Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

In America, well-informed Catholics are not divided between "liberal" and "conservative" based so much on sideshow issues like abortion or gay marriage but rather on the issue of centralization and the attendant culture of clericalism. To define the term, clericalism is generally an attitude of privileged authority on the part of priests and bishops. Lay people (including those in religious orders) often cooperate in this privilege for whatever reason. Clericalism is in my opinion characterized by condescension, reactionary political and cultural values, and extreme secrecy.

Clericalism is not limited to the Catholic Church. Recent sex abuse scandals in the US and UK prove that this kind of culture pervades organizations like university sports programs and even government media organs. I do not hesitate even a moment in saying that clericalism is the root of the sex abuse cover ups throughout the Catholic Church. On this issue, Ratzinger has a mixed reputation. On the one hand, he seems far less interested in the political aspects of the papacy than his PR-savvy predecessor. On the other hand, he has either unsuccessfully resisted or not extensively resisted clericalism in practice.

My overall impression is that he always looked at himself as a scholar rather than a politician despite holding essentially political offices for most of his career. I think this attitude has led him to mistrust and disregard modern media as so much spin and that, combined with his less authoritarian (in comparison to Wojtyla) style of governing the Church, has isolated him from the severity of clericalism -- without even considering the problems that privilege has with acknowledging privilege.

I think it will be easy for him to resign because the papacy is very hard on him. It seems to me he has approached the office with a very great historical authenticity: namely, he sees his primary role as bishop of Rome to be a teacher. His teachings have been very good -- I would especially suggest that Western people (not just Catholics) read Deus caritas est. But the pope is also an administrator and good teachings must be exercised as well as commended. I think Ratzinger's papacy has demonstrated that he is rather ambivalent about administration.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
Actually Catholic priests are often known for being quite leftist in Latin American, some outright communist.

You're thinking of liberation theology, which has been formally denounced for decades. The kind of priests who find that appealing have not moved up to bishops and cardinals and so are in no position to become pope. The Latin Americans who are bishops and cardinals are extremely conservative. Now, keep in mind I don't mean in the exact sense of US politics. But African and Latin American bishops tend to take an extremely vociferous hard line against abortion, contraception, and gay marriage vis-a-vis the state.

 rubiksnoob wrote:
Why did you get the nice Italian nuns, and the rest of us just get mean old ladies who took cruel pleasure in beating small children with rulers?

His roguish good looks, and know the Pope from way back when the Pope was still in seminary. Its good to know people in high places.
Not like me. I have friends in low places.

 Manchu wrote:
You're thinking of liberation theology, which has been formally denounced for decades. The kind of priests who find that appealing have not moved up to bishops and cardinals and so are in no position to become pope. The Latin Americans who are bishops and cardinals are extremely conservative. Now, keep in mind I don't mean in the exact sense of US politics. But African and Latin American bishops tend to take an extremely vociferous hard line against abortion, contraception, and gay marriage vis-a-vis the state.

Interesting. I know our African bishops are much more conservative. Its almost like we had a schism about it...

 Frazzled wrote:

 rubiksnoob wrote:
Why did you get the nice Italian nuns, and the rest of us just get mean old ladies who took cruel pleasure in beating small children with rulers?

His roguish good looks, and know the Pope from way back when the Pope was still in seminary. Its good to know people in high places.
Not like me. I have friends in low places.

Where the whiskey drowns and the beer chases your blues away?

Despite not being a catholic, and not agreeing with a lot of their church policy, I have enjoyed his books on Jesus. He might be a good example of the saying that good teachers don't make good leaders.

I thoroughly enjoyed his rule of the galactic empire, but it was sad that his defeat was caused because his greatest pupil couldn't hold back the guilt of not playing ball with his son Luke.

At least he survived the fall to govern the Catholic church.


It'll be interesting, I felt that the last papal election was interesting, simply because I was taking Latin at the time, so it was weird having "current" events for a language that for "all" accounts is dead (My Latin 1 teacher is keeping the language alive by constantly conversing in nothing but Latin).

 kronk wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 rubiksnoob wrote:
Why did you get the nice Italian nuns, and the rest of us just get mean old ladies who took cruel pleasure in beating small children with rulers?

His roguish good looks, and know the Pope from way back when the Pope was still in seminary. Its good to know people in high places.
Not like me. I have friends in low places.

Where the whiskey drowns and the beer chases your blues away?

Exactly!

Awwww...I'm going to miss imagining the head of the catholic church wandering around muttering "something, something, something, Dark Side!" to himself.

 Manchu wrote:
My overall impression is that he always looked at himself as a scholar rather than a politician despite holding essentially political offices for most of his career. I think this attitude has led him to mistrust and disregard modern media as so much spin and that, combined with his less authoritarian (in comparison to Wojtyla) style of governing the Church, has isolated him from the severity of clericalism -- without even considering the problems that privilege has with acknowledging privilege.

I think it will be easy for him to resign because the papacy is very hard on him. It seems to me he has approached the office with a very great historical authenticity: namely, he sees his primary role as bishop of Rome to be a teacher. His teachings have been very good -- I would especially suggest that Western people (not just Catholics) read Deus caritas est. But the pope is also an administrator and good teachings must be exercised as well as commended. I think Ratzinger's papacy has demonstrated that he is rather ambivalent about administration.

