Is it ok to be critical of the pope yet?????????

by tyydyy 62 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  jeanniebeanz

  Why? Why not? I still haven't heard anyone say why it's in poor taste to criticise someone who's dying as opposed to someone who's already dead.

  The reason is it makes you look bad.

  People who cannot put their own issues aside for a short while to allow those who *do* care for a dying leader to come to grips with the situation, hurt their chances of having a *productive* discussion once things settle down. It is seen as an attack and hurts your own position.

  Once you have riled someone up, they are less likely to be willing to have a rational discussion and the entire thread degenerates into name calling. Or, people who would have been willing to discuss the issues, and there are issues here, will just not post out of disgust at the lack of decorum shown. At that point the discussion dies because the only people posting are people who agree with you and it just turns into a gripe-fest. At least that is what I have seen, especially on the political threads.

  My two cents...

  Jeannie
• 

  Englishman

  Or, people who would have been willing to discuss the issues, and there are issues here, will just not post out of disgust at the lack of decorum shown.

  That's pretty well expressed!

  Or as Lurkio said in Up Pompeii: "There's no decorum in the forum!"
• 

  trevor

  Tyyddyy
  

  I have read all your comments and followed your reasoning and there is not much left to say - except that - I AGREE WITH YOU.

  The pope is a figure head who claims to be more than a man. When he is gone he will be replace. It is what he stands for that we question. God?s representative on earth. We have heard it all before and the concept has been found wanting.

  I find it difficult to understand how ?English Man? can censor your comments yet start a thread asking if we need to believe in God to Pray? I am sure most Catholics would be more offended by such blasphemy than a discussion about a mortal man who claims to be Holy - whatever that means?

  It seems that offence is in the eye of the beholder.

  Don?t loose any sleep over it - we have all lived through prejudice, censorship and false claims of appointment by God and will continue to do so, long after this Pope is gone and has been replaced.
• 

  Stromboli

  Serenity Now,

  re-read my post and then your, then think about how many things you have added that I did not mention, and how many you have confirmed.
• 

  tyydyy

  Or, people who would have been willing to discuss the issues, and there are issues here, will just not post out of disgust at the lack of decorum shown.

  I guess I'll have to say it again..........Look at the title on the thread. Do you think you might be offended by the content? Then don't read the thread.

  There are plenty of subjects that rub people the wrong way. If they can't participate in the discussion because it offends them, hurts them, angers them or makes their head spin, the solution is simple. Don't participate in the conversation. Jesus Christ. Some of you seem to think that we have some sort of utopian community here where everyone agrees with each other and never says anything that makes you squirm. Well.............Welcome to the real world. People sometimes are insensitive. This is an open forum and I don't remember anything in the "rules and regulations" saying that you can't disagree when someone says that the pope was an incredible leader and good guy. I happen to disagree. Just because he's dying doesn't mean that I shouldn't disagree or say so.

  Those of you who are mourning for the imminent loss of your divine representation should probably not even click on a thread entitled "The pope's last poop" or "Is it ok to be critical of the pope yet?????????". That's like going to see an Eddie Murphy concert and complaining that the language offends you. This is a forum where people are encouraged to get things off their chest. It is definitely theraputic to say things that have been caged inside your whole life. That's why we're here. Do you actually think that the majority of people come to this forum so that we can cheer everytime someone hits 10000 posts?

  A mature person would try to reason rather than just censor.

  TimB
• 

  jeanniebeanz

  Look at the title on the thread. Do you think you might be offended by the content? Then don't read the thread.

  It's almost like saying, "only click on this thread if you agree with me." The result is that these threads end up being very one sided. Some have done this a lot lately and I think that's a big part of the sensitivity you're feeling here right now.

  I guess if you want to have opinions debated only by the thick skinned that's fine. But, if you want to hear all sides of the debate, it is best not to blatently offend those who may have valuable input so that they will post.

  But if that's what you want, hey, it's your baby.

  Jeannie
• 

  tyydyy

  It's almost like saying, "only click on this thread if you agree with me."

  No it isn't. I fully expect that those who are mature enough to handle the discussion will have disenting points of view. If I didn't expect that then I probably wouldn't bother posting.

  I guess I need to say it again. If you can't handle it..........................don't participate. If you can handle it, then welcome. Let's have a discussion.

  TimB
• 

  Brummie

  why it's in poor taste to criticise someone who's dying as opposed to someone who's already dead.

  I think people expect mercy to be shown towards a dying man. It seems civilized to us westerners, an unspoken rule is broken when one scoffs at someone so helpless.

  Its pointless trying to show mercy to a dead man . So, back to your question, I guess it is poor taste to critisise someone who is dying rather than dead.

  On a personal note, I never respected the pope, like you I was raised in a religion that hated him, after I left I still thought him to be totally wrong. However, today I had this discussion with my ex wife about him and I came to realise that everything I know about him has been learned from the WTower. I based my harsh judgements of him on all the misrepresentations I have been fed over the years. Watching the news this evening I see that he has helped so many regardless of their belief. He puts the watchtower to shame in this regards. I wish I had learned from him rather than from the WT, then my judgements may have been more merciful.

  He was just a man, I cant view him as anything higher than that, but I respect that he has done more for others than I will ever do, he even visited the man who shot him and forgave him.

  Brummie
• 

  Serenity Now

  Stromboli writes: "They just saw him as an old man, definately not their leader, remember that only few give a shit about what he says."

  Okay, I reread your post and mine and here's my follow-up:

  No, Catholics didn't see JPII as just an old man. He was definitely their leader and deeply loved. Regardless of the fact that many Americans and Western Europeans are cafeteria-style Christians, 75% of the Catholics in the world are in third world countries and actually think people should try to live a life that is true to the teachings of the Church. Seventy-five percent of 1.1 billion people who cared deeply about what JPII said is not a "only few".

  Regarding me stating things that weren't simply a response to your post, I didn't know I had to stick to just responding to your post. I also added some other things that were on my mind.
• 

  Serenity Now

  Brummie wrote:

  "On a personal note, I never respected the pope....after I left I still thought him to be totally wrong. However, today I had this discussion with my ex wife about him and I came to realise that everything I know about him has been learned from the WTower. I based my harsh judgements of him on all the misrepresentations I have been fed over the years....I wish I had learned from him rather than from the WT, then my judgements may have been more merciful."

  Well said, Brummie. I remember seeing newspaper and magazine articles when I was still a JW and they would have misinformation in them about the JW's. I remember an elder saying that all of the beliefs of the WTS are in the literature; why can't people look up the facts before they print erroneous things in articles that mislead people?

  I learned from that and, after leaving the JW's, I applied that to other religions. I found out that everything I'd been taught about the Catholic Church by the JW's was false. Every word. All I did was buy a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It is amazing how easy it is to look things up and find the WTS lies if you just have the reference tools at hand.

  I've also got some Mormon resources, Lutheran resources, Episcopal resources, etc., and try never to believe anything said about a group without double-checking their "official" sources.

  It's amazing, we can't really expect the WTS to say anything true about anybody else since their whole structure is built upon lies about themselves.