Arresting the Pope, World War III?

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
71
Saint John, N.B.
The entire concept of arresting the Pope on a state visit for crimes no one has even accused him of commiting is absolutely ludicrous....the fancy of drooling morons, of which there are far too many in the world.

And I'm not Catholic.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Yup! They are attacking...

Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Pope's childhood home vandalized:

The childhood home of the future Pope Benedict XVI was paint-vandalized Tuesday evening with obscene writings, according to German police.

Pope's childhood home vandalized - Washington Times
Can I ask you an honest question, do you think they're attacking his home because he's a Catholic Pope, or because he is alleged to have covered up possibly thousands of child sexual assaults?
 

Johnnny

Frontiersman
Jun 8, 2007
9,388
124
63
Third rock from the Sun
Pope is expected to visit Britain in September 2010, rumours circulating is handcuffs awaiting.

The pope's visit (to Britain) in September is a visit of state, and so it would be very strange if during a state visit the person who is invited to make a state visit is arrested.

In Washington, the American Humanist Association, which advocates the rights of non-believers, backed Dawkins' view that the pope should not have diplomatic immunity as a head of state and called for a "criminal investigation" of the church.

If the Pope were arrested by Britain backed by the United States, what kind of retaliation should we expect?

You just cant say ww3 is going to happen because of some damned thing in britian... :lol: your not no otto von Bismark ....

your guessing
 

theconqueror

Time Out
Feb 1, 2010
784
2
18
San Diego, California
Can I ask you an honest question, do you think they're attacking his home because he's a Catholic Pope, or because he is alleged to have covered up possibly thousands of child sexual assaults?

With an honest answer, I think it's just a stress test against the Catholic Church by the Christians. The problem is that there is a breaking point where it will undoubtedly end up in war.

ps. I don't think it has anything to do with abuse and I truly and honestly think it's just a lame excuse to pick on the Pope.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
There are rabid people whose theology is opposed to that of the pope, who I really do not believe for one second are doing this 'for the children'. The likes of Dawkins have made a religion of atheism, and rabidly attempt to push their agenda and convert others to their point of view (and no, I don't believe that's true of all atheists, so don't get yer panties in a bunch).

Do I think the Pope's hands are clean of guilt? hell no. Do I think this is the right route? No. But... I lack an answer as to what is the right route to take on the Vatican on this issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Colpy

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
I think the 2 of them are showing their complete lack of operating brain cells, along with anyone that supports this stupidity. Anyone that thinks the 1 billion plus Catholics in this world will sit back and allow the Holy See to be arrested and put on trial by atheists is not thinking straight.
 

eanassir

Time Out
Jul 26, 2007
3,099
9
38
Is this possible, arresting the Pope? He is a respected personality by all Christians; and even non Christians consider him; and no wise man or state may do so, and stir people for the sake of Dowkins or others. This is what I think.​
 
Last edited:

eanassir

Time Out
Jul 26, 2007
3,099
9
38
If the Pope were arrested by Britain backed by the United States, ?


Is this possible?:smile:

But I think this may have some Gospel belonging like what in the Gospel of John


"John 16: 7 -13
7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter* will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Lord, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth*, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."
------------------------------------------

* The "comforter" here is the Awaited Mahdi or Elijah that will be raised in the Last Days. and he is the "spirit of truth" as in the aya 13 here.
 
Last edited:

eanassir

Time Out
Jul 26, 2007
3,099
9
38
Do I think the Pope's hands are clean of guilt? hell no. Do I think this is the right route? No. But... I lack an answer as to what is the right route to take on the Vatican on this issue.

Don't worry karrie; I give you guaranty he will be arrested in the afterlife.

If he is respected here for his position, in the afterlife there will be no respect for person, but for the belief in God alone and devoting to Him alone in addition to working good righteous work and avoiding the disobedience of God's Commandments.

This will be for all the princes or chiefs of the enthusiasm, association and atheism.

The guilt of the chief is not like the guilt of ordinary people; because a large number of people follow the chiefs of misguidance and association [because they believe he is truthful and his doctrine is correct];

and so he misleads a large number of people in stead of telling them to devote themselves to God alone and to avoid the enthusiasm about Jesus and other saints and imams.

For those who know Arabic, see this aya about the chiefs of misguidance:
تفسير سورة البقرة

I hope to translate the meaning of such ayat by God's help.

