Vatican Warns That Internet Promotes Satanism 585
Hugh Pickens writes "The Telegraph reports that the Roman Catholic Church has warned that the internet has fueled a surge in Satanism that has led to a sharp rise in the demand for exorcists. 'The internet makes it much easier than in the past to find information about Satanism. In just a few minutes you can contact Satanist groups and research occultism,' says Carlo Climati, a member of the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University in Rome who specializes in the dangers posed to young people by Satanism. Organizers of a six-day conference that has brought together more than 60 Catholic clergy as well as doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, teachers and youth workers, co-sponsored by the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments and the Congregation for Clergy, say the rise of Satanism has been dangerously underestimated in recent years."
Back at you. (Score:5, Insightful)
The Internet Warns That The Vatican Promotes Stupidity.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hail satan!
Re:Back at you. (Score:4, Funny)
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
emerge: there are no ebuilds to satisfy "satan".
emerge: searching for similar names...
emerge: Maybe you meant any of these: app-crypt/stan, dev-scheme/stalin, media-sound/sonata?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hell, the best promotion for Satan appears to be the Catholic church itself.
Re:Actually (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget to count int the thousands if not more "Saints" and the dozens of Angels they "pray to".
angel'o'sphere
Re:Actually (Score:5, Informative)
Except according to Christianity, Satan isn't a god, he's a fallen angel, and doesn't have godly powers (omnipotence and omniscience). He's unable to create something from nothingness, for instance. Thus, according to their beliefs, there is only one god.
Re:Back at you. (Score:5, Insightful)
* find it easier on the internet
* find others who are doing it on the internet
* blame the internet when they get caught
Meet the new boogeyman, same s the old boogeyman.
Re: (Score:3)
If they advocated some control over the internet (like riaa and politicians around the world do) because of the increase in possessions, then I would agree that they confuse effects with causes. But from TFA I understand they take the development of internet as an established fact and they say we must be better prepared, the problem has been underestimated. Which seems a normal things to say at a conference about exorcisms.
Of course I may have misunderstood them, it would be better to discuss official docum
Re:Back at you. (Score:4, Insightful)
The catholic church has much to fear about the internet... even worse than satanists, it puts their flock in contact with people who know the truth: There are no such things as gods or devils.
They are losing their means of control.
Re: (Score:3)
They appear to be using "the Internet" as a scapegoat
Except that "they" should be the author of the article.
According to the article, the Catholic Church hasn't said anything negative about the internet. They just said that the internet has allowed people faster access to occult information. The leap to saying that "internet is evil" was made when the author wrote the title of the article.
If you look at what the Catholic Church has actually been saying about the internet recently, you'd see an entirely different picture. They are currently making a big pus
Re: (Score:3)
[quote]The Vatican stated fact: you have more "Satanists" because there is more information about it available to everyone.[/quote]
The Father in the article admits that the number of "posessions" is very small, so is it really worth convening 60 church officials for a week to talk about what he considered to be a small problem? In regards to the demon possessions, I wouldn't be surprised if they're all just untreated severe mental disorders or chemical problems.
I think it's more likely to be a deliberate d
Re:Back at you. EU census (Score:4, Interesting)
Also - it might be an expression of their current unease about the EU-wide census, and the results of its question about religion. About how Internet is the tool to promote "satanisms" of various kind in answering to that question (one of more charming ones, at my place [zostandunadanem.pl]
Though in fairness, I prefer Vatican to many others... for example, their position in regards to evolution [newadvent.org] (or consider Mendel, a Catholic monk; generally, their contribution to progress is immense... even if with some temporary hiccups now and then; emphasis in the quote mine):
How do the conclusions reached by the various scientific disciplines coincide with those contained in the message of revelation? And if, at first sight, there are apparent contradictions, in what direction do we look for their solution? We know, in fact, that truth cannot contradict truth
...
the need of a rigorous hermeneutic for the correct interpretation of the inspired word. It is necessary to determine the proper sense of Scripture, while avoiding any unwarranted interpretations that make it say what it does not intend to say. In order to delineate the field of their own study, the exegete and the theologian must keep informed about the results achieved by the natural sciences
...
new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory.
Re:Back at you. (Score:4, Insightful)
...the number of "posessions" is very small, so is it really worth convening 60 church officials for a week to talk about what he considered to be a small problem?
Of course that is not worth it.
But if you want to begin to mobilize the masses of uneducated and gullible Catholics in every corner of the western world, you need to start somewhere. And a good place to start is by demonizing the Internet, which is the one thing that is doing the most to reduce the number of uneducated Catholics who would be gullible enough to do whatever the Church tells them to do.
