone comprehend the unembellished teachings of the pre – Vatican II catechism
The religious and others always told me, at my institution in Goldenbridge that I would burn in flames of fire, that I would go to hell, if I were naughty. How in God’s name, as a mere child was I to know to that it was not a corporeal fire or a corporeal hell, but was as an alternative simply symbolic?
To this day, I still feel the consequences of the fear of hell, the same as I felt as a child it under no circumstances goes away. It is imprinted – in my mind. There is a differentiation despite the fact that, in one sense I now have the wherewithal to explore and in so doing conceivably arrive at the juncture you were at when you became cognisant of the reality of HELL. That is what becomes of having mentors and concerned carers., we thus become confident enough to question places or symbolic places such as Hell.
“How in God’s name, as a mere child was I to know to that it was not a corporeal fire or a corporeal hell?”
Especially when that’s not what the religious and others told you?! They took damn good care that you would understand fire as fire, it seems to me.
Again…one has to wonder what was wrong with them, why didn’t they think, why didn’t it trouble them to do that to children? What is wrong with people that they do things like that? Why the refinements of cruelty? Why all the extra?
Honestly, I’m not convinced that Ratzi &c actually believe in all that tosh about “oh, it’s just symbolic fire”. Certainly the vast majority of his thralls don’t.
“Again…one has to wonder what was wrong with them, why didn’t they think,”
OB:
Thinking was never a burning issue with the Sisters of Mercy. In fact it was not an issue at all. Their thinking was reserved for their loving God. We had no place in their THOUGHTS or in their hearts, let alone with their god. As you know, in their eyes we were the products of fallen women.
WE WERE PUT ON THIS EARTH TO BE HUMILIATED. WE WERE CONSTANTLY REMINDED OF OUR LOWLY STATUS.
Those of whom grew up with me to this day still hear the resounding words “ye are worse than the soldiers who crucified Jesus Christ”; “ye are scourges”; “I will crucify ye”; “I WILL DRAW BLOOD”; “Ye have wounded our Lord; May ye burn in hell”. “HELL IS TOO GOOD FOR YE”. With such flaming phraselogy being continually flung in our faces what were we to flaming well do – only, believe same. There was no other choice. HELL, WAS INDEED A REAL PLACE ALRGHT FOR THOUSANDS OF VULNERABLE CHILDREN IN GOLDENBRIDGE. IN FACT. Goldenbridge WAS SYNONYMOUS WITH HELL.
“As you know, in their eyes we were the products of fallen women.”
Yes, well, that’s certainly a good reason for them to torment you all. And Jews are the children of Jews, blacks are the children of blacks, untouchables are the children of untouchables, etc etc etc.
It’s terrible stuff. The neglect is more than bad enough, but the active abuse and humiliation, the active energetic cruelty – it goes on being shocking.
In fact it’s kind of a Zimbardo experiment. The three make a nasty but informative trilogy – Milgram, Zimbardo, Goldenbridge.
Your objection to teaching children that hell is a literal and physical place of torment is well taken. It seems we have at least three kinds of religious teachers: (1) those who openly interpret things like hell symbolically; (2) those who are so simple minded that they take it all literally; (3) those who interpret it symbolically but, then, for the purpose of social control or simple sadism, teach it to others as if were literally true. Who, but the child itself, could believe that the “sins” committed by that child could result in eternal damnation? For adults to tell this to children is a form of torture. By the way, what about purgatory? The fact that the pope, by the accounts I’ve seen, did not talk about the far more theologically plausible doctrine of purgatory suggests that he was being intentionally provocative.
OB, did you see the cover of Zimbardo’s new book, The Lucifer Effect. Understanding good people turn evil. The cover of the book with white jig saws against a black backdrop, is very eye-catching.
Yin and Yang immediately sprung to mind.
Yin and yang do not exclude each other.
Everything has its opposite: although this is never absolute – only relative. No one thing is completely yin or completely yang. Each contains the seed of its opposite. For example, winter can turn into summer; “what goes up, must come down”.
2. Yin and yang are interdependent.
One cannot exist without the other. For example, day cannot exist without night. Light cannot exist without darkness. Life cannot exist without death.
