Does the world need a pope?

[Negita43]

19 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

There's lot's of insane stuff to it but the worst of it IMO is the indoctrination and brainwashing of children from birth so as to perpetuate the myth.

One of the best things my mother ever did for me was to tell the Catholic Priest to S"D off when he came to persuade her to send me to a Catholic School!

[BangkokReady]

I know a lot of people don't like it, but religion was created for a reason, and generally has a lot of decent advice.  Many of the problems we have now in society, are due to people being liberal and progressive.

[Negita43]

Just now, BangkokReady said:

religion was created for a reason

Created - says it all

[dinsdale]

4 minutes ago, Negita43 said:

One of the best things my mother ever did for me was to tell the Catholic Priest to S"D off when he came to persuade her to send me to a Catholic School!

My mother gave me the choice when I was very young. I thought it was all made up nonsense. Now I'm glad I had the choice the live a life of rational, free thought.

[BangkokReady]

Just now, Negita43 said:

Created - says it all

 

Created isn't bad.  It was created and developed over thousands of years.  Our Western culture is intertwined with it and each evolved with the other.  It's also full of interesting stories and metaphors that help people know how to live a good life.

[dinsdale]

3 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

I know a lot of people don't like it, but religion was created for a reason, and generally has a lot of decent advice.  Many of the problems we have now in society, are due to people being liberal and progressive.

No. Sorry. No need for religion to tell us as a society and as individuals what's right and what's wrong. We are moral beings with or without religion.

[dinsdale]

Being that there's been no anti-Trump baby tantrums so far (amazing) I just had to post this.

[BangkokReady]

5 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No. Sorry. No need for religion to tell us as a society and as individuals what's right and what's wrong. We are moral beings with or without religion.

 

The way things are going does not support this theory.

[StandardIssue]

9 hours ago, short-Timer said:

Do we actually need a pope in today’s world? With so many urgent global issues like poverty, wars, disease, natural

disasters, and climate change, it seems strange to focus so much attention on spiritual hierarchy. Maybe it’s time to ask whether all that energy and influence could be better spent on solving problems that affect the whole planet. Plus, centralizing spiritual authority in one person opens the door to corruption, power struggles, and a lack of accountability. The whole thing seems like such a waste of time and energy, maybe more people should start living in the real world.

 

So, IMHO, you might want to study a bit more about spirituality versus organized religion. There is a huge difference between spirituality and organized religion. There is no such thing as "spiritual hierarchy" The word hierarchy generally has to do with position of individuals in any kind of organization. The Catholic Church is an organization with officials who are appointed to do the business of running the largest religious organization on the planet. The Pope is, roughly speaking, the lead man of the Catholic Church.

 

IMHO, there are better questions to ask with it comes to religion and spirituality. The world doesn't necessarily need any kind of organized religion. But, IMHO it definitely needs spirituality.

 

I think a much better question is: Does the world need spirituality. I believe whole heatedly that it does. The core of all worlds problems is the spiritual sickness of it's societies and this "look out for number one" kind of attitude that is pervasive. People thinking mostly of themselves and not thinking enough of others.

 

Nobody needs The Bible or weekly church services to practice spirituality and try to have a relationship with a Higher Power or Higher Force in the universe.

 

The core of spirituality is a life of selflessness. Thinking of others more than oneself. Roll models would be Mother Teresa, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, The Dalai Lama and others who devote their lives in service to others and teach spiritual principles of Love, Tolerance, Patience, Selflessness, Charity and the like.

 

 

[ChicagoExpat]

5 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No. Sorry. No need for religion to tell us as a society and as individuals what's right and what's wrong. We are moral beings with or without religion.

Where do you think morals come from, Dinsdale (and nearly everyone else here)?  We have the entire 20th century to show how officially atheist societies do -- it seems by most commenters' reckoning, they should have simultaneously been wonderfully moral and also paragons of enlightenment, tolerance, progress, and peace.

 

How did it all go?

[VBF]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

I know a lot of people don't like it, but religion was created for a reason, and generally has a lot of decent advice.  Many of the problems we have now in society, are due to people being liberal and progressive.

It's possible that some of the advice was relevant 5000 years ago, but is no longer.

Example: Jews and Moslems are forbidden pork because it is "unclean" in their view. Well, 5000 years ago, when there were no refrigerators, eating unrefrigerated pork was possibly responsible for stomach ailments. In 2025, that is hardly the case.

 

Catholics apparently eat fish on Fridays, or rather abstain from meat. Something to do with an imaginary person dying on a Friday. How is that relevant? 

Now the 10 commandments, taken in isolation, make some sense. Stealing and similar are covered by laws, such things as adultery are, surely, personal matters.

 

@BangkokReady Surely, being liberal and progressive is progress, not as you imply a negative thing? Yes,  my opinion is somewhat contentious but only to (respectfully) explain my refuting your opinion.

[StandardIssue]

4 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Being that there's been no anti-Trump baby tantrums so far I just had to post this.

 

Dude Smell My Finger!

[dinsdale]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

 

The way things are going does not support this theory.

The way things are going? Do you mean Islamists. Obviously very religious people. How about the Venezuelan criminal gangs. All good Catholics I'm sure.  