This week has seen a couple of dozen killings in Afghanistan because somebody reportedly burned a Koran half a world away. There is no significant difference between an ignorant, gullible Islamist and an ignorant, gullible Catholic. Either can be turned into an explosive terrorist simply by feeding them disinformation about the world. If the Catholic Church is deliberately trying to keep its masses barefoot, pregnant, and in the pews by demonizing the Internet, this is cause for concern.
Re:Back at you. (Score:5, Insightful)
[quote]The Vatican stated fact: you have more "Satanists" because there is more information about it available to everyone.[/quote]
The Father in the article admits that the number of "posessions" is very small, so is it really worth convening 60 church officials for a week to talk about what he considered to be a small problem? In regards to the demon possessions, I wouldn't be surprised if they're all just untreated severe mental disorders or chemical problems.
I think it's more likely to be a deliberate distraction from the internal problems they are having.
The number of possessions is actually ZERO. I guess that qualifies as "very small". The thinking that people are becoming possessed is simply nonsense that the Vatican is promoting ON the Internet (or promoted on their "behalf" on the Internet) - but it's still nonsense. Part of the problem is that various sects of Christianity promote (in various places, including online) that people can excuse their baser or more vile actions by blaming it on the devil - which leads us right to situations like this.
It's not the Internet that's the problem - it's the church.
Re: (Score:3)
the number of "posessions" is very small, so is it really worth convening 60 church officials for a week to talk about what he considered to be a small problem?
Assuming they are demon possessions, I'd say that any increase is a cause for alarm. Since the church officials believe they are, it makes sense that they'd convene.
In regards to the demon possessions, I wouldn't be surprised if they're all just untreated severe mental disorders or chemical problems.
Catholicism tends to rule out natural maladies before sending in the exorcists. There are priests whose jobs revolve around disproving "miracles" like Grilled Cheesus Sandwich.
Re:Back at you. (Score:5, Interesting)
That is precisely where the church scapegoats the Internet for the church's own hideous sins. The Internet responsible for the increase in possessions, which is why these exorcists have so many more possessions to exorcise: it's the antichrist's war against the church. The church isn't the cult of baby rape and its coverup, it's the victim of a war by the antichrist.
The church embraces the scapegoat [wikipedia.org] as a fundamental practice. Why shouldn't it use it to blame someone else for its own sins, someone who doesn't exist except in the church's own propaganda?
The Slashdot reaction isn't "knee-jerk", a reflex. It's a learned behavior to see through the church's lies and nonsense to find the church's own designed benefit and escape from blame. What's knee-jerk is to ignore proof of the church's guilt even when it's shoved in your face. Not quite a reflex, but a gut reaction trained into us early. The boogeyman doesn't exist, but the church and its crimes do.
Re: (Score:3)
To be fair, there has been numerous accusations of the pope being the antichrist. These two claims sure seem to click together nicely, don't t
Re: (Score:3)
How are they using the Internet as a scapegoat? A scapegoat for what?
Resurrecting an active belief in Satanism is easier for some old men than accepting the possibility that there might be something intrinsically wrong with an institution they have dedicated their lives to.
That is, a resurgence in Satanic activities is a more acceptable explanation for all the pedophilia and sexual abuse by Catholic priests than the possibility that the Church itself is a sick institution. Instead they can claim their Church has been victimized by Satan and can be purified and able to carr
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Back at you. (Score:5, Interesting)
"Ye will not, if I trust
To know ye right, or if ye know yourselves
Natives and Sons of Heaven possessed before
By none, and, if not equal all yet free,
Equally free; for orders and degrees
Are not with liberty, but well consist.
Who can in reason, then, or right, assume
Monarchy over such as live by right
His equals; if in power and splendour less,
In freedom equal? or can introduce
Law and edict on us, who without law
Err not? much less for this to be our Lord,
And look for adoration to the abuse
Of those imperial titles which assert
Our being ordained to govern, not to serve!'"
In essence and in more modern terms: "God is immensely powerful, but just because he is physically capable of beating us all to a bloody pulp if we disobey him doesn't mean he has the right to do so. We deserve to run our own lives, not just to do as God decrees because he is big enough to enforce his will by violence."
Satan goes on to run the first uprising, and is promptly schooled on just what 'omnipotence' means in the form of the divine smackdown.
