Primetime Pope and the Maverick Mother
Farzana Versey October 7, 2003
#40 Posted by PM on October 8, 2003 8:42:13 pm
correction: However, whatt you fail to realize is that the papacy, in the late 1800s, nicely took care of the objection that the pope, -- not 1900s, of course.
Nooralain,
For some reason I thought you were a guy! :-) had an Islmaili boy from Gilgit in a class with that name. No kidding!
Anyway, sorry to hear of your misfortune on the amorous front. If you`re still `job-hunting`, I`m taking resumes this week. :-)
Nooralain,
For some reason I thought you were a guy! :-) had an Islmaili boy from Gilgit in a class with that name. No kidding!
Anyway, sorry to hear of your misfortune on the amorous front. If you`re still `job-hunting`, I`m taking resumes this week. :-)
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#39 Posted by arjun_m on October 8, 2003 7:12:12 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#38 Posted by sigalph235 on October 8, 2003 6:17:05 pm
Re Nooralain 34
Just for perspective this is th Article 19 of Faith of the Anglican Communion, the most global of the reformed catholic churches
``...so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith``.
Just for perspective this is th Article 19 of Faith of the Anglican Communion, the most global of the reformed catholic churches
``...so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith``.
#37 Posted by nooralain on October 8, 2003 5:50:23 pm
PM:
yes...the doctrine of papal infallibility...that`s what i couldn`t recall! thank you!
and that`s what i still believe the problem is. and why in part i did not want a future child (if that was a possibility) to be baptised in the catholic church, and why i ended up not pursuing a relationship leading to marriage with a catholic. : ) . . .besides the fact that the family was against him marrying a non-catholic.
all water under the bridge now. : )
yes...the doctrine of papal infallibility...that`s what i couldn`t recall! thank you!
and that`s what i still believe the problem is. and why in part i did not want a future child (if that was a possibility) to be baptised in the catholic church, and why i ended up not pursuing a relationship leading to marriage with a catholic. : ) . . .besides the fact that the family was against him marrying a non-catholic.
all water under the bridge now. : )
#36 Posted by PM on October 8, 2003 5:10:36 pm
Nooralain:
Didn`t know you were a Christian!
I completely agree with your line of reasoning and sentiment.
However, waht you fail to realize is that the papcy, in the late 1900s, nicely took care of the objection that the pope, even though he is merely a vicar of JC (though exalted much like any of the ``origianl`` imams), is after all a mere human and not infallibale.
How? Well, they simply made him infallible-- at least ``in matters of faith and morals.`` No, really! It`s called the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
;-)
Didn`t know you were a Christian!
I completely agree with your line of reasoning and sentiment.
However, waht you fail to realize is that the papcy, in the late 1900s, nicely took care of the objection that the pope, even though he is merely a vicar of JC (though exalted much like any of the ``origianl`` imams), is after all a mere human and not infallibale.
How? Well, they simply made him infallible-- at least ``in matters of faith and morals.`` No, really! It`s called the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
;-)
#35 Posted by PM on October 8, 2003 5:10:36 pm
re. #33 stuka, who in response to Arjun, who wrote:
``..My grandparents on my mothers side always told me not to question the popes authority...or his holiness....``
responded ``But they probably never implied divinity did they?
stuke, divinity may or may not have been explicit. It`s all the actions, observances, attitudes (deference) associations etc taht go with the idea that really matter, and that, yes, I do believe, in many Catholic families of yore, suggest an air of dicinity.
I have often argued that though the Muslims claim that Mohammed was not Divine, (and kinda deride Christains for deifying JC), they MAY AS WELL make him God, for all the less than conscious ways in which he is exalted. To cite just one example... Come to Pakistan and you will scarcelyt find a middle-class Muslim household without inscriptions of ``(Ya) Allah`` and ``(Ya) Muhammed``-- same print, same filigree, same affect and effect-- side by side. And yes, this does say something about the actual psychology of followers a religion that clearly demarcates the spheres of rab and abd -- God and Man.
``..My grandparents on my mothers side always told me not to question the popes authority...or his holiness....``
responded ``But they probably never implied divinity did they?
stuke, divinity may or may not have been explicit. It`s all the actions, observances, attitudes (deference) associations etc taht go with the idea that really matter, and that, yes, I do believe, in many Catholic families of yore, suggest an air of dicinity.
