Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2022 2:00 am
Called it.
well, this is probably a better place for it.Kevin's Watch
Official Discussion Forum for the works of Stephen R. Donaldson
https://kevinswatch.com/phpBB3/
Pope Francis I
Page 3 of 7
Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2022 3:14 am
well, this is probably a better place for it.Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2022 5:48 am
Well, it's not out of place. But, Wos, don't come running to me if people turn the Pope Francis I thread into a political debate.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2022 2:48 pm
+JMJ+
The "Wos is porting Religion into Politics" refrain has been done to death, so why not try "Wos is porting Politics into Religion" as a changeup?Fist and Faith wrote:Well, it's not out of place. But, Wos, don't come running to me if people turn the Pope Francis I thread into a political debate.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2022 8:59 pm
Zackly!
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 6:11 pm
I agree that Wos's copy/pastes are better suited here than in the Tank, but I'm curious: if I started a thread about Billy Graham and started posting his views on political issues here, would the thread get deleted? I honestly can't tell what's allowed and what's not anymore. Spelling that stuff out in advance to your members is greatly appreciated! (The Rules and Guidelines still haven't been updated, I notice.)
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 6:52 pm
+JMJ+
Zarathustra wrote:… I honestly can't tell what's allowed and what's not anymore. …
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 7:52 pm
The fact is, Wos' post - the one at the bottom of the previous page - is out of place here. This forum is about religion and philosophy, that kind of thing. It's not about what religious people say about politics. I have let that one stay as a joke, because he was opening the door for people to turn it into a political thread. But we're not going to do that, and wos isn't going to make more posts like that.
It did belong in a forum about politics, because that's what the post is about.
A post about Trump's, Biden's, Stalin's, whoever's religious or philosophical views is appropriate here.
It did belong in a forum about politics, because that's what the post is about.
A post about Trump's, Biden's, Stalin's, whoever's religious or philosophical views is appropriate here.
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 9:17 pm
+JMJ+
How you figure?Fist and Faith wrote:The fact is, Wos' post - the one at the bottom of the previous page - is out of place here. …
It did belong in a forum about politics, because that's what the post is about.
[…]
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 9:37 pm
This thread has been here for 9 years. The last post before yours was 9 years ago, and it had nothing to do with migrants. But days after the Tank was deleted, you made your first post in the thread, and it's about migrants, which was a serious topic in the tank. That's either one heck of a coincidence, or you were trying to bring a tank topic in here.
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 9:58 pm
+JMJ+
I asked as to why that would be.
I didn't think the answer would be, at least apparently, "because Wos".
You said that the topic is "out of place" in the Close, but rather, is about politics.Fist and Faith wrote:This thread has been here for 9 years. The last post before yours was 9 years ago, and it had nothing to do with migrants. But days after the Tank was deleted, you made your first post in the thread, and it's about migrants, which was a serious topic in the tank. That's either one heck of a coincidence, or you were trying to bring a tank topic in here.
I asked as to why that would be.
I didn't think the answer would be, at least apparently, "because Wos".
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 10:26 pm
Not sure we're quite understanding each other. And maybe my original wording wasn't terribly clear. It's a political issue. It should be in a political forum. The Tank would have been a good place. The Close is not.
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2022 11:56 pm
Really, it not at all "because Wos." If you read the discussion in the thread prior to your post, you can see that conversation was from early in Francis' papacy and was oriented to his social and religious positions, particularly the potential (in that nine-years-ago timeframe) for him to introduce modernization to the Church.Wosbald wrote:+JMJ+
You said that the topic is "out of place" in the Close, but rather, is about politics.Fist and Faith wrote:This thread has been here for 9 years. The last post before yours was 9 years ago, and it had nothing to do with migrants. But days after the Tank was deleted, you made your first post in the thread, and it's about migrants, which was a serious topic in the tank. That's either one heck of a coincidence, or you were trying to bring a tank topic in here.
I asked as to why that would be.
I didn't think the answer would be, at least apparently, "because Wos".
Your post, after many years of the thread lying fallow, focused on a much more political issue. As Fist points out, coming on the heels of the excision of the forum where such material had previously appeared, this can be perceived as trying to introduce politically-charged issues into a forum where the topic is religion and spiritual matters.
