Pope John Paul II regularly whipped himself, what does this mean?

2010-01-28 16:52:12

#51

Ticia: Member; +73|5331

CapnNismo wrote:
Then why are you posting here if you don't care, eleven?

I don't see why self-flagellation is a bad thing. I don't think the flagellation is being considered as a prerequisite for his sanctification, but rather as PROOF of his piousness. Many religions and philosophies around the world practice mind over matter and/or using pain as a way to opening the mind. When your body is in pain, it can be used as a way to help you concentrate on something. It makes sense. JP used it as a way to focus on God. Big deal.

JP was a great Pope and a great human being. Saint or not, he's definitely one of the most important people in modern history without a doubt.

But it is a shame the self-flagellation is being talked about at all. According to the reports he did it in hiding and didn't want it to be exposed so bringing it up now is just to make headlines i think.
I'm not catholic and i see religion as an hazard but i have to admit i've always had a soft spot for JP.

2010-01-28 16:58:50

#52

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6401|North Carolina

CapnNismo wrote:
Then why are you posting here if you don't care, eleven?

I don't see why self-flagellation is a bad thing. I don't think the flagellation is being considered as a prerequisite for his sanctification, but rather as PROOF of his piousness. Many religions and philosophies around the world practice mind over matter and/or using pain as a way to opening the mind. When your body is in pain, it can be used as a way to help you concentrate on something. It makes sense. JP used it as a way to focus on God. Big deal.

JP was a great Pope and a great human being. Saint or not, he's definitely one of the most important people in modern history without a doubt.

I understand where you're coming from, but I have to disagree.

It's because of the Pope and Catholicism in general that many efforts to spread education about and supplies for contraceptives fail in the Third World. The Catholics are a large part of why government funding in the U.S. toward these efforts is stifled.

Also, JP's refusal to deal with the pedophilic issues of many clergy is a stain upon his reputation. He did do some good things, but there was still plenty of room for improvement.

Granted, I will admit that much of these problems are more respective of Catholicism as an institution rather than specifically toward JP.

Last edited by Turquoise (2010-01-28 16:59:26)

2010-01-28 17:04:03

#53

Ticia: Member; +73|5331

Turquoise wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Then why are you posting here if you don't care, eleven?

I don't see why self-flagellation is a bad thing. I don't think the flagellation is being considered as a prerequisite for his sanctification, but rather as PROOF of his piousness. Many religions and philosophies around the world practice mind over matter and/or using pain as a way to opening the mind. When your body is in pain, it can be used as a way to help you concentrate on something. It makes sense. JP used it as a way to focus on God. Big deal.

JP was a great Pope and a great human being. Saint or not, he's definitely one of the most important people in modern history without a doubt.
I understand where you're coming from, but I have to disagree.

It's because of the Pope and Catholicism in general that many efforts to spread education about and supplies for contraceptives fail in the Third World. The Catholics are a large part of why government funding in the U.S. toward these efforts is stifled.

Also, JP's refusal to deal with the pedophilic issues of many clergy is a stain upon his reputation. He did do some good things, but there was still plenty of room for improvement.

Granted, I will admit that much of these problems are more respective of Catholicism as an institution rather than specifically toward JP.

And that's the main issue. I'm assuming you're not a catholic either so our take on this is null. I don't live by their rules so i don't expect the Catholic Church to value my opinion about their last Pope and his whip.

2010-01-28 17:19:40

#54

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6401|North Carolina

Ticia wrote:
And that's the main issue. I'm assuming you're not a catholic either so our take on this is null. I don't live by their rules so i don't expect the Catholic Church to value my opinion about their last Pope and his whip.

Well, I'll put it this way... I would care a lot less about religion if it didn't have power over my government and laws. Because it does, I will do what I can to remind the Church of its shortcomings.

I also still find it amazing that anyone believes in sainthood. That entire concept runs counter to the central themes of Christianity.

2010-01-28 23:31:56

#55

Benzin: Member; +576|5994

You do realize that the vast majority of the USA is Protestant and not Catholic, right?

2010-01-29 04:08:51

#56

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6407|'Murka

ruisleipa wrote:
FEOS wrote:
It is simply an argument for his piousness, not for his sanctification, although they are related--you can't have the latter without the former.
well in the sense that his 'piousness' is a prerequisite for sainthood then as you say they're connected. But even so, the idea that whipping yourself shows how 'pious' you are?!!! Crazy, surely.

For Catholics. I'm not Catholic. I think it's not quite right. I would never whip myself to show how pious I am. Nor would I sleep on the floor. Nor would I wear a funny hat. Again, rituals specific to his brand of religion.

