THIS IS NOT A STATE VISIT.........

[woolybanana]

NOR SHOULD IT BE SO LET THE VATICAN PAY. BLOODY CHEEK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11191386

[Quillan]

I think this has been discussed before at length and whilst many will disagree with you I personally don't. I have had enough of religion and all the hate and pain it causes.

[Richard51]

Totally agree Wooly.  If anything, the Vatican should be hiding it's face in shame - and paying out some of it's untold wealth as compensation to the many victims.

Mrs R51

[cooperlola]

Have you been watching these, Quillan?

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/themes/richard-dawkins-age-of-reason

[Quillan]

[quote user="cooperlola"]

Have you been watching these, Quillan?

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/themes/richard-dawkins-age-of-reason

[/quote]

No I have not, I didn't have the time but I might try and catch up with them. Did you think them of any interest and more importantly any good.

[Will]

It is a state visit because Pope Benedict was invited by the government (not the present coalition, but its predecessor). The Pope happens to be a head of state (the Vatican) and not merely a religious leader.

Because it is a state visit, it will be interesting to see if the Pope gets involved in discussions with senior politicians about matters of disagreement between the UK state and the Vatican, of which there are several, as we well know. That, after all, is one of the main functions of state visits.

Regardless of who pays and who the Pope will meet, it will be a very interesting few days. There is a lot of disagreement with the Vatican, not least from the Church of Rome's own ranks. Although other faiths, particularly the Anglican faith, openly encourage discussion about emotive issues, Rome has long suppressed any dissent, citing Papal infallibilty. But even this morning on the radio I heard a senior Catholic (Bishop Kieran Conry) coming probably as close as a bishop can to saying that the Vatican was wrong on certain issues.

[cooperlola]

[quote user="Quillan"][quote user="cooperlola"]

Have you been watching these, Quillan?

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/themes/richard-dawkins-age-of-reason

[/quote]

No I have not, I didn't have the time but I might try and catch up with them. Did you think them of any interest and more importantly any good.

[/quote]Imho, at least, worth a look next time they come around (as they will, this is Ch4!).  But then I'm a big Dawkins fan myself so this is a biased view.

 

I'd personally rather have nothing to do with the catholic church (in which I was raised initially until my mother left - or "lapsed" as they prefer to call it.)  However, as Will so rightly says, the Vatican City is in fact a state in the technical sense and thus I guess the British public is stuck with this.

[Richard51]

For the last few years, the pope has been getting invites from every man and his dog.  First from Cormac M O'C, then Tony Blair, then Gordon Brown (as Chancellor), then several rank and file labour party members, then a tory MP, then Maggie Thatcher followed by Prince Charles and then GB (as PM).   Finally the invite was issued by the Queen - probably embarrassed by all GB's fawning and the lack of protocol (Chancellor's don't have the authority to make formal invitations to heads of state, neither does the Prince of Wales).

Then, of course, we had the leaked memo suggesting potential key engagements: opening an abortion clinic, blessing a gay marriage and  launching a range of 'Benedict' branded condoms.  The foreign office apparently just as thrilled with his visit as many others in the population.

Mrs R51

[Gardengirl]

It's my understanding that it is a state visit. It's not something I welcome personally, but I'm aware that for many people it will be a very meaningful time. There have been terrible things covered up, but I feel we'll just have to grin and bear the cost. A papal visit doesn't happen often, and there have been many other visits to our country by people I'd love to see banned from UK beacause of their personal greed and what they have allowed, maybe condoned, in their countries.

 

[woolybanana]

How can it be a state visit when there are a number of paying gigs, notably in Hyde park, as well as the elevation of that famous and apparently practicing, gay priest, Cardinal Newman?

[Will]

I think that an important point is that it is 'technically' a state visit. As for the paying gigs, nobody is being forced to go to any of them (I hope) though no doubt practising Catholics will be given quite a hard sell. The Church appears to consider that a Papal blessing has a financial value, which is rather at odds with New Testament teaching.

