The Pope is a fraud

Originally posted by Seitse
Yeah, I mean, Jesus left no instructions to have a worldly representative who, unlike him, screws and makes mistakes and dies and doesn't resurrect.

I mean, WTF, dude?!

Did Benedict try to sell you some insurance?

Originally posted by Rajk999
If you were not so well-trained to regurgitate the rubbish they feed you, you will have realised that by that comment, clearly God's grace must have already left the Catholics.

Why do you always feel the need to enter every thread related to Catholicism? You only ever show an embarrassing ignorance.

Originally posted by Seitse
"Vicar of Christ" has been used to refer to the Pope ever since some crazy Pope in the year 490-something. Nowadays you can find such claim in the catechism of the catholic church.

"Vicar" is defined as "representative".

So, Jesus left no representative and, moreover, he needs no representative, particularly not a human and, even more, not a human who h ...[text shortened]... ds a political & business machine focused on many things but Jesus' legacy and teachings.

"Vicar" is defined as "representative".

Ah....no it isn't. When consulting the catechism, you should be wary that terms often have a precise theological definition, often from a Latin root, and do not translate so readily.

Originally posted by Seitse
"Vicar of Christ" has been used to refer to the Pope ever since some crazy Pope in the year 490-something. Nowadays you can find such claim in the catechism of the catholic church.

"Vicar" is defined as "representative".

So, Jesus left no representative and, moreover, he needs no representative, particularly not a human and, even more, not a human who h ...[text shortened]... ds a political & business machine focused on many things but Jesus' legacy and teachings.

Jesus did leave representatives. They were called "apostles". I think your error is to think that the Pope claims to be the only representative and also to think that a representative must be exactly the same as the person he is representing.

And why do you claim that he needs no representatives? Surely such a claim amounts to a different belief from that of the Catholics. Does that make them 'frauds' for having different beliefs?

Originally posted by twhitehead
And why do you claim that he needs no representatives? Surely such a claim amounts to a different belief from that of the Catholics. Does that make them 'frauds' for having different beliefs?

Exactly. The Catechism describes all bishops as vicars and this is not uniquely Catholic either. The Orthodox Christians, and to some extent Anglicans, believe the same thing. The bishop is the centre of the church and, when administering the sacraments, acts in the place of Christ (he is the alter Christus).

Originally posted by twhitehead
Jesus did leave representatives. They were called "apostles". I think your error is to think that the Pope claims to be the only representative and also to think that a representative must be exactly the same as the person he is representing.

And why do you claim that he needs no representatives? Surely such a claim amounts to a different belief from that of the Catholics. Does that make them 'frauds' for having different beliefs?

Good, so please be so kind to share with us the power of attorney where Jesus did so.

There's a crime called impersonation, and here's a definition at least in Colorado's legislation:

a person who knowingly assumes a false or fictitious identity and, under that identity, does any other act intending unlawfully to gain a benefit for himself is guilty of criminal impersonation

It's not cool to pretend to be something that is not. But thanks for the clarification, I recognize my mistake: the thread title should be "the Pope and all the employees below him are impersonating something that they're not".

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Did Benedict try to sell you some insurance?

Some nuns tried to get some money from me in the street.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]"Vicar" is defined as "representative".

Ah....no it isn't. When consulting the catechism, you should be wary that terms often have a precise theological definition, often from a Latin root, and do not translate so readily.[/b]

Catechism? What's the catechism? What authority does it have?

Oh yeah, the catechism, those deceiving additions to the Bible.

The catechism has the same value than Asterix comics, though Asterix is far more legit and fun.

Originally posted by Seitse
Good, so please be so kind to share with us the power of attorney where Jesus did so.

There's a crime called impersonation, and here's a definition at least in Colorado's legislation:

a person who knowingly assumes a false or fictitious identity and, under that identity, does any other act intending unlawfully to gain a benefit for himself is guilty ...[text shortened]... he Pope and all the employees below him are impersonating something that they're not".

Do you have evidence that Jesus did not - before or after his death, ask anyone to represent him? Do you have evidence that he has expressly forbidden it? Do you have evidence that any Catholic (including the Pope) is knowingly assuming a false or fictitious identity? Do you have any evidence that any Catholic whilst acting as a representative of Christ has acted unlawfully?
You will need an awful lot of evidence to back up your claim - otherwise you are guilty of slander.

Originally posted by Seitse
Catechism? What's the catechism? What authority does it have?

Oh yeah, the catechism, those deceiving additions to the Bible.

The catechism has the same value than Asterix comics, though Asterix is far more legit and fun.

Well, the catechism clearly defines what 'vicar' and 'representative' mean. Which is why the catechism is particularly pertinent to our discussion here.

And anyway, why pick on the Catholics? Anyone who has attended an Orthodox liturgy would see that they regard their clergy practically as divine. The idea of the bishop as Christ's vicar is much clearly defined among the Orthodox.

“I love the Pope, I love seeing him in his Pope-Mobile, his three feet of bullet proof plexi-glass. That's faith in action folks! You know he's got God on his side.”

Bill Hicks.

Originally posted by Seitse
Some nuns tried to get some money from me in the street.

You know what they really wanted, macho.

But why is the Pope a fraud?

Originally posted by Conrau K
Why do you always feel the need to enter every thread related to Catholicism? You only ever show an embarrassing ignorance.

Why do you always feel the need to enter every thread related to Catholicism? You only ever show an embarrassing ignorance.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That must lead to a lack of self esteem. Do you honestly believe that every time you do good, it was because God helped you to?

Whenever anything good happens, god gets all the credit. But whenever anything bad happens, he never seems to get any of the blame. Very convenient, that. It would seem to be a package deal to me.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Do you have evidence that Jesus did not - before or after his death, ask anyone to represent him? Do you have evidence that he has expressly forbidden it? Do you have evidence that any Catholic (including the Pope) is knowingly assuming a false or fictitious identity? Do you have any evidence that any Catholic whilst acting as a representative of Christ h ...[text shortened]... will need an awful lot of evidence to back up your claim - otherwise you are guilty of slander.

Do you have any evidence that the Pope and his minions were appointed representatives of Jesus? If you don't then you're guilty of gullibility.

The pope is the one who has to justify his claim. It's called impersonating and it is immoral (and illegal in several jurisdictions), as I explained earlier.