-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
President Clinton Insults Pope On Way to Funeral, Christians Outraged
- Thread starter johnnys4life
- Start date
QuestionSleep
Member
Clinton's remark didn't come off as that insulting. Sounds like he was just speculating the Pope's legacy. He even sounded like he gave credit to the Pope by commenting on the rise of Catholicism during his lifetime.
That being said, I have about as much moral respect as I do for anyone who supports abortion and wastes a perfectly good cigar. None.
That being said, I have about as much moral respect as I do for anyone who supports abortion and wastes a perfectly good cigar. None.
martha
Active Member
Well I have had time to reflect. At first, my reaction to the statement, " He's like all of us, perhaps he leaves a mixed legacy." was utter outrage. I felt like telling Bill, "Where do you get off comparing yourself to the Pope?" Then I thought a bit about it, as most of you have done.
In the end I have come to the realization once again, that we, none of us, are perfect. Remember I once said that when I make my hand into the shape of a pointing finger, there are three fingers pointing right back at me, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? They all point right back and say, " Oh yeah, and what about you, Martha?" Well now I can look at Bill, just another guy, and say, he has made his mistakes, and some butes I might add, but then again, so have I. He puts the Pope in league with the masses by saying , "His legacy might be a mixed one." Well, in fact that is true. There are many men and women who do great things in their lives, but within their private existance, they might fall short, in some opinions, and it is all fine and dandy 'till someone brings it to the fore. It is up to us to hold up the goodness of the man or woman against their perceived shortcomings. In retrospect, I think that Bill was a good and honest young man. He had high ideals, in his youth, like many others. He looked up to John Kennedy, who had greatness in his doings, but fell victim to his human traits. Somewhere along the line, something got ahold of him, whether ego, or power, or just plain lust, and he lost sight of the vision of the white house, which in my humble opinion should be held above the base nature of man.
I honestly cannot stand before you all and say that at no time in my life did I ever lie. I wish I could. We are human, and we fall victim to the denial of the truth of our being sometimes. Bill Clinton falls into this catagory , so does Pope John Paul, and so do I, to different degrees, albeit, but we all fall short, in some way.
Bill did not dismiss the Pope, nor did he condemn or insult him. He just made a point of fact.
Sometimes it takes me awhile to see properly. We must all endeavor to see past the perceived wrong, at first glance. We should try to see the individual within the light of our own life. We must question the soul, we must ask, " Have I never done that?'
This my beloved brothers and sisters, is the way to true enlightenment and real understanding and true forgiveness. I have reflected and I stand corrected in my first post. My greatest desire is that I will never condemn before I have taken a good long time to reflect.
Joufully,
Martha
In the end I have come to the realization once again, that we, none of us, are perfect. Remember I once said that when I make my hand into the shape of a pointing finger, there are three fingers pointing right back at me, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? They all point right back and say, " Oh yeah, and what about you, Martha?" Well now I can look at Bill, just another guy, and say, he has made his mistakes, and some butes I might add, but then again, so have I. He puts the Pope in league with the masses by saying , "His legacy might be a mixed one." Well, in fact that is true. There are many men and women who do great things in their lives, but within their private existance, they might fall short, in some opinions, and it is all fine and dandy 'till someone brings it to the fore. It is up to us to hold up the goodness of the man or woman against their perceived shortcomings. In retrospect, I think that Bill was a good and honest young man. He had high ideals, in his youth, like many others. He looked up to John Kennedy, who had greatness in his doings, but fell victim to his human traits. Somewhere along the line, something got ahold of him, whether ego, or power, or just plain lust, and he lost sight of the vision of the white house, which in my humble opinion should be held above the base nature of man.
I honestly cannot stand before you all and say that at no time in my life did I ever lie. I wish I could. We are human, and we fall victim to the denial of the truth of our being sometimes. Bill Clinton falls into this catagory , so does Pope John Paul, and so do I, to different degrees, albeit, but we all fall short, in some way.
Bill did not dismiss the Pope, nor did he condemn or insult him. He just made a point of fact.
Sometimes it takes me awhile to see properly. We must all endeavor to see past the perceived wrong, at first glance. We should try to see the individual within the light of our own life. We must question the soul, we must ask, " Have I never done that?'
This my beloved brothers and sisters, is the way to true enlightenment and real understanding and true forgiveness. I have reflected and I stand corrected in my first post. My greatest desire is that I will never condemn before I have taken a good long time to reflect.
Joufully,
Martha
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Well said Martha,
Some people let their dislike for a person (or their actions) color their eprception of that person forever. It takes guts to see beyond our own prejudices!
Some people let their dislike for a person (or their actions) color their eprception of that person forever. It takes guts to see beyond our own prejudices!
kiwimac
Brother Napalm of God's Love
For your edification, I post the WHOLE article J4L took her snippet from.
It is even more objectionable an article than I expected.
Kiwimac
Source: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/apr/05040704.html[font=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Former President Clinton Insults Pope on Way to Funeral[/font]
[font=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, Sans-Serif][/font]
ROME, April 7, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Former President Bill Clinton, one of recent history's most ardent political advocates of abortion, placed himself on an equal footing with the Pope and critiqued the Pope's legacy in comments to reporters while en route to Rome for the papal funeral.
Matt Drudge reports that Clinton told reporters, the Pope "centralized authority in the papacy again and enforced a very conservative theological doctrine. There will be debates about that. The number of Catholics increased by 250 million on his watch. But the numbers of priests didn't. He's like all of us - he may have a mixed legacy."