Moreover:

([Then God will say to the angels:] "Bring up those who wronged [their people] together with their wives [: the associaters] and [the devils] that they served [in the world of souls],"

"Apart from God, and direct them to the path of Hell."

"And stop them [This is the detainment]; for they are to be questioned [rebuking, not judging - concerning their followers.]"

[It will be said to them in rebuke:] "What ails you [now] that you help not one another!?"

No, indeed; but today they resign themselves in submission [to the doom.])


The above between brackets is the explanation, by Mohammed-Ali Hassan, of the Quran ayat 37: 22-26

احْشُرُوا الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا وَأَزْوَاجَهُمْ وَمَا كَانُوا يَعْبُدُونَ .مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ فَاهْدُوهُمْ إِلَى صِرَاطِ الْجَحِيمِ . وَقِفُوهُمْ إِنَّهُم مَّسْئُولُونَ . مَا لَكُمْ لَا تَنَاصَرُونَ . بَلْ هُمُ الْيَوْمَ مُسْتَسْلِمُونَ


 
Last edited:

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I think the 2 of them are showing their complete lack of operating brain cells, along with anyone that supports this stupidity. Anyone that thinks the 1 billion plus Catholics in this world will sit back and allow the Holy See to be arrested and put on trial by atheists is not thinking straight.
I am thinking straight Gh. If the evidence that has been mounted against him is true, then why shouldn't he face the charges?

If he believes that he is innocent, then why not voluntarily turn himself over to the ICC?

I mean the ICC has issued warrants for other "Heads of State", which the Pope is merely ceremonially.

If you think this will lead to violence, you condemn the whole of your faith. IMHO.
 

wulfie68

Council Member
Mar 29, 2009
2,014
24
38
Calgary, AB
I am thinking straight Gh. If the evidence that has been mounted against him is true, then why shouldn't he face the charges?

If he believes that he is innocent, then why not voluntarily turn himself over to the ICC?

I mean the ICC has issued warrants for other "Heads of State", which the Pope is merely ceremonially.

If you think this will lead to violence, you condemn the whole of your faith. IMHO.

Benedict wouldn't turn himself into the ICC over this because it goes against the strategy the Roman Catholic Church has employed in responding to the allegations (proven and otherwise) of pedophilia and child abuse. They don't want to admit anything for fear of embarassing the Church and undermining their standing... which is ironic because IMO thats exactly what they are doing by not coming clean and addressing the problem. I think its the Vatican talking the "easy" way out because if they did admit to the sexual misconduct of some priests, they would have to examine the causes and this would probably lead to more discussion and examination of their policies regarding other (and related) sexual issues, including allowing the clergy to marry. They're caught in a trap of their own devising and where Jean Paul II was a more conciliatory personality and seemed to be slowly trying to address these issues, the stance under Benedict seems to have regressed and drawn up the veil of secrecy.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Benedict wouldn't turn himself into the ICC over this because it goes against the strategy the Roman Catholic Church has employed in responding to the allegations (proven and otherwise) of pedophilia and child abuse. They don't want to admit anything for fear of embarassing the Church and undermining their standing... which is ironic because IMO thats exactly what they are doing by not coming clean and addressing the problem.
My point exactly sir. I'm of the thought, that if the Church were as clean as they have made themselves out to be, if I were in their shoes, I would be more then willing to acquiesce and meet the allegations head on.

I think its the Vatican talking the "easy" way out because if they did admit to the sexual misconduct of some priests, they would have to examine the causes and this would probably lead to more discussion and examination of their policies regarding other (and related) sexual issues, including allowing the clergy to marry.
I couldn't agree more. I never actually gave it that much thought, but your assertion seems highly plausible, to say the least.

They're caught in a trap of their own devising and where Jean Paul II was a more conciliatory personality and seemed to be slowly trying to address these issues, the stance under Benedict seems to have regressed and drawn up the veil of secrecy.
Sadly true.

All I would like to see, is justice. No pound of flesh, no tearing down of the Church, simple justice. Exacted by the rule of law and nothing more.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
... they would have to examine the causes and this would probably lead to more discussion and examination of their policies regarding other (and related) sexual issues, including allowing the clergy to marry.

While I agree with the vast majority of what you say, I will point out that rates of pedophilia in the church are no higher than in any other population. Celibacy does not make men like children. Anyone who uses 'being hard up for some', as an excuse to touch kids is deluded.