Re: (Score:3)
Crafty. But we can't expect anything less from the ultimate damager [google.com] and destroyer [google.com] (two old that-what-we-don't-speak-about posts talking about it much better that I could in short amount of time)
Re:Back at you. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
One side being evil doesn't automatically or even likely make the other good. I really wish that people would learn this; it would make things a lot better here on Earth if people stop
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Back at you. (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly, there is no reason for a scapegoat unless one is going to continuously blame others for your problems. Rational people understand that is necessary to take some control over their own lives. They can't just sit back and wait for a deity to provide for them. They can't just blame the satanist when things are not working out.
If there is anythings that makes christianity in general, and catholicism in particular, a joke to some many people is the externalization of blame. If satanism a problem, then clean up your own backyard. We can start with the focusing of the teaching of the christ in christianity and his directive to be better people, rather than to use any means necessary to force others to behave in ways that we agree. Of course christianity is not unique in it's use of force to promote religion, but it is, IMHO, uniquely positions to promote self discipline over blame.
Re:Back at you. (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a whole bunch of people who call themselves Satanists who really don't actually believe in Christ (or even actually Satan) for that matter. If a group can appropriate the name of someone they don't believe in and use it in their religion, I would think that its certainly possible for others to follow the teachings of that same entity and call him something else, or even deny his existence entirely. That's what we call results-oriented diabolism.
Obviously, if you didn't start out as a Christian or in a Christan-influenced area, you probably wouldn't use the terminology. Still, that's like when the Native Americans called European ships "giant birds" or whatever when they first saw them. They didn't have a word for ocean-going ship and no previous way to pick one up from the Europeans, so they made something up. That doesn't mean they weren't talking about ships. If you follow certain practices, then you are following Satanist practices, even if you say that you are actually following Zamfir, Master of the Pan Flute.
Catholicism does not split things down into the line of good and evil. Having had to sit through Catholic education, I know that's more the realm of Manichaeism, which is definitely not Christianity. Catholics believe in one creation, and they do not believe in the equality of good and evil in Creation. Good is more powerful than evil and will always triumph. The only thing that gives evil the illusion of being equivalent to good is that free will allows humans the freedom to select evil if they want to, which tends to make it seem like just two equivalent choices in voting booth. Once selected, however, evil always either falls short of the promises, and sometimes, even some unintended good comes out of it because good is more powerful. So the teaching goes, in any event.
As for Satan, my understanding of what the Catholic Church teaches are as follows:
* Satan is real and a distinct entity. He was created by God and therefore subject to God's rules. Apparently, he is/was an angel, and so our understanding of his existence and his motivations are limited. He is supernatural, but limited, so he doesn't need a TV to lie to you, but he can't actually create things.
* Satan can't make you do anything. Your God-given free will must be respected by him just as much as by any one else.
* Satan can tempt you. That is to say, he's allowed to promote his way of life vigorously and by any means other than removing your free choice. This means that he's probably the world's first, and by far the best, global marketing/advertising firm.
* You can choose to let Satan into your life and in that manner, he can do the whole possession thing. Apparently, Satan and his underlings, being real and supernatural, do have the ability to manifest, but likely if very specifically allowed in. My understanding is that you generally need to have made some sort of choice to allow that to happen. Perhaps even a specific set of choices, the practices therein referred to collectively as "Satanism".
Okay, well, that's probably too much for someone who doesn't actually believe in God to bother with, but I think its important to realize that there is an entire set of logical premises out there that you accept if you are actually a Catholic. Having Satan exist may seem like an externalization of blame, but he's only an externalization if he's not actually real. If he's real, he's out there doing things, and those things are the Church's job to oppose. Either way, it seems to me that self-discipline IS what they are teaching: you have the choice to not be a Satanist, and no one can force you to be one, not even Satan himself.
Re:Back at you. (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, that's not true. Anything that Christians don't like would be "sin". Satanism, in the specific discussion of the Internet and cults does consist of sin, but it's more like the deliberate and even ritualistic practice of sin. Everyone sins, but not everyone is a Satanist.
Of course, there is "Satanism" as defined by the Church and then things like Wicca or even the Anton LaVey's Church of Satan. While certainly some of those would certainly qualify, it's not a 1:1 ratio. The "Do no harm" rule of some neo-pagan groups is much like the Golden Rule, and certainly would not be considered to be satanic. On the other hand, the practice of ritualistic "magick" might be considered satanic, even if no one is talking about Satan, because it purports to gain power from something other than God.