Even if that was not your intent, surely you can appreciate that such an impression might be taken.
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2022 1:33 am
+JMJ+
As to my choice of thread, I've always tried to follow the general forum protocol of Whenever possible, post to an existing thread rather than start a new one.
And though there were undoubtedly other Close threads which would've also sufficed, the subject seemed to fit well enough, so there ya go.
I was simply asking why Ethics (whether Catholic or not, whether iterated by the Pope or not, whether having politically-charged implications or not) is adjudged an inappropriate topic for The Close.Savor Dam wrote:Really, it not at all "because Wos." If you read the discussion in the thread prior to your post, you can see that conversation was from early in Francis' papacy and was oriented to his social and religious positions, particularly the potential (in that nine-years-ago timeframe) for him to introduce modernization to the Church.
Your post, after many years of the thread lying fallow, focused on a much more political issue. As Fist points out, coming on the heels of the excision of the forum where such material had previously appeared, this can be perceived as trying to introduce politically-charged issues into a forum where the topic is religion and spiritual matters.
Even if that was not your intent, surely you can appreciate that such an impression might be taken.
As to my choice of thread, I've always tried to follow the general forum protocol of Whenever possible, post to an existing thread rather than start a new one.
And though there were undoubtedly other Close threads which would've also sufficed, the subject seemed to fit well enough, so there ya go.
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2022 2:19 am
I was just surprised that Wos, who has absorbed a heck of a lot of abuse, was on this occasion taking something personally that I didn't interpret as personal.
I went back and actually read the post that has been called both not out of place and out of place. It certainly is not of the same sort as those about migration / immigration issues that were so contentious in the Tank, being deeply rooted in US politics.
The fate of Eurasian and Levantine migrants / refugees is a legitimate ethical issue. While this has been so for many years, the current situation in Ukraine has made it both more relevant and demostrably worse.
Both religion and politics are relevant.
Oh, as an aside for Z, you may choose to post about the views of a deceased American evangelist, but that feels out of character from someone with your professed views on religion. In any case, are the views of deceased sectarian leaders more relevant than those of current leaders, less relevant, or of equal weight?
I went back and actually read the post that has been called both not out of place and out of place. It certainly is not of the same sort as those about migration / immigration issues that were so contentious in the Tank, being deeply rooted in US politics.
The fate of Eurasian and Levantine migrants / refugees is a legitimate ethical issue. While this has been so for many years, the current situation in Ukraine has made it both more relevant and demostrably worse.
Both religion and politics are relevant.
Oh, as an aside for Z, you may choose to post about the views of a deceased American evangelist, but that feels out of character from someone with your professed views on religion. In any case, are the views of deceased sectarian leaders more relevant than those of current leaders, less relevant, or of equal weight?
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2022 2:43 am
+JMJ+
But if Ethics is is a legit Close topic, then it seems like it shouldn't matter that I happened to post when I did.
Hmmm … It's so coincidental that Wos would decide to post just now. What could he possibly be up to???
As I read it, the framing was that it was either 1) a "coincidence" or 2) I was trying to import a foreign element into The Close.Savor Dam wrote:I was just surprised that Wos, who has absorbed a heck of a lot of abuse, was on this occasion taking something personally that I didn't interpret as personal.
[…]
But if Ethics is is a legit Close topic, then it seems like it shouldn't matter that I happened to post when I did.
Hmmm … It's so coincidental that Wos would decide to post just now. What could he possibly be up to???
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2022 3:29 am
Ethics is an entirely appropriate topic for the Close. But you had not been attempting to discuss it here for the last six months. You had not posted here at all for those six months. Not until the Tank was gone, and you found quotes by the Pope regarding a topic that had been hot there. Yes, the timing is certainly suspicious. It's fine to not post in any forum for any amount of time, then post again. It's just quite the coincidence that migrants is the topic you return with. Sure, a discussion on Ethics cannot exist in a vacuum. There must be a topic that has ethical implications. So what will be the topic of your next papal quotes? Gun control? Abortion?
In addition, although I joked about people turning the thread into a political discussion, there are no legitimate grounds to say they can't. It's not at all a stretch to apply what he said to the American migrant issue. In light of recent events, how do I allow you to post about migrants, and not allow responses?