3. Yin and yang can be further subdivided into yin and yang. Any yin or yang aspect can be further subdivided into yin and yang. For example, temperature can be seen as either hot or cold. However, hot can be further divided into warm or scorching; cold into cool or icy. Within each spectrum, there is a smaller spectrum; every beginning is a moment in time, and has a beginning and end, just as every hour has a beginning and end. 4. Yin and yang consume and support each other. Yin and yang are usually held in balance: as one increases, the other decreases. However, imbalances can occur. There are four possible imbalances: excess yin, excess yang, yin deficiency and yang deficiency. They can again be seen as a pair: by excess of yin there is a yang deficiency and vice versa. The imbalance is also a relative factor: the excess of yang “forces” yin to be more “concentrated”.
5. Yin and yang can transform into one another. At a particular stage, yin can transform into yang and vice versa. For example, night changes into day; warmth cools; life changes to death. However this transformation is relative too. Night and day coexist on Earth at the same time when shown from space. 6. Part of yin is in yang and part of yang is in yin. The dots in each serve: as a reminder that there are always traces of one in the other. For example, there is always light within the dark (e.g., the stars at night); these qualities are never completely one or the other.
as a reminder that extreme yang at some point transforms instantly into yin, and vice versa, or that the labels yin and yang are conditioned by an observer’s point of view. For example, the hardest stone is easiest to break. This can show that absolute discrimination between the two is artificial.
OB,
I really do not want to rock the boat by going too deeply into Milgram as I will otherwise have to book a weeks trip up “de nile” to get over the shock. I believe the RA is the most upmarket cruiseliner of them all, however I cannot be sure of the service one would receive. They can be very temperamental these Egyptian cruise liners. Will have to ask Betsy!
“By the way, what about purgatory? The fact that the pope, by the accounts I’ve seen, did not talk about the far more theologically plausible doctrine of purgatory suggests that he was being intentionally provocative”
Angelo; Not luscious enough.
I would also surmise that his belly is momentarily too full up with the “hell,” “fire” and “damnation” menu, that was on offer at the obscure Italian Church.
He may decide, when the weather is fine to have a St. Peter’s outdoor balcony “Purgatory” Barbecue (BBQ)
III. THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY
1030 All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.604 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:605
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.606
1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: “Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.”607 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.608 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
Let us help and commemorate them. If Job’s sons were purified by their father’s sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.609
Purgatory can be almost as frightening as hell as one does not know what to expect.
Waiting on the Goldenbridge Landing, shivering and quivering with a mixture of anxiety and cold anticipating the punishment that was to be had was a mini type of hell for children. It was certainly a zizzling frothing provocative, non-theological matter on the part of the sister in charge, who was dishing it out.
Marie-Therese – yes, Milgram can be quite upsetting to read about. If it sounds like too much, don’t do it!
Waiting on the Goldenbridge landing was discussed in the testimony. Apparently a great many people have painful memories of it.
Punishment, revenge, torture, cruelty – a big subject in human history and affairs. Very big indeed.
Well – and just to note that the church and its priests haven’t been absolutely always on the wrong side: there’s the great Bartolomé de las Casas, a 16th century Dominican priest who protested against what his fellow Spaniards were doing to the indigenous people in what is now Mexico. He recognized cruelty when he saw it.
And let’s not forget karma, the asian version of Western conceptions of hell, another behavioral cudgel. I’m coming back as a dung beetle for writing this…
“Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.”
I was playing around in Google’s new news archive feature (which goes back to the 1700s; almost eveything is either pay or subscription, but you still get snippets) and I wondered how nasty the press we got used to be and came up with this from “The Washington Post” in 1906: “Chicago, March 10. — ‘All the very bad criminals — I mean the murderers, hold-up men, burglars, and others who are ever ready to commit murder in the pursuit of their abominable business — are atheists,’ said Dr. E.M. Hirsch at Temple Israel last night. ‘Murderers and that like are the only real atheists. There are no deliberate murderers who are not atheists.'”
Heartwarming what a difference 101 years can make, isn’t it?
Two thoughts:
1] So Dante was wrong, and his description of l’Inferno is not in accordance with the pope’s?