Bear in mind, the Catholic Church considers paganism in the same way that atheists consider Catholicism. To them, there is only one God and one Adversary. Anything other than heaven or hell is just a fiction. Since there are no other gods than God, worship and prayers to a deity other than God is at best pointless, and at worst, an innovation of Satan who may have a hand in creating false religions in much the same way that record producers synthesize boy bands. The goal of Satan is to get you to not follow the law of God and to accrue power to himself. It probably does not much matter to him if you say "Ave Satana" or "Blessed Be" as long as the result favor's Satan's goals.
Mind you, not trying to say pagans are actually secret "Satanists". After all, they do not believe in Satan any more than Catholics believe in the Goddess. But from the Church's viewpoint, some of the practices of paganism may coincide with what a Satanist might be expected to do. And if you start from the premise that the Church does, it is logical to believe this. From that standpoint, the Church would ignore the labels that the pagans choose to use for themselves and instead refer to the offending practices as Satanism.
Re: (Score:3)
So what they do believe in does not have a name of its own? Or is this "bunch" just a few teenagers going through their angst phase?
While they CAN take the name of a heresy of a religion they don't believe in ... WHY would they do that?
Well, having never been an atheist Satanist, I don't know all of them, but I suspect there are a lot of reasons for it. Mostly rhetorical, I imagine. Consider that LaVey's Church of Satan are actually atheists:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Satan [wikipedia.org]
These people may or may not actually be what the Church considers to be "Satanists". Since they purport to be a church and use Satan's name, even if they say they deny Satan's very existence, they probably qualify,
The system is not even internally logical. Which is why so many concepts such as "Limbo" have to be invented and then discarded.
I'm not sure what you are getting at. Li
Re: (Score:3)
...start with the focusing of the teaching of the christ...
Except he's wrong! [kyon.pl] ;p But seriously, the christ is also a wolf masquerading as a sheep - "do what I say or suffer eternally"? "My fairly unremarkable, not anywhere near worst death is worth enough to balance out the deaths of 100+ billion homo sapiens sapiens and their 'sins' - largely arbitrary ones, all imposed on humanity by me with full foreknowledge"?
That's something worthy of Demiurge (and probably why gnostics were labelled as heretics early on), deity of dystheism or maltheism [wikipedia.org], the ultimate sin [google.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I'm an atheist, and a devout one at that.
> Honestly, one cannot be a satanist unless one is a christian, because Christianity makes it's hallmark the separates the continuity of good and evil into a polarity that is then split into autonomous creations.
Patently false; you should read up on Satanism, it's actually fairly interesting. There are a bunch of different ``sects'', one of which is comprised of people who are entirely atheists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVeyan_Satanism [wikipedia.org]
I think most satanists c
Re: (Score:3)
I am forced to agree with you. If one more devout Catholic informs me solemnly that Bill Gates is poisoning little African babies with his polio vaccine, I may throw up. It hasn't occurred to them that if Bill Gates had it in for little African babies, all he'd have to do would be to take his billions elsewhere. They're doing a far more effective job of demonizing the man than the Linux community was ever able to accomplish.
Re: (Score:3)
Internet promotes Christianity (Score:5, Insightful)
The internet says that it also promotes christianity, using the same arguments. Within minutes you can research churches, bible groups and also contact them...
Re:Internet promotes Christianity (Score:5, Insightful)
But they want to be the ONLY faith that you can read or talk about.
Re:Internet promotes Christianity (Score:5, Insightful)
They're not protestants. You don't read about religion. That's not your role. You go to church and get information from a priest, who has a greater connection to God through the hierarchy of the Church, which has at it's head God, and right below that the pope, with whom he has conversations daily.
OK, it's a pre-Vatican-two sort of world-view, but it's historically that of the Catholic church.
Re: (Score:3)
Considering how badly some protestant sects have raped Christianity, having some control at the clergy level doesn't sound so bad.
It's not like the Catholics are the Christian fundamentalists, you know.
Re:Internet promotes Christianity (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Internet promotes Christianity (Score:5, Funny)
That sounds more like Apple, apart from the source code part
Apple is more like scientology - first class marketing campaign, minimum of choices and very very expensive.
Re:Internet promotes Christianity (Score:5, Funny)
How dare you? The Catholic Church is nothing like Apple! One group follows an infallible leader whose every word is considered gospel.
The other lot's boss wears a funny hat and lives in Rome [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Internet promotes Christianity (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
They're not protestants. You don't read about religion. That's not your role. You go to church and get information from a priest, who has a greater connection to God through the hierarchy of the Church, which has at it's head God, and right below that the pope, with whom he has conversations daily.