But again, it's just a book about the life of the man. Whether he was up for sainthood or not, this would've come out. Thus the two issues are not related. Whether he whipped himself to show his piousness or not, he would've been considered for sainthood (he canonization was started long before this came to light). Thus the two issues are not related.

ruisleipa wrote:
But he was Pope, ffs. His piousness is already well established.
only in one, narrow sense, i.e. that of the Catholic church. Which doesn't necessarily mean squat if you're not an adherent of that particular branch of Christianity.

This statement makes no sense. Piousness is entirely relative to your belief system.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2010-01-29 04:14:43

#57

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6407|'Murka

CapnNismo wrote:
You do realize that the vast majority of the USA is Protestant and not Catholic, right?

Considering the uproar when the US elected its first Roman Catholic President (JFK) and all the concerns that "the Pope would be calling the shots"...maybe he forgot that bit.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2010-01-29 17:33:06

#58

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6401|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
You do realize that the vast majority of the USA is Protestant and not Catholic, right?
Considering the uproar when the US elected its first Roman Catholic President (JFK) and all the concerns that "the Pope would be calling the shots"...maybe he forgot that bit.

And that was over 40 years ago.

Anyway... Majorities don't matter for this sort of thing. Special interests rule our system -- including Catholic lobbies.

2010-01-29 21:59:19

#59

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6407|'Murka

Turquoise wrote:
FEOS wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
You do realize that the vast majority of the USA is Protestant and not Catholic, right?
Considering the uproar when the US elected its first Roman Catholic President (JFK) and all the concerns that "the Pope would be calling the shots"...maybe he forgot that bit.
And that was over 40 years ago.

Anyway... Majorities don't matter for this sort of thing. Special interests rule our system -- including Catholic lobbies.

The evangelicals you decry so much on the far right can't stand Catholics. Many of them think Catholics are idolators who worship the Pope and Mary instead of or in addition to Jesus. Hence the issues with JFK back in the day. Those issues still exist with the far right religious nuts...who some seem to think (erroneously, I might add) wield some kind of influence in this country.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2010-01-29 23:14:17

#60

ruisleipa: Member; +149|6218|teh FIN-land

FEOS wrote:
Those issues still exist with the far right religious nuts...who some seem to think (erroneously, I might add) wield some kind of influence in this country.

LOL dream on, sheep.

2010-01-29 23:22:32

#61

ruisleipa: Member; +149|6218|teh FIN-land

FEOS wrote:
This statement makes no sense. Piousness is entirely relative to your belief system.

Yes, and I am 100% sure there are Catholics who do NOT think whipping yourself is a way to show that. But ehy're maybe a bit more sane than the others. As for believing in miracles...fuggeddaboutit.

2010-01-30 07:50:31

#62

DesertFox-: The very model of a modern major general; +794|6681|United States of America

ruisleipa wrote:
FEOS wrote:
This statement makes no sense. Piousness is entirely relative to your belief system.
Yes, and I am 100% sure there are Catholics who do NOT think whipping yourself is a way to show that. But ehy're maybe a bit more sane than the others. As for believing in miracles...fuggeddaboutit.

It is a way to show it, but is not the only way.

2010-01-30 08:04:25

#63

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6401|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
FEOS wrote:

Considering the uproar when the US elected its first Roman Catholic President (JFK) and all the concerns that "the Pope would be calling the shots"...maybe he forgot that bit.
And that was over 40 years ago.

Anyway... Majorities don't matter for this sort of thing. Special interests rule our system -- including Catholic lobbies.
The evangelicals you decry so much on the far right can't stand Catholics. Many of them think Catholics are idolators who worship the Pope and Mary instead of or in addition to Jesus. Hence the issues with JFK back in the day. Those issues still exist with the far right religious nuts...who some seem to think (erroneously, I might add) wield some kind of influence in this country.

Just because Evangelicals have influence doesn't preclude Catholics from having it too.

It doesn't matter though... Both of them are just 2 forces in a sea of lobbyism. Whether one has more influence than the other is relatively inconsequential, and my attempts to decry either are rather futile.

2010-01-30 14:41:15

#64

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6407|'Murka

ruisleipa wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Those issues still exist with the far right religious nuts...who some seem to think (erroneously, I might add) wield some kind of influence in this country.
LOL dream on, sheep.

Says the guy who's not even from here and whose insight into American politics consists of what he reads on the internet and is fed from the media (who have no agenda, I'm sure).

