Did a 'Gay Lobby' Pressure Pope to Resign?

It may seem odd that Pope Benedict XVI suddenly decided to resign -- the first pope to do so in over 600 years.

[Imprtnrd]

His whole reign as pope has been against the gay community. We heard NOTHING that he did to better the Catholic church. He was too involved with things not really associated with the church. As the saying goes....."be of the world, not in the world". Maybe the next pope will address the REAL issues OF the church!

[JohnInToronto]

If an African is elected pope there will almost surely be a schism. Anti-popes in Rome, popes in Nairobi (or vice-versa).
I do not believe the Catholic Church in its present form will last more than 10 years if another right-wing pope is elected.

[snyper]

Imprtnrd wrote:

His whole reign as pope has been against the gay community. We heard NOTHING that he did to better the Catholic church. He was too involved with things not really associated with the church. As the saying goes....."be of the world, not in the world". Maybe the next pope will address the REAL issues OF the church!

You got the "saying" backwards. lol

[Imprtnrd]

snyper wrote:

<quoted text>
You got the "saying" backwards. lol

lol wow ok

[Dan]

Imprtnrd wrote:

His whole reign as pope has been against the gay community. We heard NOTHING that he did to better the Catholic church. He was too involved with things not really associated with the church. As the saying goes....."be of the world, not in the world". Maybe the next pope will address the REAL issues OF the church!

Which are what, in your opinion?

[Imprtnrd]

Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Which are what, in your opinion?

Staying out of politics and opinionated things that are not church related.

[Dan]

Imprtnrd wrote:

<quoted text>Staying out of politics and opinionated things that are not church related.

If faith and politics intersect, then what?

It happens.

For instance, the Church speaks clearly on matters of social justice. Should they remain silent on this?

[Dan]

Imprtnrd wrote:

<quoted text>Staying out of politics and opinionated things that are not church related.

Also, other denominations have made statements supporting gay marriage.

Should they be silent as well?

[Otter in the Ozarks]

Which "gay lobby" within the Church are they referring to, the College of Cardinals or the sacerdotium?

[KirkW]

Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
If faith and politics intersect, then what?
It happens.
For instance, the Church speaks clearly on matters of social justice. Should they remain silent on this?

Faith and politics should not intersect.

Gay rights is more than just a social issue - there is a legal component to it as well in that we treat a group of tax-paying citizens differently for no rational legal reason.

What one religion or another thinks is irrelevant because the laws of a country shouldn't be based in tenets of one belief system or another. That said it is true that there are tenets of religions, such as not murdering others, that share a societal interest but those intersections don't justify a religion dictating social policy or law.

[WCGay]

They should focus on retaining and growing the church. Figure out what they are doing that is causing them to lose members at such a high rate. How can they attract more priests and nuns? That is what they should be concerned with!

[Dan]

KirkW wrote:

<quoted text>
Faith and politics should not intersect.
Gay rights is more than just a social issue - there is a legal component to it as well in that we treat a group of tax-paying citizens differently for no rational legal reason.
What one religion or another thinks is irrelevant because the laws of a country shouldn't be based in tenets of one belief system or another. That said it is true that there are tenets of religions, such as not murdering others, that share a societal interest but those intersections don't justify a religion dictating social policy or law.

They do intersect.

Religions exist in a societal context.

You know that.

[snyper]

Imprtnrd wrote:

<quoted text>lol wow ok

A good modern translation would be, "be in the system, not OF the system".

[snyper]

Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Also, other denominations have made statements supporting gay marriage.
Should they be silent as well?

Yes.

But until the others do, we can't.

[snyper]

WCGay wrote:

They should focus on retaining and growing the church. Figure out what they are doing that is causing them to lose members at such a high rate. How can they attract more priests and nuns? That is what they should be concerned with!

They are gambling that they will convert and breed more drones than they are losing.

[Dan]

snyper wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes.
But until the others do, we can't.

Nice slogan, but do you really advocate for the silence of people unless it's in agreement with you?

[snyper]

Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Nice slogan, but do you really advocate for the silence of people unless it's in agreement with you?

I advocate for the silence of religion in the politics of the USA.

[Dan]

snyper wrote:

<quoted text>
I advocate for the silence of religion in the politics of the USA.

Why?

I agree that they should not endorse candidates as they are restricted now, but certainly you'd allow them their collective opinions.

[snyper]

Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Why?
I agree that they should not endorse candidates as they are restricted now, but certainly you'd allow them their collective opinions.

Within their churches, yes. Not in the outside, public forum.

I'm pretty severe on this. No "National Prayer Breakfast". No prayer to open sessions of Congress. No "Congressional chaplains". No bibles (or religious tracts of any kind) at inaugurations or in Courts of Law. No "In God We Trust" on money. No tax exemption for Religious organizations. No recognition even of the existence of any religion or religious institution of any kind in ANY Law of the land whatsoever.

As I said. Severe. Very severe.

I see it as the best and surest way to protect my Constitutional Right to Freedom of Religion ... and everyone's.

http://www.au.org/

[Dan]

snyper wrote:

<quoted text>
Within their churches, yes. Not in the outside, public forum.
I'm pretty severe on this. No "National Prayer Breakfast". No prayer to open sessions of Congress. No "Congressional chaplains". No bibles (or religious tracts of any kind) at inaugurations or in Courts of Law. No "In God We Trust" on money. No tax exemption for Religious organizations. No recognition even of the existence of any religion or religious institution of any kind in ANY Law of the land whatsoever.
As I said. Severe. Very severe.
I see it as the best and surest way to protect my Constitutional Right to Freedom of Religion ... and everyone's.
http://www.au.org/

Fair enough.

At least you're consistent.