OK, it's a pre-Vatican-two sort of world-view, but it's historically that of the Catholic church.
Which is quite odd, when one considers that is EXACTLY what Jesus tried doing away with, including teaching that one's relationship with God was between them and God. And that one's temple is their heart. Interesting, huh?
Re:Internet promotes Christianity (Score:5, Interesting)
Catholics are encouraged to read the Bible.
They are now, but only because the Catholic church finally admitted that it lost a hundred-year-long fight to prevent them from doing so. During that period, people were tortured and burned for suggesting that reading the bible was a good idea for christians. They were branded heretics, and the catholic church argued that anyone other than a priest who read the bible would fail to understand it correctly and would become a heretic (whose soul could only be saved by burning them alive).
Re: (Score:3)
How does the church recommend bible reading? I was raised as a catholic and was never once encouraged to read the bible in church. I went to church from when I was a baby until I was about 16. And we went every sunday. I remember this, because I always wanted to stay home and watch wwf wrestling and rollergames and never could, except on rare occasions when my mom was sick. My dad stayed home because he knew the deal.
In the church they did have bibles in the pews but nobody ever used them. The priest w
Re: (Score:3)
How does the church recommend bible reading? I was raised as a catholic and was never once encouraged to read the bible in church.
...err, really? How long ago was this? I ask because...
* there are *three* different biblical readings conducted during Mass. The first is usually from the Old Testament, the Second is usually from the New Testament outside the Gospels, and the Gospel Reading, which comes out of one of the first four books of the NT. They're among the first things that happen during Mass.
* the Missal (a book which lays out how Mass is said over a given year) contains *all* of the biblical readings in advance. You can read
Re: (Score:3)
Slashdotters, as a general rule, are woefully ignorant of relgion.
Being disinclined to swallow religious apologia does not equate to ignorance of religion. If anything, it indicates a better understanding of religion than that possessed by most believers.
Re: (Score:3)
"But not everyone on the Church is modern."
Yup. The Pope, for example.
No mod points, but completely agree (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The internet says that it also promotes christianity, using the same arguments. Within minutes you can research churches, bible groups and also contact them...
You can also research and contact support groups & class action law suits for the many reported cases of abuse that the Catholic Church has been charged with. Ooops, the internet is bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which is a bad thing, because it causes people to lose faith, as you get to see just how little sense most of the christian dogma makes?
Unintended Consequences (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Unintended Consequences (Score:4, Interesting)
It's all in the labeling. Instead of referring to them as Anti-Gay Inc", why not refer to them as "Anti-Civil Rights", or "the Anti-Freedom of Association clowns"?
Same as the Vatican referring to themselves as "The Holy See". More and more people are referring to them as "Pedophiles International", and Vatican City as PedVille*
*no, I'm not suggesting that zanga come out with a new "kid-themed" game
Re: (Score:3)
makes no sense without the myth structure of God, Jesus etc
That's the whole point of the quote, self-market with the false appearance of being the only game in town. The opposite of Christianity must be ... following christian-mythos bad guys. Not following something else, or nothing at all. Make it look like the only game in town....
Re: (Score:3)
What's wrong with Santa-ism? (Score:3)
Santa is an important part of Christmas, he brings gifts and reminds us to go to church and .... ohh SATANism, not SANTAism
ok, nevermind
Internet promotes everything (Score:2)
Just shows how tolerant they are of alternative views.
Sort of reminds me of the radical Muslims today, and how they are killing people over a simple book burning. Tolerant and understanding my ass. Its 'my way or the highway' ( except highway is death ).
Re: (Score:3)
Given the common roots of Christianity and Islam, you could just as easily be making a case for that half-wit down in Florida being a Satanist. One thing he is not is 'tolerant'.
Re: (Score:2)
Shame that you have to go AC to state something that's that obvious. Looking at Christians about 600 years ago, they're pretty much a carbon copy of modern islam, with witch hunts and having women basically as home slaves on one end (compare woman headdress from 600 years ago in catholic heartland of Italy and modern islamic woman headdress), and killing off scientists and seeking political control on other.
Considering that Islams roots are in the same religion as Christianity, and that the main difference
Naturally, (Score:4, Interesting)
Well of course, demons are part of the christian cosmology. I think it would be very strange if Benedict did no believe in exorcism. It's like not believing in Jesus's resurrection.