My initial reaction to some of the changes they made to prayers -- "consubstantial" in place of "one in being with" comes to mind -- was that they were exactly the kind of thing that would come from a scholar, or at least a Vatican headed by a scholar.

The new liturgical translations are very interesting indeed. When the vernacular translations were first made back in the '60s, the local churches did them. Thus, the American bishops got their people together and came up with what we've been saying until recently. This time around, all the translations were done in Rome. Furthermore, after they were finished and approved by the American bishops a further unapproved series of edits (literally thousands upon thousands) were undertaken and -- most tellingly of all -- no one seems to know or be willing to say exactly who made these additional changes or under what authority.

The approach of the changes over all shifted from "dynamic equivalence" to "formal correspondence." In practice, this means the translations are much more literal or at least faux-literal. The Latin word "calix" has been translated as "chalice" rather than "cup," for example. Also, as you mentioned, the use of "consubstantial" in place of "one in being" seems pedantic given that if anyone ever asked me what consubstantial means I would simply say of the same being or substance.

You can see how this ties into the idea of curial centralization and clericalism.

Frazzled for Pope. That's all I will say.

 4oursword wrote:
Frazzled for Pope. That's all I will say.

Ditto... kickstarter his plane ticket?

 4oursword wrote:
Frazzled for Pope. That's all I will say.

I have two questions before I accept:
1. Can the Pope have a Harley Sportster?
2. Can said Harley Sportster have a sidecar modified to carry between two and thirty dogs?

Animals are not allowed in the papal apartments. No joke -- Ratzinger had to give up his cat.

To be fair, the cat would probably think it is the pope.

 Manchu wrote:
Animals are not allowed in the papal apartments. No joke -- Ratzinger had to give up his cat.

I'm sure exceptions will be able to be made once the entire clergy is replaced with wiener dogs.

 Manchu wrote:
Animals are not allowed in the papal apartments. No joke -- Ratzinger had to give up his cat.

Wait if you're Pope you can do what you want.

"Your Eminence...no animals are permitted."
"These aren't animals. This is my security detail."
"But we have the Swiss Guard."
"They're fired. You displease Pope Frazzled. You're fired too."
"But your Emin..."
"You know what we haven't had around here in a while? A good old fashioned witch burning."
"Leaving right away!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Animals are not allowed in the papal apartments. No joke -- Ratzinger had to give up his cat.

I'm sure exceptions will be able to be made once the entire clergy is replaced with wiener dogs.

Now you're thinking properly! Plus, there will be an end to scandals. On the negative the clergy would be easily distractable via steak treats.

 Alfndrate wrote:
I thoroughly enjoyed his rule of the galactic empire, but it was sad that his defeat was caused because his greatest pupil couldn't hold back the guilt of not playing ball with his son Luke.

At least he survived the fall to govern the Catholic church.

Awesome.

 Frazzled wrote:
Wait if you're Pope you can do what you want.

I should think this very issue might disprove that notion.

 Manchu wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Wait if you're Pope you can do what you want.

I should think this very issue might disprove that notion.

Let me rephrase that. The Pope with a Mossberg 500 and a camo bandanna. The Vicar of Christ with a scattergun...yea I think he can rescind that no pets thing.

Good luck with those Swiss fellows.

 Manchu wrote:
Good luck with those Swiss fellows.

Again, thats what the Mossberg is for. The camo bandanna just provides a certain...penache.

"Thou shalt not murder! "
"I'm Pope, I absolve myself!"
"Oh crap..." (in Latin of course)

And this is why a Texan will never be Pope.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Good luck with those Swiss fellows.

Again, thats what the Mossberg is for. The camo bandanna just provides a certain...penache.

"Thou shalt not murder! "
"I'm Pope, I absolve myself!"
"Oh crap..."

Oh gak that's hilarious!

On a serious note... could the pope ever be "removed"? Impeached?

I absolve myself at least once a day. I find it helps to keep the humours balanced.

 whembly wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Good luck with those Swiss fellows.

Again, thats what the Mossberg is for. The camo bandanna just provides a certain...penache.

"Thou shalt not murder! "
"I'm Pope, I absolve myself!"
"Oh crap..."

Oh gak that's hilarious!

On a serious note... could the pope ever be "removed"? Impeached?

Not Pope Frazzled.

Now remember, this is Italy. He'd just get wacked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:
I absolve myself at least once a day. I find it helps to keep the humours balanced.

Thats very humourous.


*Frazzled note, Frazzled is not picking on the Catholic Church, or Popes. Just the Swiss Guard. And Cats. We hates them don't we Precious..er have I said too much?

 whembly wrote:
On a serious note... could the pope ever be "removed"? Impeached?

The pope is the bishop of Rome. A bishop can be laicized. It is therefore theoretically possible even if it is administratively improbable.

 Manchu wrote:

 whembly wrote:
On a serious note... could the pope ever be "removed"? Impeached?

The pope is the bishop of Rome. A bishop can be laicized. It is therefore theoretically possible even if it is administratively improbable.

That sounds really painful.

I'm sure it is.

 Manchu wrote:

 whembly wrote:
On a serious note... could the pope ever be "removed"? Impeached?

The pope is the bishop of Rome. A bishop can be laicized. It is therefore theoretically possible even if it is administratively improbable.

Oooooo... "laicized"... need to do some google-fu... brb!

 whembly wrote:
need to do some google-fu

That might not be helpful. Do you have a question?

I assume from the context of the sentence it just means to remove someone from power/remove the rights of their position.