[dinsdale]

2 minutes ago, ChicagoExpat said:

Where do you think morals come from, Dinsdale (and nearly everyone else here)?  We have the entire 20th century to show how officially atheist societies do -- it seems by most commenters' reckoning, they should have simultaneously been wonderfully moral and also paragons of enlightenment, tolerance, progress, and peace.

 

How did it all go?

Morals come from social norms of what is and isn't acceptable. We do not need a book to tell us this.

[VBF]

2 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Morals come from social norms of what is and isn't acceptable. We do not need a book to tell us this.

Acceptable to whom? "Society" consists of a heterogenous  collection of people. It's not a homogeneous "lump"

[BangkokReady]

3 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

The way things are going? Do you mean Islamists. Obviously very religious people. How about the Venezuelan criminal gangs. All good Catholics I'm sure.  

 

I mean modern Western culture.

[BangkokReady]

3 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Morals come from social norms of what is and isn't acceptable. We do not need a book to tell us this.

 

Social norms in the West come partly from Christianity, from a book, and Western social norms affected the development of that book.

[Bert got kinky]

 

Does the world need a pope?

Of course it does, who else is going to protect all of them paedos?

 

[BangkokReady]

4 minutes ago, VBF said:

It's possible that some of the advice was relevant 5000 years ago, but is no longer.

Example: Jews and Moslems are forbidden pork because it is "unclean" in their view. Well, 5000 years ago, when there were no refrigerators, eating unrefrigerated pork was possibly responsible for stomach ailments. In 2025, that is hardly the case.

 

Catholics apparently eat fish on Fridays, or rather abstain from meat. Something to do with an imaginary person dying on a Friday. How is that relevant? 

Now the 10 commandments, taken in isolation, make some sense. Stealing and similar are covered by laws, such things as adultery are, surely, personal matters.

 

This is just silly.  Obviously these things are minor.  You know this.

 

"Religion has had a powerful effect on the development of our societies and should not be completely written off."

 

"Ahh, but, blah blah blah, pork and crustations!"

 

🙄

 

4 minutes ago, VBF said:

@BangkokReady Surely, being liberal and progressive is progress, not as you imply a negative thing?

 

How is progress not a negative thing?  Progress can be negative.

[VBF]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

 

Social norms in the West come partly from Christianity, from a book, and Western social norms affected the development of that book.

Which is where you're (unwittingly) agreeing with my earlier post. The book is of unknown provenance and rather than development, I'd use the term modification - to something that was imaginary in the first place.

The books referenced in other religions share similar characteristics.

[dinsdale]

7 minutes ago, VBF said:

Acceptable to whom? "Society" consists of a heterogenous  collection of people. It's not a homogeneous "lump"

Acceptable to society as a whole. Rape for instance or child abuse is obviously unacceptable. No need to have religion to tell us this. 

[VBF]

4 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

This is just silly.  Obviously these things are minor.  You know this.

 

"Religion has had a powerful effect on the development of our societies and should not be completely written off."

 

"Ahh, but, blah blah blah, pork and crustations!"

 

🙄

 

 

How is progress not a negative thing?  Progress can be negative.

Progress, by definition "development towards an improved or more advanced condition."

Progress must, therefore be positive.

 

The problem with accusing certain rules as being minor is that yes, they are minor to you (and me) but go towards forming the tenets of the whole religion.

[VBF]

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

Acceptable to society as a whole. Rape for instance or child abuse is obviously unacceptable. No need to have religion to tell us this. 

Precisely! Thus making religion irrelevant. 

[nauseus]

32 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

My mother gave me the choice when I was very young. I thought it was all made up nonsense. Now I'm glad I had the choice the live a life of rational, free thought.

 

A choice that all giant hedgehogs should indeed be entitled to.

[nauseus]

33 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No. Sorry. No need for religion to tell us as a society and as individuals what's right and what's wrong. We are moral beings with or without religion.

 

How can you be sure?

[dinsdale]

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

A choice that all giant hedgehogs should indeed be entitled to.

[Yagoda]

You can expect those who would spit on the Pope to warble his praises if he criticizes Trump.

[dinsdale]

11 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

How can you be sure?

Plenty of people who don't believe in the invisible, omnipotent, all powerful creator that function perfectly well in civil society and are in no need of a book telling them what they should or shouldn't do.

[KannikaP]

1 hour ago, saintdomingo said:

Henry was a classic devout RC, he had a dispute with the Pope but no dispute with Popery.

But he fell out with Leo X in 1530s over that Aragon woman, starting the Church of England. 

[Globalres]

Since we are classified in religious beliefs depending on where we were born, it’s quite arbitrary really.  Most of us have not chosen the designated religion per se.  Very few of us, these days have actually chosen our labeled religion.  This name calling depending upon where in the world you were born is actually quite misleading.  
Very few, generally speaking, are active believers in their country’s designated religion.  They follow the rules of society so as not to risk detention or worse.

Theoretically, the Pope should be a leader for kindness, love, and wellness for all.  Introspective thoughts and generally a seeking of pure joy. Revelling in nature’s bounties and the animal/human kingdom should perhaps be more thought about, that is if one is a bit more spiritually advanced and not only seeking the pursuit of more and bigger gadgets in the belief that it will give happiness and joy.

Unfortunately, as someone above said, our leaders of the  world in general can’t seem to get enough power, not caring about the detrimental effect it may have on others.