Opus Dei To Hunt Down Vatican Whistle-Blowers

I'd like to know by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:26 · Score: 1

Is Tom Hanks with a weird haircut implicated in all this?

Re:I'd like to know by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:51 · Score: 0

Is Tom Hanks with a weird haircut implicated in all this?
Depends whether he is expecting the spanish inquisition or not
Re:I'd like to know by cmiller173 · 2012-04-26 09:21 · Score: 2

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!!
... well somebody had to say it.

Geez, they should have known better! by quax · 2012-04-26 05:27 · Score: 0, Flamebait

The only accountability that matters is the one at Judgment Day. Until then let's party like it's 999.

Bloody fools.

War criminals like Tony Blair understand that crystal clear hence the conversion to catholicism.

Re:Geez, they should have known better! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:30 · Score: 0

Or the conversion to that green religion, fools
Re:Geez, they should have known better! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:47 · Score: 0

Why is he a war criminal? What laws did he break?
Re:Geez, they should have known better! by quax · 2012-04-26 11:36 · Score: 1

He ordered his forces to attack a country without authorization of the UN security council in cohorts with a couple of other high profile war criminals:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Preparations_for_war
Re:Geez, they should have known better! by quax · 2012-04-26 14:21 · Score: 1

No idea what you talk about.
Re:Geez, they should have known better! by slick7 · 2012-04-26 17:48 · Score: 1

The only accountability that matters is the one at Judgment Day. Until then let's party like it's 999.
Bloody fools.
War criminals like Tony Blair understand that crystal clear hence the conversion to catholicism.
The Inquisition 2.0 is about to start, film at 11.

--
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.

No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:27 · Score: 0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAn7baRbhx4

Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by nospam007 · 2012-04-26 06:26 · Score: 1

Unfortunately it's no joke.
from WP:
"... Pope John Paul II named Ratzinger as the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly known as the "Sacred Congregaton of the Holy Office", the historical Inquisition. ..."
Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:44 · Score: 0

Wrong Inquisition. Sir.
Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by Penguinisto · 2012-04-26 06:51 · Score: 3, Informative

Unfortunately, you got bad information. Let's get you started on the basics first: Start here.
It ain't the "Spanish Inquisition" as you and GP were talking about. That particular group is detailed here, and ran independently of the Vatican (it was a pet project of the Spanish crown). Surprisingly, as an institution the Spanish Inquisition lasted into the 19th Century.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by Will.Woodhull · 2012-04-26 08:05 · Score: 4, Funny

This will be the Italian Inquisition. We should expect it to be much like the Spanish Inquisition, but instead of burning books there will be zapping Blackberries and iPads with staff weapons.
Oh, the humor will be different, too. Less wry; more pratfalls.

--
Will
Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by yurtinus · 2012-04-26 09:04 · Score: 1

Bring out The Comfy Chair!!!!

--
+1 Disagree
Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by cmiller173 · 2012-04-26 09:23 · Score: 1

Poke him with the soft cushions!!
Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 15:30 · Score: 0

Please don't confuse the argument with facts.
Re:No one expects the Spanish Inquistion! by tehcyder · 2012-04-26 22:55 · Score: 1

This will be the Italian Inquisition. We should expect it to be much like the Spanish Inquisition, but instead of burning books there will be zapping Blackberries and iPads with staff weapons.
Oh, the humor will be different, too. Less wry; more pratfalls.
Plus, the uniforms will be cooler.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it

Which is why... by betterunixthanunix · 2012-04-26 05:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

...we need anonymity systems. People who are afraid to report unethical behavior are less likely to report it (shocking!), and whistleblower protections are neither universal nor reliable.

--
Palm trees and 8

Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:45 · Score: 1, Insightful

which is one of the thousands of reasons religion needs to die. Period.
Re:Which is why... by jellomizer · 2012-04-26 05:57 · Score: 3, Interesting

Why yes, because corruption in non-religious areas is unheard of.
Corruption is highest in areas where the people have the reputation of being incorruptible/working for the public good.
Religions are in this group, but so are...
Unions,
Activist Organizations,
Health Services,
Government Services,
Education,
Science...
Actually I am willing to bet the areas where there is less corruption (At least in corruption/dollar) is probably in business as everyone expects them to already be corrupt.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Re:Which is why... by MatthiasF · 2012-04-26 06:06 · Score: 1

Anonymity systems don't work if there's a finite number of people who know about the issue in enough detail to blow a whistle.
Re:Which is why... by Attila+Dimedici · 2012-04-26 06:13 · Score: 5, Informative