If anyone is interested in exorcism, I recommend the books of Gabriele Amorth [wikipedia.org]. He's an Italian exorcist, and although his work is not the official doctrine, it's still very interesting to read.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget: Before he became pope he was the head of what's left of the Inquisition (and I don't mean the Monty Python variety). That should tell you a thing or three.
uh... (Score:2)
April Fools is over, guys.
Well fair is fair (Score:3, Insightful)
Sex scandal = Satan exists within Catholic Church (Score:3)
If the Catholic church can get away with an apology for the rape of countless young boys and girls on behalf of its members, then please your Holiness, accept this apology on behalf of the internet for our "satanic" practices.
This is exactly what the article claims is the proof of their assertation.
The Vatican's chief exorcist claimed last year that the Devil lurked in the Vatican...
...He claimed that the sex abuse scandals which have engulfed the Church... ...were proof that the anti-Christ was waging a war against the Holy See.
They are afraid of an educated populance (Score:5, Insightful)
They can't control the flow of information and keep the people in check through ignorance like they used to. Much harder to cover up church scandals like pedophile priests with the internet available to a wide population.
Re: (Score:3)
Hmm, no. Sorry, but there's really no evidence of any kind to support that kind of conclusion. They haven't had the luxury of ignorance or the power to control information for many, many years. All of the people associated with the church at that time are long dead, even before the internet was available to the general population. Also, notice that this comes as a caution, not as a move to ban the internet, or even advice to boycott the internet. They're telling people to beware what they and their children
Re:They are afraid of an educated populance (Score:5, Insightful)
"They haven't had the luxury of ignorance or the power to control information for many, many years"
Tell that to the people in Africa and South America. There is a reason that the Church is growing in areas of low educaiton and high ignorance and poverty. They share their brand of salvation and afterlife to make people feel better about their shitty lives now.
Same thing applies to Islam.
You never grew up in the church, you apparently are not familiar with their tactics. By 'warning' the faithful, they actually intend to scare those who may already be uncomfortable with using the web (older folks, the uneducated or undereducated, etc).
Make no mistake, this is a direct reaction to the sex scandals.
Before you start stomping on others for modding something, perhaps you should do a little legwork. I know this is slashdot, but judging the validity of the opinions of others invites a very negative response.
Satan? (Score:2)
Oh, you're serious?
Let me laugh even harder.
Attendees (Score:2, Informative)
"Organizers of a six-day conference that has brought together more than 60 Catholic clergy as well as doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, teachers and youth workers..."
As well as a constantly changing harem of young boys (and a couple of young girls for those who really want to go against the Catholic creed)
cthulhu fhtagn (Score:2)
welcoming the enemy? (Score:2)
"Organizers of a six-day conference that has brought together more than 60 Catholic clergy as well as doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, teachers and youth workers."
Am I the only one with such a low opinion of various professions as to think that the Vatican has invited their enemy into their midst?
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, that ain't how it works - what happens is a bit in reverse of what you posted.
Nowadays, priests have to actually weed out mental and physical illness [catholicculture.org] as a factor, and find secular help for those who are simply ill. Making that diagnosis obviously requires the help of medical and psychiatric professionals, and this conference is likely examining those bits, among other things.
Occam's Razor kicks in at this point, yanno?
(not talking about you, mind - but...)
Of course, that tends to deprive the Teleg
Stop laughing, start confronting. (Score:5, Interesting)
While most of Slashdot it is laughing I think we should be taking this as a serious issue and find ways to confront it. We may think the religion is full of ignorants, but they can still have geek kids who get abused and treated badly because they want to play D&D or play some video games. For those who remember Columbine and how geeks got treated, keep that mentality but instead of it just being a small part of your life it becomes your entire life. Your family, friends and everyone you know is calling you a devil worshipper because you want to tell and story and roll some dice.
Stop laughing and start looking for the tears. These people are ruining children's lives and we should be supporting them not laughing at their abusers from a high horse.
Re: (Score:3)
To be honest, the Catholic Church has been hemorrhaging members in the US for a long time, and this sort of nonsense is a large part of why. You'd have to be an idiot not to see that the Pope is off his rocker on many issues, and as the head of the organization, that's bad.
