Slashdot Mirror
Vatican Warns That Internet Promotes Satanism
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."
The Internet Warns That The Vatican Promotes Stupidity.
The internet says that it also promotes christianity, using the same arguments. Within minutes you can research churches, bible groups and also contact them...
Santa is an important part of Christmas, he brings gifts and reminds us to go to church and .... ohh SATANism, not SANTAism
ok, nevermind
Karma: Excellent. 15 moderator points expire sometime.
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. He's an Italian exorcist, and although his work is not the official doctrine, it's still very interesting to read.
In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
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.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
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.
My rights don't need management.
ia!
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.
I like muppets.
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.
Hrm, where have we heard this one before?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
The internet facilitates people of like minds finding each other. This could be people working for good causes and people working for evil causes. People have found each other through networks for long periods of time. The internet just makes it easier. This can be scary. It helps domestic terrorists find each other and it helps Christians find each other. And whether something is bad or good can be debated. I work with a long existent LGBT rights organization in developing their internet strategy. Our blog isn't one of the real popular ones that has thousands of readers a day (such as Joe My God) but the people who do read us are important people. Who then cite our views on the situation in various news articles in dead tree publishing. But our opponents, who I refer to collectively as Anti-Gay, Inc., are equally as engaged with promoting their views on the internet. But our supporters are younger while the opponents supporters are older and less savvy with technology. This issue of enabling bad people to find each other is one of the unintended consequences of technology. Sort of like how the automobile was originally a technology to promote a cleaner enviroment.
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).
"A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
...Internet Warns That Vatican Promotes Cultism
portfolio
More of a re-invention. Satan as a character is Jewish in origin, but their view of him is different. Satan to them isn't evil, or opposed to God - he is an agent of God who works to prove the faith of believers, as seen in the case of Job. He doesn't commit evil acts for their own sake, but commits evil so that the faithful may overcome it and thus grow stronger and closes to God in the struggle. Christianity started with that character, but reworked it entirely - turning Satan from the good-natured adversary into the antithesis of God, the Evil to God's Good, a character filled with spite and hate who revels in suffering and is driven to oppose all that is Godly. That is the Satan we have come to know today, perhaps because he is just far more interesting. Various sects and writers fine-tuned the details - transposing elements of pagan gods to give the goatlegs-and-wings image we would all recognise today.
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.
The Catholic Church has had some bad experiences with this in the past. Think 1450 AD was bad? The internet is like Gutenberg on speed. Satan actually maintains one of the tamer websites, I've discovered things way more evil than Satan on the internet, and things more godly than church. Next thing you know, people won't have to attend choir to enjoy music.
Gently reply
Confusingly, there are several very different religions that bear the label of 'satanism.' There are some that go back centuries, often new forms of what were once nature-worship pagan cults. Some are mishmashes of imagery, often taking the symbols of Satan but not believing in the character as an actual being - rather as a representation of human nature. And then there are the ones the others look down upon, the ones born more recently of cultural rebellion and the appeal of the forbidden, which get their religion more from horror movies than ancient texts.
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?
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
I'm certain that the Elders of the Internet would never allow Satanism to flourish. Unless it hadn't been properly demagnetized...
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
Internet Warns that Vatican Promotes Pedophilia
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'.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
Satan?
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
IANARC (I am not a Roman Catholic) but I did RTFA. Am I still allowed to comment? :)
/. could disagree with that. The original article barely mentions the Internet at all.
I really hate to spoil the party that seems to happen every time the Roman Catholic church is mentioned on Slashdot but nowhere in the article does anyone say that the Internet promotes *anything* or say that the Internet is to blame for anything.
They're simply saying that the Internet has fuelled an exchange of information that is a game-changer in the arena these particular clergy are interested in. I don't think anyone on
There are plenty of articles about the RC Church far more deserving of comment. This one's a non-starter.
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 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 Telegraph (and a sizable portion of Slashdot) the opportunity to indulge prejudices, from the looks of it.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
They should be happy. They fabricated the concept of Satan so if the internet helps people spread the idea, it's helping spread their fabrication.
If they don't want it spread, don't make up the concept.
...is good. Yours is evil.
Reading the story... the evidence provided is that demand for exorcists has increased. This, according to the Church, suggests that Satanism is on the increase - the same as an increase in sales of flu medicine may indicate increase in illness. To explain the rise in demand for treatment of Satanic possession, they formulate the theory that the internet could have promoted Satanism, increasing demand for exorcists. An alternative explanation would be that exorcists formerly could only advertise in very large markets - not in the yellow pages of rural areas. With the increase in internet, victims of Satan have wider access to exorcists, who defeat Lucifer in areas where he formerly established safe harbors. Therefore the Internet promotes Exorcism, not Satanism. And flu medicine sales may indicate meth labs are also on the increase in rural areas, which could also increase demand for exorcists. Personally, I find crackheads scarier than Satan.
Gently reply
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 generations, giving them a "satan" to blame the breeding ground for evil on instead of taking the blame for its own sins in time to stop them.
