Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumMajor Nikon
(36,827 posts)Just sayin'
SkyDaddy7
(6,045 posts)Having to spend eternity with Christians!!
Brother Buzz
(36,437 posts)then when I die I want to go where they went.
UrbScotty
(23,980 posts)My fault, it looks like he is not a spokesperson. It's really difficult to tell, but I believe the Vatican has released something. I'll research and get back to you.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)But I do agree with him on one point: the Vatican [notwithstanding Pope Francis' recent musings] only cares about their castle, not morality.
Too bad the Nuns on the Bus don't run the Vatican.
zebonaut
(3,688 posts)Just thought I'd point that out; however you are atomically recycled into the universe.
RVN VET
(492 posts)I think pretty nearly everyone goes to heaven -- except Ty Cobb, that is.
(And it just wouldn't be the same saying "All dogs are atomically recycled into the universe."
(And if there's no heaven, where in hell do pennies fall from?)
(And who would know Mr. Alison?)
(Yep, that's me, laughin' at my own tired jokes!)
patrice
(47,992 posts)happens to us.
BTW, I have never seen Christian dogma on that definition. Heaven is mentioned in Catholic creed, but no where have I ever seen that reference defined, as a matter of dogma, the way that it is conventionally (ie.e. a specific and rather exclusive place somewhere, where you hang out with God and angels and saints and have any- every-thing you want, know all things etc. etc. etc.) as a matter of dogma.
democrat2thecore
(3,572 posts)If Pope Francis is to be taken seriously, beyond the photo ops, he needs to say:
"From this day forward, ANY official in the Church who allows child abuse to go unreported, that is swept under the rug, that is not immediately reported to the police, will face excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church."
Is that so hard, Mr. Bergoglio? Even if you're left with a handful of priests after such a pronouncement, it's the right thing to do.
The stonewall continues in Rome...
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)Neoma
(10,039 posts)stlsaxman
(9,236 posts)I've seen this guy do some good stuff but it could have been that Packmann guy or other internet talking head...
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)Decades. See Section 16 of the Vatican II document, Lumen Gentium.
Obviously, Mr. Rosica does not know Church doctrine as well as he thinks he does.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)but all the atheists I have met, including myself, don't believe in "salvation" as described in any religious text and could care less about "church" doctrine, catholic or otherwise.
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)In fact, it has been Catholic doctrine since Lumen Gentium was promulgated in 1964 that atheists have at least the possibility of salvation. Whether or not you, as an atheist, believe in salvation is wholly irrelevant.
It is like saying that Muslim doctrine is that Muhammed is the Prophet of Allah. It makes no difference whether one accepts Muhammed as a prophet or not, the subject is how Muslims see Muhammed.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)to the religious. I have lived that one for a long time!
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)Your views on the Designated Hitter rule are just as irrelevant.
Tell me, which part of my previous post did you find difficult to understand? The subject was not "how do atheists feel about Catholic doctrine?", but rather "what is Catholic doctrine on the subject of salvation?"
circlethesquare
(806 posts)While I like the inclusion talk of the new pope I don't think saying atheists will go to heaven will sit well with most Catholics.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)atheists, for the most part, really don't give a rats ass what the pope says. As an atheist, I consider anything the pope says as more or less verbal masturbation. Just my personal viewpoint.
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)Your comment certainly appears to be "disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate".
rexcat
(3,622 posts)but I am sure you are being disingenuous on the "call."
on edit: I am sure you will find enough religious types on DU through the jury system who will find anything an atheist says as disruptive, hurtful, etc...
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)I promised that I would not say that some DU atheists make bigoted statements. Saying that someone made a bigoted is a big no-no on DU, far worse than the original bigotry.
So I shall just say "biased". And no, I will not call you on your biased statement. I'm feeling kind.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)I don't really care for religion, be it Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or any other religion, past or present. You didn't say I was a bigot directly but it was definitely inferred. You are such a class act.
I have had my fair share or religious people turn their back on me once they find out I am an atheist, even after years of knowing them. Bias (or as you use it as a euphemism for bigotry) is seen more on the religious side, in my opinion. Most atheists in this country do not usually bring up the topic while in conversation. We have been burned too many times.
I also get the feeling that if anyone says anything negative about religion and specifically the catholic church to you they are a bigot or biased or whatever euphemism you want to use.
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)You didn't say I was a bigot directly but it was definitely inferred. You are such a class act.
Just as your "biased" statement showed your complete lack of class. It really had nothing to do with the topic at hand, you just felt the urge to be nasty, and gave into that urge.
Bias (or as you use it as a euphemism for bigotry) is seen more on the religious side, in my opinion.
So you feel that it's OK for you to be "biased" back. As you say, you are such a class act. "Those religious people were mean to me, so I'll be nasty right back." And your "biased" comment was completely off topic in a thread devoted to a specific piece of Catholic doctrine.
I also get the feeling that if anyone says anything negative about religion and specifically the catholic church to you they are a bigot or biased or whatever euphemism you want to use.
Obviously, you have not read what I wrote in the Lesbian Catholic school teacher fired after mother's death because obit listed her partner thread. I was highly critical of a number of things in the Catholic Church. But hey, why should mere facts bother your "biases?"
rexcat
(3,622 posts)your hypocrisy but it seems someone lacks the intellectual acuity to understand what I was saying.
And big deal about being critical about the catholic church, they are an easy target for criticism. Your distain for atheists is will known by many here on DU. I have a tit-for-tat philosophy so if you are nice to me I am nice to you. On the other hand if you are not nice I think you can figure that out!
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)Even if it is wholly uncalled for. "Hey, here's a chance to sneer at Catholics, because someone mentioned them. I can't pass this one up. And it anyone complains, I shall just toss off a gratuitous insult at them."
I do not have a disdain for atheists. I have a disdain for "biased" atheists.
Your claim "I'm nice to you if you're nice to me" is clearly false, as shown by your uncalled-for sneer at Catholicism. Your actual attitude is "I will be nasty to you if I feel like it."
Response to Fortinbras Armstrong (Reply #34)
rexcat This message was self-deleted by its author.
patrice
(47,992 posts)biases and if you disagree with this statement, then you should ask yourself if you don't indeed BELIEVE in a God called rationalism.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)speaking of verbal....(go to my post #15 to fill in the blank).
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)Do you really believe that Catholics say "Oh, I hope and pray that atheists are damned!"?
patrice
(47,992 posts)John 14:16, "I am the way the truth and the life . . . "
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)There is NO heaven to worry about. Just like Santa and Easter bunny, religion is the same thing, FAKE. Just to make you behave so you get your reward.
patrice
(47,992 posts)subject.
Words. are. NOT. the. same. thing. as. that. to. which. words. ONLY. refer.
i.e. What is going on in your head when you use a word is NOT the same thing as anything in the phenomenological universe to which your words very indirectly refer.