Considering the amount of blame that's being heaped on the people that have been sexually abused by other Catholics, it's no wonder that the exodus isn't restricted to those that have themselves been abused. It's just really hard to take
Re: (Score:3)
To be honest, the Catholic Church has been hemorrhaging members in the US for a long time
Thanks for contributing to the mass hypocrisy and gross misrepresentation of facts that seems to plague this discussion. I don't mean to have facts get in the way of your diatribe, but in reality the percentage of Catholics in the US has remained steady over the past 38 years [blogspot.com] (at about 25%). Since the population of the US continues to grow, this means (follow me here) that the number of Catholics in the US continues t
The Vatican should wikipedia "Satanism"! (Score:2)
It's too bad they didn't or else they wouldn't have a mixed-up impression of what Satanism is. It's basically hedonistic humanism with a license to destroy those who get in the way of your fun. This is doesn't necessarily make it BETTER, but it's important to realize that most (many? some?) Satanists don't really believe in Satan as a real being, although they may believe in Satan as an archetype or metaphor. (BTW, Shatan was a god in the ancient Hebrew pantheon (perhaps equivalent to Loki). You knew th
religious freedom (Score:2)
surely satanism is as valid a religion as any other, and a downright peaceloving one if you compare bodycount with some of the mainstream ones.
Re: (Score:3)
Not hard to believe... (Score:2)
Gutenberg (Score:5, Insightful)
Hrm, where have we heard this one before?
Alternatively... (Score:3)
The internet makes it much easier to find (mis)information about "demonic possession" and therefore increase the demand for exorcists.
I think it goes something like this:
1. Fundamentalist parent is concerned that teenage daughter's behaviour indicates she's dabbling in the occult, or demonic possession,
2. Parent looks up symptoms of demonic possession on the internet, finds other fundamentalist parents who describe similar symptoms ("Once I smelled alcohol on my daughter's breath!"), thus confirming parent's fears,
3. Parent calls for an exorcist,
4. Profit (for some).
oh those wacky Christians (Score:3)
I'd always thought that the one advantage they'd have to the existence of demonic possession and proof of Satan would be that they could at least say "See? That part of the story's right. So you have to believe that there's a God, too!" But, as many have pointed out, one doesn't always follow the other. A pagan could point to the tree shattered by the thunderbolt and say that this is proof of Zeus for where else could such a bolt have come from? Before science explained such things, the skeptic's arguments were as baseless as the pagan's claims. If there are demons, does this imply there must be a Satan? And even if all of Catholic demonology were proven to be accurate in the enumeration and ranking of such things, could we trust church dogma on their origin story?
I always liked the idea of a story where the demonic possessions are happening and are supernatural, not just misdiagnosed epilepsy, and yet a very effective exorcist is himself an unbeliever in the faith.
It also makes me think of a possibly apocryphal story....
LEGEND HAS IT that in the early 1920s one of Vladimir Lenin's fellow Bolsheviks asked him to justify the growing number of atrocities they were committing in the name of a socialist future. "If you want to make an omelet," Lenin insisted, "you have to be willing to break a few eggs." To which the Bolshevik replied, "Comrade, I see the broken eggs everywhere. But where, oh where, is the omelet?"
I see your demons but where is your God?
No no no no (Score:3)
I'm certain that the Elders of the Internet [eldersoftheinternet.com] would never allow Satanism to flourish. Unless it hadn't been properly demagnetized...
Internet Warns that Vatican Promotes Pedophilia (Score:5, Insightful)
Internet Warns that Vatican Promotes Pedophilia
Who could it be? (Score:3)
My invisible friend.... (Score:5, Insightful)
...is good. Yours is evil.
Methodology (Score:5, Insightful)
More anti-Catholic drivel...just move along (Score:3)
The Telegraph as an accurate [slashdot.org] news [slashdot.org] source [slashdot.org]? I would expect better from the /. crowd. But hey, since Catholicism is such an easy target, why not throw away sense and reason and engage in a little [slashdot.org] hypocrisy [slashdot.org]?
Proudly marching into the Twentieth Century (Score:3)
The Catholic Church, with one foot proudly marching into the Twentieth Century, scientifically and socially, and one foot firmly planted in the Dark Ages, scientifically and socially.
The exorcism should, if possible, be carried out with the consent of the possessed person [catholicculture.org]
Anyone who ties up, restrains, or otherwise threatens an unwilling person for an exorcism ritual is a criminal and should damn well be arrested and imprisoned for it. Just as we'd imprison someone for murder if they tied someone to a stake and burned them as a witch.
