You can be skeptical and friendly at the same time.
Follow Patheos Atheist:
Never gonna happen.
(Image by Kevin Siers of the Charlotte Observer. Via Canadian Atheist)
Hemant Mehta is the editor of Friendly Atheist, appears on the Atheist Voice channel on YouTube, and co-hosts the uniquely-named Friendly Atheist Podcast. You can read much more about him here.
Peter, the first pope, denied Jesus. In fact he lied right to Jesus’s face.
All the popes went downhill from there.
Hmm…the way I see it, Peter said “Him? Never seen him before in my life” when jesus was arrested, basically interested in saving his own neck. But when writing the gospels, he looked over his shoulder to make sure nobody could see him then he wrote what basically amounts to “Better him than me but I feel really bad about that”.
That’s pretty bad when the only pope that ever saw Jesus completely disowned him when the going got tough. He could cure the flu by casting out the “flu demons”. Jesus was the one that created the universe. Yeah, that Jesus. Going gets tough… whoops, don’t know the guy.
Peter never wrote anything. No records that he could even write.
Even the Christian tradition doesn’t claim Peter write any of the gospels….
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John… and uh… Peter?
Awesome cartoon with an undeniable message regarding women’s right within religious communities – we should all enter the 21st century and acknowledge there are no gods – no Zeus, Mars, Jesus or the judeochristian god.
Given the fact that the Catholic church is expanding in areas of the global south, there’s a chance that the next pope might be from that region of the planet. Will he be a person of color? Probably less likely. A woman? Only if a spaceship full of Catholics from another planet land at Cape Canaveral, tomorrow morning. If that happens, anything is possible.
I don’t think the spaceship would get you the required two-thirds vote in the college of Cardinals. Too many are conservatives appointed by the current clown.
Contrariwise, if you can get the needed 2/3 vote out of them (and the nominated woman to accept), it appears that’s a loophole in the current rules against women being ordained as priests. Get elected as pope, accept the job, and if you weren’t previously ordained as a bishop (having been mere priest, deacon, or laity), you’re immediately ordained as Bishop of Rome.
I think the odds are marginally better than for Richard Dawkins being elected… though rather less than the odds the bookies are giving on his election.
But what if the spaceship was full of liberation theology folks with mind control rayguns? Just imagine what might be possible with an electronically controlled college of Cardinals!
(They’ve got an app for that!)
Dammit, stop trying to mess with my clever scheme! The Irish bookies might catch on!
Oh, I’m sure that by 2250, whatever remains of the Catholic church will be ready to elect a 21st-century pope.
Fucking optimists, how do they work?
we actually have a candidate from another blog i read. he’s catholic so he’s eligible, liberal, and ready to help the poor:
Long live Pope Gomex! he’s clearly the only choice, RCC. elevate him now.
I would prefer an African pope so that American catholics find out how nasty catholicism/christianity really is. People in America have had such a watered down version that it might just spark a new awakening.
Considering how many of the Christian Americans have reacted to the first African- American President and First Lady, an African Pope may speed the demise of the Roman Catholic Churh in the US.
That would be a feature and not a bug.
Well, the one on the right is definitely not from the 21st century … not in that getup. Hope the stinking ship sinks, Joe the Rat and all.
White smoke for Edward Tarte! He’d get all their ducks in a row!
given how the catholic church refuses to remove the de-converted from their membership rolls and says if you’re baptized, it’s for life, that’s a good choice too.
Sure, we’ll have a 21st century pope someday! Probably just in time for the 23rd century. The Catholic Church is usually about 200 years behind the times.
More like 400 years (see Galileo case, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_reassessments_of_Galileo_in_later_centuries).
This guy . . .
My group watched Euro Trip last night in honor of Ratzi’s resignation. Funny as hell… but man that movie is sexist.
Better idea – none at all.
The problem with a pope from the 21st century is that we’re still talking about a goddamn POPE here. The world ill needs a new Holy Blowhard of Lordy McJesusGod to tell people how to live their lives. Whoever gets saddled with that farce of a title, I hope the response from the world (even the Catholic world) is a shrug and a “whatever.”
Seriously, fuck the pope.
I suspect Ratzinger is stepping down now because the power brokers within the Church have told him if he does so, they can engineer the election of another arch-Conservative. I also suspect that Cardinal Turkson of Ghana, who has defended the criminalization of homosexuality in various African countries and is being touted as a top candidate, is part of the plan; they’ll present him as a viable candidate in order to intimidate the cardinals into electing someone who is not quite as far to the right, but who is still a pre-Vatican II throwback.
On the other hand, if this is legit, it may be a blessing in disguise. If Turkson does get elected, perhaps the rest of the world will finally turn against that evil institution once and for all.
Not until the 23rd Century.
Yeah, I much prefer hip 21st century non-religious morality like that expressed by the Amazing Randi:
“Any weeping and wailing over the Poor Little Kids who would perish by immediately gobbling down pills and injecting poison, is summoning up crocodile tears, in my opinion. They would – and presently do – mature into grown-up idiots, and Darwin would be appalled that his lessons were ignored…
I think that Darwinism, survival of the fittest, should be allowed to act itself out. As long as it doesn’t interfere with me and other sensible, rational people who could be affected by it. Innocent people, in other words…
These are stupid people. And if they can’t survive, they don’t have the IQ, don’t have the thinking power to be able to survive, it’s unfortunate; I would hate to see it happen, but at the same time, it would clear the air.”
Modern atheism: embrace the worst religion has ever offered for the sake of hedonism and narcissism while insisting that it’s OK since it’s not because of religion, don’tcha know. Heh. The self parody continues (and I can’t wait for atheists to rush in and distance themselves from such Goebbels inspired dribble, as if people of faith should see a difference that modern atheists refuse to see in religion). Though maybe not. The website this came from had respectful debate by atheists arguing to what degree this was A-OK.
Why would any organization embrace the 21st century? or the 20th for that matter? Is it because we’ve built such a wonderful world with this modern philosophy that rises from the pit of hell itself? Can you not see that the very things you hate about the church are an outgrowth of its embracing modern philosophy? I don’t know what to tell my kids when they ask me what kind of a world I left them. Go ahead, run down that modern path of egoism. Don’t blame me. I just wish I didn’t have to deal with the consequences.
You have kids? That’s a shame. Hope they turn out to be decent humans anyway.
“embracing modern philosophy” like women and minorities and non-landowners get to vote? Like queer folks should stay in the closet and commit suicide from all the social marginalization? I keep seeing the RWA making the ‘egoism’ argument but I don’t see you all focusing on the harms your orgs and ideas cause. It’s not enough to say “bad thing happens” and “oh look looser morals!” at the same time and have them actually be related.
Follow Patheos on