2] – from Zimbardo, and becoming the other ….
Light is the left hand of Darkness
and Darkness the right hand of Light.
Two are one, lif and death, lying
together like lovers in kemmer,
like hands joined together,
Like the ebd and the way.
Stewart,
That’s fun new feature, thanks for pointing it out. How about this one;
‘How is it possible to conceive that a woman can be an atheist? What shall prop up this reed if religion does not sustain her? The feeblest being in nature ever on the eve of death, or loss of her charms; who shall support her if her hopes be not extended beyond an ephemeral existence? For the sake of her beauty alone woman should be pious.’
Hartford Daily Courant Dec 8, 1842
Or this:
“ROME, Feb. 5 — Pope Pius XII told a group of lawyers today that there is an eternal hell after death for the souls of men who have committed grave sins.” (NYT 6 Feb. 1955) [love, love, love the fact that he told it to lawyers]
Or this: “Vatican City, March 23 (AP) — Pope Pius XII called for a return to Christian teaching in the home and a greater emphasis on Hell’s Fire preaching in the church.” (Washington Post, 24 March 1949)
That’s the problem; there’s so much, you can play forever. What’s enlightening is that all this talk of hell actually comes from religion. Because folks like Mr. Eagleton had had me convinced that all that stuff about people burning for eternity was just a straw man invented by us atheists to make religion look bad, whereas religion is all about complex philosophy.
The only way to avoid going to hell, Pope Benedict says, is to make a good confession (Let us hope that he has made a good confession himself over the Hitler Youth episode, or the rest of us sinners will have to face spending an eternity with him below.
If you were under the the impression that hell was going to be a fleeting moment, you can forget it mate. You can stop thinking about making that u-turn in the hereafter. There will be no roaring for B&W to save you outside the pearly gates. IT DOES EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS ON THE TIN. Eternal Damnation.
Mind you, if you were to read what the Vatican thinks/says about Atheism you would not be wasting your time reading what the tin says. As surely, as there is good and evil would have flung it at the pearly gates, that is before your arrival, down below, along with the rest of us sinners.
Re: Limbo it was, lastOctober -BANISHED. KAPPUT
Pope Benedict accused the European Union of “apostacy” for not mentioning Christianity on ther 50th anniversary of its founding. At the same time castigating European women for not having enough babies. He has got into a spat over a proposed law granting rights to homosexual couples. He has dug in his heels about priestly celibacy.
BUT DOES IT REALLY MATTER WHAT THE POPE SAYS.. Surely Ratzinger can think what he likes there in his little city state.
Dante saw several popes in hell, remember?
Heheheheheheheheeeeeeeee ….
“Kaput, or kaputt is correct spelling”.
In the meantime,
Buongiorno – and DANTE, DANTE, DANTE GRAZIE, I did not know this fact. Arrivederci
Dante Alighieri was born on May 14/June 13, 1265 – and died September 13/14, 1321.
Pope Clement IV (1265-1268) reigned at the time of his birth – and Pope John XXII (1316-34) at his death.
Dante lived through the reign of five pontificates. They were Pope Clement; Pope Gregory X; Pope Blessed Innocent; Pope Adrian V; and Pope John XXII.
Dante, would in all, have seen out – 197 Popes.
Will check out the nasty ones,as I feel like rubbing it in and giving them hell.
GOT THEM AT LAST FROM GOOD OLD RELIABLE WIKI.
The Bad Popes.
The Bad Popes is a 1969 book by E. R. Chamberlin documenting the lives of eight of the most controversial popes (papal years in parentheses):
Pope Stephen VI (896-897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber[1]
Pope John XII (937-964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife. Modern evidence suggests he never lived at all, but was in fact several people posing as one.
Pope Benedict VIII (1012-1024), who is lampooned in Dante’s Divine Comedy
Pope Benedict IX (1032-1044,1045,1047-1048), who “sold” the Papacy
Pope Urban VI (1378-1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.[2]
Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503), who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[3]
Pope Leo X (1513-1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors reserves on a single ceremony[4]
Pope Clement VII (1523-1534), also a Medici, whose power-politiking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
I WILL GIVE THEM A REST FOR NOW.