You do realize that the Vatican is a sovereign state, right? The Vatican has the right to structure their reporting structure any way they want. It is not a democracy. In a democracy, the government is theoretically answerable to the people and therefore the people have a claim to being informed by whistleblowers as to inappropriate behavior on the part of government officials (and therefore whistleblower protections should exist to some degree in a democracy). The Vatican on the other hand is not in anyway a democracy. The various officials of the Vatican government are only theoretically answerable up the chain of command to the Pope, who is, theoretically, answerable to no power on earth. Someone in the Vatican government who reports inappropriate behavior to someone outside of the Vatican government hierarchy is not a "whistleblower", as, theoretically, there is no one outside of the Vatican government to blow the whistle to, they are, instead, a traitor (I am not sure if that is the correct word from the perspective of Vatican governance, but if it isn't, I am not sure what is). They have betrayed their commitments as a member of that organization (similar to someone who had reported such actions by a government official of the USSR to a western government).

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:Which is why... by Jessified · 2012-04-26 06:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

I would argue that corruption is prevalent in business but that we just don't call it corruption. When a business does something morally despicable for money, they are serving their shareholders.
Buy some legislation? Just serving their profit motive, it's the politicians that are corrupt, amirite?
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:32 · Score: 2, Interesting

The Vatican has the right... It is not a democracy
Now that's interesting. Where do you think rights come from? I would argue that a non-democratic government has no legitimate right to do anything.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:33 · Score: 0

No, you're not right. We don't call those businesses corrupt because, as morally bankrupt as they may be, they aren't actually corrupt. It is the entity in a position of power (i.e. the "bribee") that is corrupt. That's what corruption is. In your example, we know the business has less power than the government because it must bribe the government.
And the more corrupt a government is, the less morally bankrupt I think it is for a business to bribe it. In some countries bribes are literally a cost of doing any business at all.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:08 · Score: 0

>Anonymity systems don't work if there's a finite number of people who know about the issue in enough detail to blow a whistle.
Unless that finite number is anything other than exactly 1. Because then you still don't know who did it. Whereas, if it is exactly one, then you're right, no anonymity system can work, because it could only have been that guy, and we can punish him.
So yeah, for any finite number of plausible users other than not exactly one, anonymity systems just can't work. It's that simple.
Re:Which is why... by operagost · 2012-04-26 07:22 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure bribery is illegal in most places in the West. So it's not just morally reprehensible, it's illegal and thus doesn't serve the shareholders. Funny how it all comes back to corruption in government, amirite?

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:Which is why... by Quila · 2012-04-26 07:23 · Score: 1, Troll

Sort of like a well-known Army private reporting certain actions of the US government to the entire world? Giving that video on a DVD to his congressman (within the structure as you say) would have been protected by law, but releasing it to WikiLeaks, go to jail.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

The Vatican is a "sovereign" state, in that its sovereignty hinges on the Italian Government continuing to honor the treaties between the two that have set aside Vatican City as such.
What is worse imho is how the Roman Catholic Church can flaunt local governments with this so-called "sovereignty" with regards to the affairs of the Church and its actors in those countries. So, does a whistleblower from the Catholic Church need to somehow make their way to a foreign embassy, then, and seek asylum? That's pretty fucked up.
Perhaps the British were right way back when w.r.t. the Catholic Church.
Theocracy, gloria Dei! /s
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:28 · Score: 0

I don't think it can be considered treason because, even though the Vatican is a sovereign state, clergy assigned to the Vatican are not vatican citizens. As such, the Vatican can really only remove them from their posts and reassign them within the church. If they wanted to prosecute more vigorously within Vatican City, I believe they would need to treat the clergy member as a foreigner. I certainly know very little about the Vatican legal system, so not really sure what options that would give them.
Re:Which is why... by chuckinator · 2012-04-26 07:29 · Score: 2

Doesn't really matter what you or I think. It only matters what the Vatican and Italy think, and Italy only matters because the Vatican is functionally an Italian state even if they are allowed to claim sovereignty. Plus, if anyone wants to wage war with the Vatican, they have to go through Italy first.
Re:Which is why... by evilRhino · 2012-04-26 07:43 · Score: 3, Insightful

Traitor is such a loaded word, and is misused in this context I think. A wife that leaves her abusive husband is a traitor. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and many others were traitors also.
Re:Which is why... by flaming+error · 2012-04-26 07:46 · Score: 2