I have often argued that though the Muslims claim that Mohammed was not Divine, (and kinda deride Christains for deifying JC), they MAY AS WELL make him God, for all the less than conscious ways in which he is exalted. To cite just one example... Come to Pakistan and you will scarcelyt find a middle-class Muslim household without inscriptions of ``(Ya) Allah`` and ``(Ya) Muhammed``-- same print, same filigree, same affect and effect-- side by side. And yes, this does say something about the actual psychology of followers a religion that clearly demarcates the spheres of rab and abd -- God and Man.
#34 Posted by nooralain on October 8, 2003 3:47:08 pm
stuka,
i`ll try to make my explanation as brief as possible given that i have to be at work in a few minutes.
as arjun said (and i cannot believe that for once i am agreeing with him), the pope in the roman catholic church is considered to be the vicar of christ. . .this does put a lot of power in his hands, and it does imply divinity to a certain extent. the pope is not infallible.
in the orthodox church, from which rome split. councils were held where important decisions were made regarding the faith. there are archbishops and bishops and metropolitans in the orthodox church, but none of these people can do anything alone, without representation by the priests and the laity. as christians we are all representatives of christ, and encouraged to be christ-like. the sole power, and decision-making is not meant to be in the hands of one person. . .it wasn`t like that in the beginnings of the church, and one of the obstacles preventing the reunification of the church is that the pope wishes to remain the `top dog` for lack of a better word. the pope is not the head of the church, be it catholic or a reunified church. christ is the head of the church. the pope cannot be JC jr. literally or figuratively, because he is not infallible.
i don`t want to digress from farzana`s article too much, and i do have to go, but perhaps we can discuss this at another time? i don`t know if any of this made much sense because it is rushed. . .
i`ll try to make my explanation as brief as possible given that i have to be at work in a few minutes.
as arjun said (and i cannot believe that for once i am agreeing with him), the pope in the roman catholic church is considered to be the vicar of christ. . .this does put a lot of power in his hands, and it does imply divinity to a certain extent. the pope is not infallible.
in the orthodox church, from which rome split. councils were held where important decisions were made regarding the faith. there are archbishops and bishops and metropolitans in the orthodox church, but none of these people can do anything alone, without representation by the priests and the laity. as christians we are all representatives of christ, and encouraged to be christ-like. the sole power, and decision-making is not meant to be in the hands of one person. . .it wasn`t like that in the beginnings of the church, and one of the obstacles preventing the reunification of the church is that the pope wishes to remain the `top dog` for lack of a better word. the pope is not the head of the church, be it catholic or a reunified church. christ is the head of the church. the pope cannot be JC jr. literally or figuratively, because he is not infallible.
i don`t want to digress from farzana`s article too much, and i do have to go, but perhaps we can discuss this at another time? i don`t know if any of this made much sense because it is rushed. . .
#33 Posted by cosmic_citizen on October 8, 2003 1:25:40 pm
#31 by anil on October 8, 2003 11:44am PT
Very rational and thought provoking....
Very rational and thought provoking....
#32 Posted by stuka on October 8, 2003 1:09:53 pm
Arjun:
``..My grandparents on my mothers side always told me not to question the popes authority...or his holiness....``
But they probably never implied divinity did they?
``standard catholic dogma...``
which had its origins in the Latin expression of the Roman church. The funny thing is that the same Rome was fedding Christians to the lions at the time when Christianity was still propagated in the Aramaic tongue.
``..My grandparents on my mothers side always told me not to question the popes authority...or his holiness....``
But they probably never implied divinity did they?
``standard catholic dogma...``
which had its origins in the Latin expression of the Roman church. The funny thing is that the same Rome was fedding Christians to the lions at the time when Christianity was still propagated in the Aramaic tongue.
#31 Posted by anil on October 8, 2003 11:44:29 am
Dear Farzana (#18):
Your response intrigued me.
Actually, one of the Shankaracharya`s came and stayed at my home in California a few years ago. I did not find him engaging or charismatic, and felt that his title was attracting the followers. Then the other part of the paradigm that followers make a leader failed, he was not charismatic to build any followers own his own, unlike Gandhi who indeed built his own followers. I gave up this logic follower-leader logic to analyze hi, Instead accepted that he was product of corrupted institution. The institutionalization of religion, whether in the form of prophet, or by a prophet, or non-prophet gods, is indeed creation of men, funnily women become more ardent followers in religions. Therefore, if you can bring enough followers then you could join them too, because you will be able to create an institution. Raju Guide, in R.K. Narayanan`s novel on which the movie Guide was based, is a good example. Afterall, Bhagvan Rajneesh thought himself as a recently created god. He too created an institution.
