Papal Bull!
There seems to be a bit of a witch hunt going on at the moment with regard to the Catholic church.
Of course a lot of the negative publicity is richly deserved, but I ask myself if it would be so vehement if it was a different religion that was being targeted.
One or two things caught my eye. First when putting forward a positive and negative view of individuals who are Catholic the two names put forward were Susan Boyle and Wayne Rooney.
Why would Subo be positive yet Wazza negative. Who decides these things?
Ruth Kelly is being castigated for buying a property on the doorstep of a high scoring Catholic school. So what? Isn’t she allowed to do what she wants with regard to where she lives and her children’s education?
That those memos are circulating around the Foreign Office and getting into the press seems quite convenient.
Yes I am a Catholic, but don’t let that obscure your view.
-
1
April 25, 2010 at 19:15 -
Saul, the Catholic Church gets what the Catholic Church deserves. Any and all organisations that corrupt minds with fictitious tales and deluded ideas should be ridiculed fae mornin’ till night.
Yer bleatin’ does ye nae favours.
-
2
April 25, 2010 at 20:02 -
Wot like Marx, Sophia?
-
3
April 25, 2010 at 20:06 -
It’s just a personal prejudice, and nothing to do with Catholicism, but Ruth Kelly DESERVES to be castigated, and in Spades, simply for being Ruth Kelly. She’s one of those awful women who are absolutely certain that there is only ONE way to do things, and that is HER way, that she needs to force her POV on you because “it’s only for your own good.”
And she “understands” you, of course she does, but she’s going to ignore you anyway, steam-roller over you and then clog-dance on your prostrate body.
God save the planet from people like this — well-meaning authoritarians, who lead us all down their own road to Hell.
Never forget the old-age adage which I have only just this minute made up — Blessed are they that keep their noses out of it.
End of rant.
-
4
April 25, 2010 at 20:31 -
After all that abuse, I notice that “children” are in the Positive & Influential quartile?
-
5
April 25, 2010 at 20:35 -
The usual gang of secularists,atheists,agnostics and fellow travellers have
slithered out of their covens to have a rant and rave about Catholicism.
Cant wait for them to have a go at Islam, will the frightened little squeeking
rodents suddenly scarper down the grids whence they came.
And dont forget the cartoons and captions my glorious warriors of free thinkingEncore from the Enlightened Ones
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HajJAkQj_HU&feature=related -
6
April 25, 2010 at 20:38 -
Gladstone, ah’m no awfy sure where ye’re comin’ fae. Ye gie Marx the man a lot o’ credit ah’m no sure he deserves. Ah wis referrin’ tae organisations, generally the work o’ many many folk workin’ th’gither wi’ a common purpose. Churches, governments, outfits like the Masons or the unions.
Marx isnae tae be faulted for the work o’ Marxist governments.
-
7
April 25, 2010 at 20:43 -
Asturias, Islam’s glaringly obvious wickedness is nae excuse for the Catholic Church’s wanton evil.
If pointin; yer finger is yer best defence then yer church is sittin’ oan a shoogly stool.
-
8
April 25, 2010 at 21:52 -
Are the FCO on something? That brainstorming chart is hilarious! And we’re paying for it. I think they may be taking the piss with Alex Salmon.
In what possible way is Wayne Rooney a ’stakeholder’ in the Papal visit? Is there some difference between the ‘military’ and the MOD?
At the very least this shows the FCO have too much time and money on their hands and employ too many children.
-
9
April 25, 2010 at 21:55 -
“Isn’t she allowed to do what she wants with regard to where she lives and her children’s education?”
Of course she is. But she should be aware that there are those who believe that it shouldn’t be necessary to move (to a high price area) to accesss better educational standards after so much taxpayers’ money has been “invested” in education in recent years.
-
10
April 25, 2010 at 22:37 -
The Catholic church should be commended for playing this business down and treating it as, one must hope, a light-hearted and unofficial view of how Britain’s relations with the Holy See should be promoted.
Sophia:
shoogly there’s a lovely word: it gives you the geographic context you want without giving the rest of us the trouble of deciphering your contributions.
-
11
April 25, 2010 at 23:09 -
So, is it safe to assume that there aren’t any Church of England paedophiles?
Or any Muslim paedophiles?
Or any Jewish paedophiles?
In the Clergy, that is. -
12
April 26, 2010 at 00:12 -
We can’t all have a panglossian view of life. (Sophia). I admit the Catholic church has a lot to answer for. But with upwards of one billion Catholics, why single out Susan Boyle and Wayne Rooney? Perhaps the media is aiming for the lowest common denominator.
No change there then!
-
13
April 26, 2010 at 00:16 -
Any organisation that automatically gives respect or authority is usually sought by those who would abuse it.
Schools, scouts, children’s homes, etc etc.
And what better respect or authority could a dirty pervert ask for than that from God.
-
14
April 26, 2010 at 00:43 -
Being a Catholic has always been a rather small part of who I am,with however the demonising of the church by the leftist media i feel that is something that will change….if they hate the Church then it must be good for something.
-
15
April 26, 2010 at 09:01 -
“There seems to be a bit of a witch hunt going on at the moment with regard to the Catholic church.” You don’t say!
A friend of mine wrote to me recently saying that he’s given up entirely on the press; he’s noticed over the past few years that everything he reads about football or Catholicism (these being the two subject on which he feels confident that he is competent to judge) is bollocks, and he sees no reason to believe that reports on any other subject are better informed. I used to wonder – after all, the couple of”catholic” stories which I either knew were rubbish or discovered to be pure fiction with five minutes in the library were very minor ones. But then there was the British reporting of Polish politics (even worse than Polish reporting of Polish politics!), and then there came the reporting of the various abuse cases, and it turns out that even in serious matters, they either can’t or won’t do better.
What are these people paid for?
-
16
April 26, 2010 at 09:30 -
Virtually all clubs have rules. People who are not members of a particular club will often disagree with or even feel aggrieved by some or all of those rules. They sometimes feel moved to take a pop at the club, its rules, and its members. It seems to be OK to take a pop at the Masons, the Tories, the BNP, alumni of Eton, Oxbridge etc, or even Neue Labour. The deliberate and gratuitous giving of offence without good reason is rude, but why is it that members of religious clubs are ever alert to the possibility of claiming offence?
-
17
April 26, 2010 at 11:17 -
PT …but why is it that members of religious clubs are ever alert to the possibility of claiming offence?
In fairness, I don’t think the Catholic Church had to be very alert in this case and I don’t think they claimed much offence.
Could one conjecture that had the target been Islam, then the hullabaloo might have been greater and the perpetrators not merely reassigned to other duties.
-
18
April 26, 2010 at 19:35 -
PT said:
Virtually all clubs have rules. People who are not members of a particular club will often disagree with or even feel aggrieved by some or all of those rules.
*******
With regard to clubs, I’m of the same opinion as Groucho Marx. -
19
April 27, 2010 at 10:43 -
“Isn’t she allowed to do what she wants with regard to where she lives and her children’s education?”
Yes, indeed. But we are also allowed to complain loudly about it because she, and her colleagues, spend so much time and energy trying to stop the rest of us from doing the same.
“Is there some difference between the ‘military’ and the MOD?”
Again, indeed. Especially in the graphs treatment – the ‘military’ have more influence with the public than the MOD (compare how much press retired Generals can get, positive or negative, as opposed to Comrade Bob) and are less tractionable to the government’s position on the Papal visit.
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }