Filum Romanum - A Thread for the Catholic Church

@ Euo: There's earlier; there are obscure Saints such as Sativola, Urith and Juthwara.

edited 15th Apr '14 11:51:15 PM by Greenmantle

I know: I was just throwing one out there. With a name I happen to like.

The early denizens of Britain (so essentially the ones there after the Roman Empire fell) really love their Æ's.

We still do: visit the North East some time. It might get spelled with an "E" these days, but the sound is still alive and well.

edited 16th Apr '14 12:24:02 AM by Euodiachloris

So is she the saint of Kent? That's kinda cool, as a Kentish man (or is it a man of Kent?) I dig the idea of us having our own saint.

It is actually a thing in Kent, depending on which side of the River Medway you were born on you are either a man (or presumably women) of Kent or a Kentish man.

edited 16th Apr '14 3:39:49 AM by Silasw

You're a Kentaur.

Allot of places have their own state. There's even a patron saint of the internet.

The question was pretty much random; I was mostly wondering if there was a push on to get more women listed as saints, or to increase the visibility of existing female saints.

Why should there be?

There's definitely too many male Saints, but it helps that they look a lot like women.

The "rate" of pushing for more saints and increasing their visibility has been consistent through the centuries, overall. Although there have been more new saints in the last 100 years, it's still generally a "status quo", and gender is also irrelevant (as is ethnicity/nationality).

Look no further than, say, Saint Joan of Arc, Saint Theresa of Avila or Saint Maria Goretti, to name a few.

Pope Francis urged to back fossil fuel divestment campaign.

This should be interesting. Good to see though. we really need to start moving away from fossil fuels.

The Catholic Church in England and Wales has turned down a request by members for the results of a sexual ethics survey to be made public.

Looks like it will soon be Saint John Paul II and Saint John XXIII (both former popes)...

Popes John XXIII and Pope John Paul II, have been canonized in Rome.

The Catholic Herald has a live blog and an opinion piece by Freddy Gray, editor of The Spectator: "John Paul II is the great hero of post-war Catholicism and his critics can shut it."

Francis believes in a literal Satan and in exorcisms.

Also, more priests are getting sanctioned to perform exorcisms.

I suppose that this is a positive sign, actually. While I'd be worried about it if Francis were neglecting his pastoral responsibilities, he's not, and given that Francis appears to be a man of genuine faith with regards to the rest of the Church, there's no reason why he shouldn't personally believe in the existence of angels and demons in this world.

edited 13th May '14 4:34:30 PM by Ramidel

It amused me how some people (though not many) are doing a 180 on his reputation solely because of that detail, suddenly leaping from "The best Pope ever" to "A delusional fool". Only because he has a somewhat old-fashioned view of Satan and demons.

Go figure.

If that's the worst thing anyone can say about him, I think I can live with it. I'd rather have a Pope who actively institutionalizes a more humanitarian approach to Catholicism who believes in some superstitions, than a Pope who is more empirical but endorses the old reactionary values.

If people are calling him a "delusional fool" over this, they've got no reason to be commenting on the catholic church anyway. Are they shocked he's actually religious or something?

Agreed.

The problem (to some people) is more that Francis seems to be entirely literal on saying the Devil is actively plotting against humanity and the Church needs exorcists to combat his army. It's a rather old-fashioned belief even within the Church itself (as the article makes note, the numbers of exorcists has been dwindling steadily due that precise reason).

It's old-fashioned, but it's still an article of Catholic dogma. The Devil is real, the Devil is active, and the Devil is present in the world.

Absolutely. Personally, I take a dim view of religious folks who pick and choose what parts of the cosmology to believe in, and to what degree. If you have good reason to believe in an active Satan plotting against humanity, then it is your duty to do something about it.

I am very much an ex-catholic (although not yet an ex-parrot!), but I respect Pope Francis. I know that he and I disagree deeply in quite a few respects, but in many others he appears to be rather in tune with my own thoughts and feelings. I also get the impression that, if we were to have a chat, although he would disagree with many of my own opinions, he would not disrespect me or think of me as inferior for having them. I feel that we would be able to have a very polite and understanding discussion, and that is a nice feeling.

I think he has taken important steps to clean some of the nasty dirt that had accumulated in certain spheres of the Catholic church — whether he will be ultimately successful is another question, but I cannot fault him for trying. Also, his emphasis on helping the downtrodden is, in my opinion, good. Of course, that should be par for the course for the Catholic church, but previous popes seemed to emphasize the "morality in life" aspects and kind of push the "help the poor" aspects a bit into the background. I guess that Francis has seen that modern society is too secularized for the church to have a real chance of reversing current trends, and has decided to focus on calling attention to the situation of those less fortunate.

And about the exorcist thing... Well, it *is* part of catholic dogma, and he is supposed to follow it. As long as it doesn't hurt people, I have no problem with it. And I understand that modern-day exorcists in the Catholic church are subject to very strict supervision, so no rogue exorcists doing who-knows-what running around.