Prophets, Imams, gods and godesses, popes and saints create and perpetuate institutions based on beliefs. Institutions need them too, and hence this hoopla of sainthood for Mother Teressa. So many of her followers will be pushed toward greater beliefs. How far you go before you stop questioning makes the follower of that last thought and that last writing. For instance, you may not wish to stop questioning Prophet Muhammad and thus choose to believe him, and be a proud muslim, as his proud followers are called. While another may not wish to question Gita and believe in it and may be proud to call himself Krishna`s follower. This logic extends to Jesus`s follower in the same fashion. Therefore, by inference, the followers think in retrograde to search their beliefs. This retro search for the belief, is truly root cause of institutionalized religions becoming corrupt and later susceptible to attacks, forced changes, and probably reform and diffusion of thought into something new. I guess one can say that is why your thought as a muslim may be so much different than Osama bin Ladin`s, and my thought as a hindu may be very different than Hindutvas.
Be it crusades of Christians, be it warriors carrying sword of Islam or modern day version of other weapons, be it brahminism in Hinduism, or be it monasteries and monks with power to self-immolate; all these come as a result of mind corrupted to an extent that it accepts nothing but their belief system. Religious hands are corrupt. Religions have used institutionalization to build more power of deliverance to convert in one way or the other. Very sadly, the same institutions are also used to deliver the believers to more so called fundamental (or retro) part of their belief systems, and make them hardened who quite like hardened criminals are quite numb to any other thought and become willing fodder. Like it or not, madarssas are modern example of such deliverance. Deobandis or Talibans or Bajrang Dals or Born Agains are results of such indoctrination.
We, in plural societies, must accept them to exist on the fringes, but when they become mainstream, a form of fascism is born, which no plural society would ever tolerate.
I always read your articles and find them very thought provoking. Keep on writing.
Thank you.
ANIL
Your response intrigued me.
Actually, one of the Shankaracharya`s came and stayed at my home in California a few years ago. I did not find him engaging or charismatic, and felt that his title was attracting the followers. Then the other part of the paradigm that followers make a leader failed, he was not charismatic to build any followers own his own, unlike Gandhi who indeed built his own followers. I gave up this logic follower-leader logic to analyze hi, Instead accepted that he was product of corrupted institution. The institutionalization of religion, whether in the form of prophet, or by a prophet, or non-prophet gods, is indeed creation of men, funnily women become more ardent followers in religions. Therefore, if you can bring enough followers then you could join them too, because you will be able to create an institution. Raju Guide, in R.K. Narayanan`s novel on which the movie Guide was based, is a good example. Afterall, Bhagvan Rajneesh thought himself as a recently created god. He too created an institution.
Prophets, Imams, gods and godesses, popes and saints create and perpetuate institutions based on beliefs. Institutions need them too, and hence this hoopla of sainthood for Mother Teressa. So many of her followers will be pushed toward greater beliefs. How far you go before you stop questioning makes the follower of that last thought and that last writing. For instance, you may not wish to stop questioning Prophet Muhammad and thus choose to believe him, and be a proud muslim, as his proud followers are called. While another may not wish to question Gita and believe in it and may be proud to call himself Krishna`s follower. This logic extends to Jesus`s follower in the same fashion. Therefore, by inference, the followers think in retrograde to search their beliefs. This retro search for the belief, is truly root cause of institutionalized religions becoming corrupt and later susceptible to attacks, forced changes, and probably reform and diffusion of thought into something new. I guess one can say that is why your thought as a muslim may be so much different than Osama bin Ladin`s, and my thought as a hindu may be very different than Hindutvas.
Be it crusades of Christians, be it warriors carrying sword of Islam or modern day version of other weapons, be it brahminism in Hinduism, or be it monasteries and monks with power to self-immolate; all these come as a result of mind corrupted to an extent that it accepts nothing but their belief system. Religious hands are corrupt. Religions have used institutionalization to build more power of deliverance to convert in one way or the other. Very sadly, the same institutions are also used to deliver the believers to more so called fundamental (or retro) part of their belief systems, and make them hardened who quite like hardened criminals are quite numb to any other thought and become willing fodder. Like it or not, madarssas are modern example of such deliverance. Deobandis or Talibans or Bajrang Dals or Born Agains are results of such indoctrination.
We, in plural societies, must accept them to exist on the fringes, but when they become mainstream, a form of fascism is born, which no plural society would ever tolerate.
I always read your articles and find them very thought provoking. Keep on writing.
Thank you.
ANIL
#30 Posted by arjun_m on October 8, 2003 11:44:28 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#29 Posted by cosmic_citizen on October 8, 2003 9:47:09 am
TEMPORAL....
{{
the senior citizen has to pass a mandatory road test if s/he wants to retain their driving permit beyond a certain age...