Rather than "fear the Vatican", use your "techie blessings" to free yourself from superstition and understand the simply human reasons people do each other wrong. The more people do that, the faster we can turn from the millennia of religion's legacy of moral and physical destruction.
--
make install -not war
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. 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".
--
make install -not war
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 well claim this to be the result of the "ungodlyness" of the 60s generation and the hippies.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Any student of general Christian theology would concur that many Protestant sects are actually anti-Christian (they promote the idea that it is OK to worship both God and money, completely contrary to the NT).
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
He appeared as a snake in the beginning and fooled Eve and Adam into rebellion against God. The consequences of the rebellion are 1) shame from nudity, 2) hard work for sustenance, and 3) painful childbirth. See Genesis 3.
Those who support Satanism implicitly support these consequences. Only nihilists won't care about the spread of Satanism, but then do nihilists care about anything?
Well, I've heard of a few problems with young Muslim girls being married off to older men. But I think this is tribalism, not a feature of the specific faith (the offshoot Mormon cults tend to behave in a similar manner). Isolate a population from the moderating influences of society, and the village elders are free to look for whatever excuse is available to pounce on young tail (boys, girls, whatever).
Have gnu, will travel.
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
Though in fairness, I prefer Vatican to many others... for example, their position in regards to evolution (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.
One that hath name thou can not otter
Don't forget to count int the thousands if not more "Saints" and the dozens of Angels they "pray to".
angel'o'sphere
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
The Telegraph as an accurate news source? 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 hypocrisy?
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
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
When an exorcism results in death, the people responsible damn well should be arrested and imprisoned for murder, or manslaughter at minimum.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
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?
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
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 (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 card and being a Catholic are not mutually exclusive, contrary to the drivel that you might see here.
The Church doesn't teach that "life is a test." Instead, the Church teaches that God gave man free will, and that you are free to allow him in your life or not, as the case may be (para. 1). It's all about choice. There is no pass/fail test. If you choose to follow God, and to live a life that fulfills the greatest of the commandments (love God and your neighbor), then the kingdom of God is yours.
It's not a cult of baby rapers, headed by an evil pope who protected (and protects) them worldwide.
I realize this is sarcasm on your part, but you might be interest in knowing that the US Dept. of Education estimates between 6% and 10% of school-aged children have been molested by teachers and other school employees. Considering there are about 74 million school-aged children in the US, I'd say the child molestation epidemic in the US public school system is a vastly larger problem than that of the Catholic Church. Maybe you should devote your energy towards that cover-up.
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.
Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
The power of the internet compels you!
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 Church's baby rape and coverup simply because the Church isn't the only one doing it. You are part of the coverup.
I didn't suggest that you ignore anything. I just suggested that you apply facts and logic to the situation, and realize that the Catholic Church is only a small part of a much larger child abuse problem. To focus on one small aspect of a larger problem is rather narrow-minded. You chip away at a granite block with a dental pick, but at the end of the day, it's still a granite block. I'm just suggestion you use something large, maybe a sledgehammer and chisel.
You are going to hell.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Only Satanists will have internet.
Wow, that really doesn't work does it?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Reality Warns That Vatican Promotes Child Sexual Abuse By Clergy
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
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. Limbo has never been a dogma of the Catholic Church.
"While the Catholic Church has a defined doctrine on original sin, it has none on the eternal fate of unbaptized infants, leaving theologians free to propose different theories, which Catholics are free to accept or reject." from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo which cites the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
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?
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 - you had your place and that was it. Peasant or king, you didn't have a choice. The question we ask every kid today: "what do you want to do when you grow up?" is a question that never crossed the common medieval mind. The rare exceptions were exactly that: Both rare and exceptions.
The churches doctrine fit perfectly into that and had no small part in creating this society in the first place.
But - in every human being there is also a desire for freedom, to be responsible for your own deeds, to cross the borders, to experiment, to fight for something better than what you've been dealt. This desire can be suppressed, but not erradicated - look at the arabic world right now, these people have been oppressed for forever and yet it takes mere weeks for the common man to come out onto the street and say "I want freedom".
Satan is the church's reaction to that. Look at the image that was created during the middle ages, and only especially well executed by Milton. This figure is the sum total of the freedom-loving human who will disregard the rules of his society, and act according to his own believes, his own set of morals, by what he believes is right and wrong, not by what he is being told. He questions authority and demands his own place in the world, willing to fight even the omnipotent for it. He is the incarnate horror for every autocratic ruler.
By creating an extreme version of this figure and putting it up as evil incarnate, the church had created two weapons at once: A stick for those who had their small doubts about the society they lived in, to beat them more or less softly back into the herd, and a sword to behead those who crossed the line and dared to demand to determine their own fate.
And that, I think, is why Milton was a little afraid of his own creation: By explaining the character he came dangerously close to uncovering the construction that went into it. To demonstrating that Satan, even more than god, is a projection of the fears of the christian church. That he is the anti-christ, in being the opposite of the obedient, unquestioning subject the church desired.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org