In addition, although I joked about people turning the thread into a political discussion, there are no legitimate grounds to say they can't. It's not at all a stretch to apply what he said to the American migrant issue. In light of recent events, how do I allow you to post about migrants, and not allow responses?
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2022 3:44 am
Nine year thread necromancy? Noticed? Yes. Not unheard-of (this is the Watch, after all), but still noticed.
Honestly, it was interesting to go back and reread this thread from when Francis was new; what the range of expectations for his Papacy were, how the years have treated those expectations...and the absence back then of the kind of vitriol that more recent discussions have drawn.
I'm glad you resurfaced it and hope some of the prior posters come and tell us how their prior assessments square with their current views. We'll see if that happens, but it would be a legitimate continuation of this thread.
I just still can't shake having my visceral reaction to your post, the first in nine years, with no segue whatsoever, being
If you feel moved to post more about the ethics of the sadly-many refugee situations, maybe a thread can be split off for such...whereever that thread might legitimately reside.
~edit: Apparently I cross-posted over Fist. No surprise; I tend to be a slow writer. I'll leave the above in the spirit of owning my words, but Fist mods this forum, so...what he said.
Honestly, it was interesting to go back and reread this thread from when Francis was new; what the range of expectations for his Papacy were, how the years have treated those expectations...and the absence back then of the kind of vitriol that more recent discussions have drawn.
I'm glad you resurfaced it and hope some of the prior posters come and tell us how their prior assessments square with their current views. We'll see if that happens, but it would be a legitimate continuation of this thread.
I just still can't shake having my visceral reaction to your post, the first in nine years, with no segue whatsoever, being
If you feel moved to post more about the ethics of the sadly-many refugee situations, maybe a thread can be split off for such...whereever that thread might legitimately reside.
~edit: Apparently I cross-posted over Fist. No surprise; I tend to be a slow writer. I'll leave the above in the spirit of owning my words, but Fist mods this forum, so...what he said.
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2022 8:13 am
+JMJ+
Fight for justice is not a political battle, pope tells Salvadorans
And before anyone asks … No, the Pope is not reading KW.
Or is he???
Fight for justice is not a political battle, pope tells Salvadorans
=========================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Pope Francis and Cardinal Gregorio Rosa Chávez, retired auxiliary bishop of San Salvador, El Salvador, pose during a meeting with faithful from El Salvador offering thanks for the beatification of Father Rutilio Grande, in the Clementine Hall in the Apostolic Palace at the Vatican Oct. 14, 2022. (Credit: CNS photo/Vatican Media)
ROME — The struggle for justice and love for all people is not over, but the battle must be evangelical and never political, Pope Francis told a group of Catholics from El Salvador.
“As long as there are injustices, as long as the just claims of the people are not heard, as long as there are signs in a country of immaturity on the way toward the fullness of the people of God, our voice against evil must be there, against the tepidness in the church, against everything that separates us from human dignity and from the preaching of the Gospel,� the pope said during an audience at the Vatican Oct. 14.
This effort, which is “a spiritual journey of prayer, of struggle, must sometimes take the form of a denunciation, of protest, never political, always evangelical,� he told the group, which was led by Archbishop José Luis Escobar Alas of San Salvador and included Salvadoran Vice President Félix Ulloa Garay and his wife, Lilian Alvarenga de Ulloa.
The archbishop had come under criticism recently for comments he made calling the government’s mass detentions — aimed at ending gang-related homicides — “bitter medicine,� and for saying that most Salvadorans want President Nayib Bukele to run again in 2024 even though the constitution limits the post to one term. While many thought the archbishop was backing the president’s reelection efforts, the archbishop denied it, saying he was only stating a fact.
The delegation from El Salvador came to the Vatican to give thanks for the January beatifications of Jesuit Father Rutilio Grande and his two companions, as well as the beatification of Franciscan Father Cosme Spessotto.
[…]
And before anyone asks … No, the Pope is not reading KW.
Or is he???
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2022 1:14 am
The real question is, if conventional geopolitical discussion is allowed to spread to the Close, where (which subform[s]) would it not be feasibly able to spread to? It seems to me that Mallory's would be relatively safe, for one.