}}
wanted to share that it is not so atleast in Germany... Permenant Driving License... cancelled only if something goes wrong.. or person dies!
#21.. true to a certain extent...
It is unfair to say that the Missionaries have done nothing for the society... they do a lot of social service... take medicine to the remote places.... serve the most deprived... and so on and so forth...
and our Governaments dont do it(I mean the whole of it...).. and our religious societies (except for a few) dont usually bother about doing such work... and even if they did.. given the population and geography.. there will still be room for the missionaries.....
but one thing is true above all.... `Nothing Comes free in this world`... and `Kuch pane ke liye.. kuch khona padta hain....`
I think it will be worth mentioning here that the Christian missionaries get a lot of money (quite obvious) and spend a lot of it on conversions (perhaps more than social service)..... there are many who have turned from pauper to paster... (forgive my arrogance but it is a fact I have observed first hand).... there are fixed rates for converting people of different castes... the remuneration depends on attendance in the congregations...
the tactics used by them to convert people are a different story... may some other time.. when it is relevent...
... Mother Teresa comes from same class of missionaries.... and as always there is criticism...
... miracles we dont know.. but good work has been done for sure... and for that she surely deserves respect...
{{
the senior citizen has to pass a mandatory road test if s/he wants to retain their driving permit beyond a certain age...
}}
wanted to share that it is not so atleast in Germany... Permenant Driving License... cancelled only if something goes wrong.. or person dies!
#21.. true to a certain extent...
It is unfair to say that the Missionaries have done nothing for the society... they do a lot of social service... take medicine to the remote places.... serve the most deprived... and so on and so forth...
and our Governaments dont do it(I mean the whole of it...).. and our religious societies (except for a few) dont usually bother about doing such work... and even if they did.. given the population and geography.. there will still be room for the missionaries.....
but one thing is true above all.... `Nothing Comes free in this world`... and `Kuch pane ke liye.. kuch khona padta hain....`
I think it will be worth mentioning here that the Christian missionaries get a lot of money (quite obvious) and spend a lot of it on conversions (perhaps more than social service)..... there are many who have turned from pauper to paster... (forgive my arrogance but it is a fact I have observed first hand).... there are fixed rates for converting people of different castes... the remuneration depends on attendance in the congregations...
the tactics used by them to convert people are a different story... may some other time.. when it is relevent...
... Mother Teresa comes from same class of missionaries.... and as always there is criticism...
... miracles we dont know.. but good work has been done for sure... and for that she surely deserves respect...
#28 Posted by stuka on October 8, 2003 9:30:47 am
Arjun_M
``Actually the pope is considered the vicar of Christ....JC Jr if you will.. ``
My problem with your statement is that it implies divinity of the Ppe, which is not the case. I am okay with the bit on ``Vicar of Christ`` but not JC Jr.
Nooalain
`Furthermore, Catholicism considers the Pope as God`s human representative on Earth. . .`
which is precisely the problem with catholicism, if this is the case. ``
Why? Every prophet of all the Semite religions have considered themselves to be God`s representatives, messengers..whatever you want to call them. Why single out the Pope if you are okay with Moses, Abraham, Mohammad and the like?
``Actually the pope is considered the vicar of Christ....JC Jr if you will.. ``
My problem with your statement is that it implies divinity of the Ppe, which is not the case. I am okay with the bit on ``Vicar of Christ`` but not JC Jr.
Nooalain
`Furthermore, Catholicism considers the Pope as God`s human representative on Earth. . .`
which is precisely the problem with catholicism, if this is the case. ``
Why? Every prophet of all the Semite religions have considered themselves to be God`s representatives, messengers..whatever you want to call them. Why single out the Pope if you are okay with Moses, Abraham, Mohammad and the like?
#27 Posted by nooralain on October 8, 2003 9:16:25 am
`Furthermore, Catholicism considers the Pope as God`s human representative on Earth. . .`
which is precisely the problem with catholicism, if this is the case.
which is precisely the problem with catholicism, if this is the case.
#26 Posted by arjun_m on October 8, 2003 8:41:45 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#25 Posted by arjun_m on October 8, 2003 8:41:45 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- tahmed32: pinku: i really dont... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- tahmed32: ajeya: thanks for your... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- ajeya: #296 Posted by tahmed32... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- Dinaric: Re: # 295 I agree... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- pinku: #296 Posted by tahmed32... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- tahmed32: pinku/dinaric: going by chowk... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- pinku: Re #292 Posted by... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- Dinaric: Re: # 286 "Rather ISCON... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