Clinton's comments have already spurred outrage from Catholic bloggers and Protestant ministers alike. Joseph Grant Swank Jr., pastor of New Hope Evangelical Church in Maine wrote an editorial in his local paper calling Clinton a religious hypocrite and a liar. Pastor Grant writes, "This rank sinner of the most alley cat genre plows into the Pope on the way to the Pope's funeral! In moments after making his 'confession,' the former United States President then has the audacity to kneel in St. Peter's Church, looking on adoringly at the Pope's corpse."
President Bush's decision to include Clinton in the US delegation to the Pope's funeral has already upset many Catholics. Clinton's presidency was one of aggressive opposition to the Catholic moral universe which John Paul personified.
Clinton's audacity in critiquing the Pope - who will likely be best remembered for his indefatigable championing of the sanctity of human life - will strike many as especially insulting from a president whose reign was a mud-spattered catalogue of moral and political scandals. Bill Clinton's particular legacy among pro-lifers is to be remembered for his repeated vetoes of the partial birth abortion ban.
Clinton's indifference to Catholic sensibilities was exemplified in 1998, when he and his wife received Holy Communion at a Catholic Mass while on a trip to South Africa. This act, understood by Catholics to be one of sacrilege, occurred while the Clintons led the world in their war against traditional Christian morality. The late John Cardinal O'Connor of New York declared the episode "legally and doctrinally wrong."
Focus on the Family President Dr. James Dobson in February 2001 said, "No man has ever done more to debase the presidency or to undermine our Constitution - and particularly the moral and biblical principles upon which it is based - than has William Jefferson Clinton." Dobson wrote, "Clinton's hands are stained with the blood of countless innocent babies. By twice vetoing a bill that would have banned partial-birth abortion, he almost single-handedly preserved a barbaric procedure by which fully viable and un-anaesthetized infants, each fresh from the Creator's hand and brimming with life, were murdered during the final moments of delivery."
It is even more objectionable an article than I expected.
Kiwimac
Quoth The Raven
Half Arsed Muse
If Bill and Hil received communion and it was so sacriligious, why did the priest do it?
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
First, let me express my shock and dismay that the source for J4L's original post was a Right to Life publication - I never saw that one coming!!
Second, Bill Clinton's remarks regarding the Pope, and his legacy, are accurate.
Third, on a personal note, I do not think Clinton to have been the most moral President (nor the most immoral), but regardless of my opinion on his morality, I do think he did a good job of running the country while in office.
Fourth, has anyone else noticed a trend in the "hit and run" postings of some of our members lately? If someone wishes to debate or discuss a given subject, I'm all for it - regardless of their (or my) stance on that subject. That said, I'm growing tired of people posting inflammatory garbage (such as this), then simply walking away without responding. This is beginning to smack of prostelytizing, with a political bent.
TVOR
Second, Bill Clinton's remarks regarding the Pope, and his legacy, are accurate.
Third, on a personal note, I do not think Clinton to have been the most moral President (nor the most immoral), but regardless of my opinion on his morality, I do think he did a good job of running the country while in office.
Fourth, has anyone else noticed a trend in the "hit and run" postings of some of our members lately? If someone wishes to debate or discuss a given subject, I'm all for it - regardless of their (or my) stance on that subject. That said, I'm growing tired of people posting inflammatory garbage (such as this), then simply walking away without responding. This is beginning to smack of prostelytizing, with a political bent.
TVOR
Bravo! Well said.The Voice of Reason said:
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
Deut - your PM box is full, and I cannot send you a message.
Thanks,
TVOR
Thanks,
TVOR
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
Upon reflection, it would have been more appropriate to title this thread:
Clinton Speaks on Pope's Legacy - Thin Skinned Right to Lifers Take Offense
TVOR
Clinton Speaks on Pope's Legacy - Thin Skinned Right to Lifers Take Offense
TVOR
Fat Old Sun
Active Member
I'm usually at the front of the line when a slam Bill Clinton opportunity arises. This is not one or those opportunities.
I find nothing wrong with what he said. I also think that if people remove their political bias and look at his comments objectively, they serve to burst the bubble of the media that was foaming at the mouth to trash the dead Pope. Keeping in mind that the Pope was a man, and that we all have successes and failures in our lifetime, dulls the edge of their sword.
There are plenty of reasons to challenge Bill Clinton's credibility, just as there are plenty of reasons to challenge George Bush's credibility. To challenge them every time they appear in public or open their mouths regardless of the comments or context, only destroys your credibility. Choose your battles wisely.
I find nothing wrong with what he said. I also think that if people remove their political bias and look at his comments objectively, they serve to burst the bubble of the media that was foaming at the mouth to trash the dead Pope. Keeping in mind that the Pope was a man, and that we all have successes and failures in our lifetime, dulls the edge of their sword.
There are plenty of reasons to challenge Bill Clinton's credibility, just as there are plenty of reasons to challenge George Bush's credibility. To challenge them every time they appear in public or open their mouths regardless of the comments or context, only destroys your credibility. Choose your battles wisely.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
funny they don't mention the article by the Associated Press that Bush got boo-ed by the crowd present.
Guess that just isn't news anymore. :sarcastic
wa:do
Guess that just isn't news anymore. :sarcastic
wa:do
M
Majikthise
Guest
You mean like when people judge Bush? Oh, but that's different.NetDoc said:Well said Martha,
Some people let their dislike for a person (or their actions) color their eprception of that person forever. It takes guts to see beyond our own prejudices!
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
You make a good point, Majik. Personally, I think Bush is one of (if not, the) most ignorant, unpolished people to ever hold the office, and I tend to prejudge much of what he does.Majikthise said:You mean like when people judge Bush? Oh, but that's different.
I've never twisted his words though, to make it seem as if he is making some type of uninformed slur on someone or a group of people.
Come to think of it, he shoots himself in the foot often enough that it would be redundant to intentionally misrepresent his words or his position on most issues.
TVOR