As for Newman's alleged sexuality, that's another of many questions which should be raised with Benedict XVI. It's not something that can be proved, but in the Oxford academic circles in which Newman moved, bachelorhood and close friendships with others of the same sex and mindset was the norm - which may or may not have developed into homosexual relationships. Newman was originally an Anglican priest, a faith in which clerical homosexuality is tolerated - some say even encouraged. He converted to Catholicism comparatively late in life. As did Tony Blair, I keep thinking, though what relevance that fact has escapes me. But the biggest question mark is that Newman specifically requested to be buried alongside his close friend, Father Ambrose St John, with whom he had shared a house until St John's death. The fact that the Vatican has, as part of Newman's elevation to beatification, decided to move his remains elsewhere, smacks of an opinion among senior Catholics that Newman may indeed have been gay, and somebody approaching sainthood cannot be seen to lie alongside another of the same sex. Otherwise why not leave him where he was buried (and asked to be buried)? - particularly as little is said to remain of his body.

[AnOther]

I hear that Dr Barnado's have been approched to provide the evening entertainment for the entourage [Www]

 

[BIG MAC]

Thankfully those who have elected to reside in a still predominateley Catholic Country have elected not to criticise. The Fact that any World Leader see fit to visit Bankrupt Britain is fascinating though.

Far as I am concerned I am quite ambivolent, there will be many who will want to attend the various events I guess.

In the interests of fair play though and in perspective I suspect there are more crimes committed Worldwide by Social Workers than there are by Catholic Priests....Therefore all Heads of State should be held accountable under the same rules as being freely applied here to the Pope CEO of RC Ltd.

Hang on that means Tony Blair and Cameron get it in the chops......Bring it on..

[Russethouse]

Surely the difference is that when suspected a Social Worker is immediatley suspended and often loses their job, not moved to another area/country where they can can continue their ways ?

[woolybanana]

Well, those responsible for the terrrible abuse cases one reads about usually move on and get promotion.

[Russethouse]

Who are you refering to Social workers or priests ?

[woolybanana]

Take your pick!

[Russethouse]

[6][6]

[Hoddy]

I'm not to keen on my taxes going towards the Pope's visit, on the other hand it would be pretty embarrassing if anything happened to him while he was there wouldn't it ?

Hoddy

[Patf]

[quote user="BIG MAC"]

In the interests of fair play though and in perspective I suspect there are more crimes committed Worldwide by Social Workers than there are by Catholic Priests....

[/quote]

Do you have any evidence for this sweeping (and almost libellous)) generalisation,  BigMac ?

Who do you include in the term "Social Worker"?

[Quillan]

South Ronaldsay comes straight to my mind straight away as a classic example.

I don't think he is talking about abuse nor direct crime but the number of court cases bought against social services is extremely high especially with regards to removing children from their parents. The 'crime' is the effect forced removal has on these children which can leave them mentally scared for the rest of their lives. There is also the 'Force Adoption' scandal currently under review which will probably hit the press in full next year. Then of course there are the cases where Social Workers get it wrong the other way round i.e. the several cases over the last 10 or so years where children were not monitored correctly and the result was that they died, some in quite horrific circumstances. However it would, I feel, be wrong to tar all Social Workers with the same brush, I am sure there are many very good and caring ones out there who we never hear about in much the same way as there are priests, teachers (thinking of the ex head teacher recently sent to prison for 21 years for abusing young boys) and others.

[Patf]

Ok - I've cooled down now.

I trained as a social worker originally, and found the work extremely stressful, changed to something related but not so stressful.

To those who criticise social workers, I challenge you to take over the job and do better. The pay is poor too.

[BIG MAC]

To those daft enough to take it on the pay may be commensurate with intelligence........

My daughter is studying to become one ( I rest my case) and as part of this is required to look at the failings of social work departments worldwide.

I was astonished at how many deaths are potentially attributable to social work mismanagement.

I fully accept that the Social Worker is rarely the perpetrator of the crime whereas the (some may suggest) scurrilous accussation is that the majority of Catholic Priests are...

However is the Prime Minister (or equivalent) to be held  responsible for Social Work Departments in the same way as some would suggest the Pope should be for priests?

My remarks were meant to spur some thought in relation to the wholesale carpet bombing of  catholicism and its ministers and in context are mild in relation to what I would imagine our muslim friends may say were such remarks directed at their prophet.

Bit like Hereditary Heads of State.....who voted the Queen in? and while we are at it who made her head of a Church? (Rhetorical questions both)

Least the Pope got voted for, strange choice though it may have been....

[franco-phil]

After 2000 years of the most despicable violent repression (especially in France), people are begining to see the reality of catholicism in particular, and religion in general.

[Will]

[quote user="Quillan"]

South Ronaldsay comes straight to my mind straight away as a classic example.

[/quote]

Not to mention Angers...