With assistance from four nuns, priest Daniel Corogeanu bound Cornici to a cross, gagged her mouth with a towel, and left her for three days without food or water. The ritual, the priest explained, was an effort to drive devils out of the woman. Cornici was found dead on June 15; an autopsy found she had died of suffocation and dehydration... Maricica Cornici is not the first innocent victim of an exorcism. On August 22, 2003, an autistic eight-year-old boy in Milwaukee was bound in sheets and held down by church members during a prayer service held to exorcise the evil spirits they blamed for his condition. An autopsy found extensive bruising on the back of the child's neck and concluded that he died of asphyxiation. In the past ten years, there have been at least four other exorcism-related deaths in the United States alone [radfordreviews.com]
When an exorcism results in death, the people responsible damn well should be arrested and imprisoned for murder, or manslaughter at minimum.
-
Great, the 80s all over again (Score:3)
Remember the big Satanism scare in the 80s? Sounds like the same thing except now backed by the Vatican. Has anyone ever met or heard of a real, true Satanist? Not goth kids or other silly people, but truly sick individuals?
By the way, how is this news for nerds?
When the internet is outlawed... (Score:3)
Only Satanists will have internet.
Wow, that really doesn't work does it?
No, the Church didn't say that. (Score:4, Informative)
It must be the silly season for the Telegraph newspaper: the Vatican didn't say anything about satanism.
The statement didn't come from any Church office, or any cardinal, bishop, or spokesman for the Church. The speaker, Carlo Climati, is a journalist who spoke at a conference at the Catholic university where he works in Rome.
Some reporters can't tell the difference between an official church spokesman and Some Guy in Rome, or even Some Priest in Rome, but what do you expect from the press: distinctions? We don't need no stinking distinctions!
Besides, the guy's probably right! If the net has made communication and collaboration easier for jihadist bombers, white supremacists, Democrats, and other horrible people, who's to say it didn't help satanists too?
Re:Satan? (Score:4, Informative)
Milton did some very nice work on Satan - he turned the rather vague and open-to-interpretation mentions in the bible into a coherent narrative of Satan's origin as the fallen angel who thought himself God's equal and was struck down in his pride, thus becoming dedicated to corrupting God's greatest work: Mankind. Milton actually thought he did a bit too well on that, as he was most displeased when people actually started seeing the prince of darkness as a sympathetic character.
Re: (Score:3)
Having actually read Paradise Lost, I think there's quite a bit more to that. I think Milton picked up on the trend the church had been going on for quite a while already (also see: "Lucifer in the Middle Ages" by Russel, another greatly recommended book on the subject).
The church had this religion of absolute authority, which literally spells out that your lot is your lot dealt by god and you should accept it. The middle ages were a time we can barely imagine today because the society was extremely rigid -
Re: (Score:3)
You should help yourself to depend more on reason than on the medieval superstitions the church requires you to believe. Then maybe you'll be better equipped to cope with the Internet and other sources of behavior you'd prefer to avoid than to rely on a cult of baby rapers who insist their worldwide rapes and coverups are proof that the antichrist is warring against them, rather than proof of their own bottomless evil.
That bible and its church you respect so much has destroyed the moral character of many ge
Re: (Score:3)
It's just a lack of pirates. Don't you see that the increase in climate catastrophes corresponds with the time that we started to fight the pirates in the far east seas and the African coasts?
In other words, correlation and causation are not to be mixed. There has been so much happening in the last two decades that there are FAR more likely reasons for the changes. Not to mention that God tends to think in other dimensions of time, do you really think he'd react what would be to him instantly? You could as
Re: (Score:3)
Just the kind of gibberish I expect from a Creationist, especially one crying out the name of the biblical story the church gets most completely wrong [wikipedia.org]. The story of a guy who'd have been tempted most by the Internet if the story happened today, but in which story the Internet would be the tool of god, not "satan".
Re:That Wouldn't Be A Bad Way To Go (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The Vatican's Catholic Church tells everyone (and I mean everyone) that the entire reason for life is to be tempted to sin, but instead to have faith in Jesus and avoid sin. Life is a test, they say, where god tests our faith in Jesus. Pass and go to heaven; fail and go to hell.
Actually, the Catholic Church teaches that reason points us towards faith [vatican.va] (para. 36). The Church doesn't teach us to have "blind faith" in Jesus, but to use reason towards establishing faith. This is the reason why carrying a geek
Re: (Score:3)
Being a geek means you know how things really work, facts and logic in thorough detail. Your fallacies and word games are contrary to being a geek. If you were a geek about religion, you'd understand that it's superstition and power games.
Reason tells me that there's nothing lost in believing in God. It always amuses me that this freedom of choice (to believe or not to believe) seems to stick in the craw of many non-believers, as if it's a personal insult to them.
But your suggestion is that I ignore the Ch