"Sheep" my hairy white ass.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2010-01-30 14:47:54

#65

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6443|Chicago, IL

It doesn't mean anything. It is a centuries old tradition often practiced by high ranking members of the clergy. John Paul's decisions regarding his personal relationship with god are his own, and do not detract from the great strides he made bringing the Catholic church into the modern era. He spent his time as the pope trying to make Catholics more tolerant and forgiving, and that is how he should be remembered.

https://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/a/ae/PopeGlasses.jpg

2010-01-31 00:12:02

#66

ruisleipa: Member; +149|6218|teh FIN-land

FEOS wrote:
ruisleipa wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Those issues still exist with the far right religious nuts...who some seem to think (erroneously, I might add) wield some kind of influence in this country.
LOL dream on, sheep.
Says the guy who's not even from here and whose insight into American politics consists of what he reads on the internet and is fed from the media (who have no agenda, I'm sure).

"Sheep" my hairy white ass.

So there's NO religious extremists in the US who have ANY political or other influence?? riiight.

2010-01-31 08:16:24

#67

eleven bravo: Member; +1,399|5255|foggy bottom

I think its silly for somebody who has such disdain for the catholic church to feel such outrage at what the pope did when it only effects catholics and their beliefs.

Last edited by eleven bravo (2010-01-31 08:16:41)

Tu Stultus Es

2010-01-31 08:55:59

#68

ruisleipa: Member; +149|6218|teh FIN-land

eleven bravo wrote:
I think its silly for somebody who has such disdain for the catholic church to feel such outrage at what the pope did when it only effects catholics and their beliefs.

Fair enough, I stated my opinion on this earlier so it's OK if you think it's silly. Don't care really

2010-01-31 08:56:31

#69

eleven bravo: Member; +1,399|5255|foggy bottom

no you didnt, you just kept asking me questions

Tu Stultus Es

2010-01-31 08:58:02

#70

ruisleipa: Member; +149|6218|teh FIN-land

woteva. try reading the thread again. And I still don't care

You're very argumentative today aren't you?

2010-01-31 09:07:08

#71

eleven bravo: Member; +1,399|5255|foggy bottom

why rant about a stupid religious belief as if you were a follower of that belief. It looks like to me its one those cases of "HEY EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME IM AN ATHEIST!!!! IM SO ATHEIST!!!!!"

youre not unique bud

Tu Stultus Es

2010-01-31 09:51:50

#72

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6443|Chicago, IL

eleven bravo wrote:
why rant about a stupid religious belief as if you were a follower of that belief. It looks like to me its one those cases of "HEY EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME IM AN ATHEIST!!!! IM SO ATHEIST!!!!!"

youre not unique bud

People like that are just as bad as the evangelists.

2010-01-31 10:06:21

#73

DesertFox-: The very model of a modern major general; +794|6681|United States of America

S.Lythberg wrote:
eleven bravo wrote:
why rant about a stupid religious belief as if you were a follower of that belief. It looks like to me its one those cases of "HEY EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME IM AN ATHEIST!!!! IM SO ATHEIST!!!!!"

youre not unique bud
People like that are just as bad as the evangelists.

They probably are. Evangelical atheism would be similar to that of any theistic religion. They have the same goal as well, to get you to believe what they do.

2010-01-31 11:23:02

#74

ruisleipa: Member; +149|6218|teh FIN-land

eleven bravo wrote:
why rant about a stupid religious belief as if you were a follower of that belief. It looks like to me its one those cases of "HEY EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME IM AN ATHEIST!!!! IM SO ATHEIST!!!!!"

youre not unique bud

rant? who's ranting? actually I am unique, just like everyone is - you know we're all different yeah? Or is it easier for you to just pigeonhole everyone into appropriate groups? But that aside, I don't really get your point by putting words into my mouth. You don't see the point, I get it, but why do you keep going on about it? Why not piss off out of the thread if you don't see the point yeah?

2010-01-31 17:49:10

#75

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6407|'Murka

ruisleipa wrote:
FEOS wrote:
ruisleipa wrote:

LOL dream on, sheep.
Says the guy who's not even from here and whose insight into American politics consists of what he reads on the internet and is fed from the media (who have no agenda, I'm sure).

"Sheep" my hairy white ass.
So there's NO religious extremists in the US who have ANY political or other influence?? riiight.

Did I say that? No.

I said they don't wield the sort of influence that others seem to think they wield. The stories that get printed are outliers, but because they get press, those who are unfamiliar with the reality of life here think that is the norm--you think the leading and trailing edges of the curve are what's under the bell because that's all you ever see.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

BF2S Forums Pope John Paul II regularly whipped himself, what does this mean?

CapnNismo wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Ticia wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

FEOS wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

FEOS wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

FEOS wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

FEOS wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

Board footer