> it's illegal and thus doesn't serve the shareholders
You appear to be suggesting corporate law breaking has some sort of negative consequence for shareholders. Where did you get that idea?
Re:Which is why... by Bigby · 2012-04-26 07:50 · Score: 1

They'll probably have to through a whole lot more than Italy. Like if someone attacked Assisi or the Dalai Lama. You don't attack people or organizations that at least preach non-violence.
Re:Which is why... by Jessified · 2012-04-26 07:56 · Score: 1

But you make my point. It's corruption in government not corruption in business? It's not corruption in business because we expect as much.
Also it's not called bribery. It's called lobbying. Not illegal.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:02 · Score: 0

Dude. That's pretty much how it works with all nations. Wtf?
Re:Which is why... by Attila+Dimedici · 2012-04-26 08:05 · Score: 1

Was Jonathan Pollard a traitor? The "whistleblowers" in the article are no less traitors to the Vatican than Jonathan Pollard was to the U.S. and were perhaps more rightly called traitors than Pollard (I have heard people argue that Pollard was not a traitor, but have never cared enough to follow their arguments closely enough to see if they have merit). Actually, that may not be true, some of these whistleblowers may be merely guilty of espionage (as some of them may owe a primary loyalty to some government other than that of the Vatican).

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Re:Which is why... by stephanruby · 2012-04-26 08:25 · Score: 1

I thought that was what the confessional was for.
Re:Which is why... by hey! · 2012-04-26 08:34 · Score: 3, Informative

First point: the Vatican has its own law (canon law) which everyone is supposed to follow, despite the monarchical form of government everyone is supposed to follow. So it is possible for somebody to be a whistlblower, although that itself is a crime under canon law. That's why the clergy sex abuse scandal went on so long. Canon law precludes doing anything that would bring disrepute upon the church, which is why pedophiles weren't turned over to the police.
Second point: one of the people they are looking for is a person who suggested that the Vatican has more information about the 1983 disappearance of two fifteen year-old girls who held dual Italian-Vatican citizenship. That makes this an international incident. Their disappearance happened during a dispute between Italian organized crime and the Vatican bank. The mob had been laundering money through Banco Ambrosiano, an Italian bank in which the Vatican bank had controlling interest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Calvi#The_Banco_Ambrosiano_scandal). The implication is that the girls were kidnapped to put pressure on the Vatican to make good the Mafia's losses.
That sounds a bit Dan Browne, but after he was killed in a mob hit, an Italian gangster named Enrico de Pedis was granted burial in a Vatican basilica, an honor normally reserved for cardinals. The speculation is that this was a pay off for brokering a settlement between the Vatican bank and the mob.
The point is that it's not like the Vatican can operate in a vacuum. There are Italian interests involved here: Italian citizens, companies, and mobsters. The Banco Ambrosiano affair also involves the forgery of US securities.

--
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Re:Which is why... by idontgno · 2012-04-26 08:35 · Score: 1

One man's traitor is another's patriot. One's whistleblower is another's spy. One's heretic is another's saint.
History is the consensus choice of alternate terms based on outcome (i.e., which side won the conflict).
In the immediate here-and-now, the choice is entirely based on the speaker's alignment with the parties in the conflict. The behavior of the organs of power is irrelevant to this. Only, perhaps, to the practical fate of the traitor/patriot/whistleblower/spy/heretic/saint. Hence, the availability of another term: "martyr".

--
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Re:Which is why... by mikeycook · 2012-04-26 08:41 · Score: 1

Technically, a traitor is someone committing an act against their own country. So, from that perspective, treason is not the correct charge. Priests, bishops, and cardinals are all citizens of other countries, not citizens of the Vatican. The more appropriate charge might be espionage, i.e clergy member is a foreign national stealing/sharing confidential information. That being said, frankly, I think he deserves a medal.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 09:10 · Score: 1

Oh stop. Courts can and do pierce the veil of liability and hold individuals accountable all the time. That's bad for companies and their shareholders. Even when they don't, companies get slammed all the time. And it's not good for shareholders.
The way people talk, you'd think every company out there was raking in huge amounts of profit, year after year, by breaking the law and robbing people blind. Fortunately, the numbers disagree with your "anti-corporashuny" rhetoric.
Re:Which is why... by Coren22 · 2012-04-26 09:21 · Score: 1

He might even have been fine if it wasn't just a massive dump of classified cables and was instead reporting an actual incident of wrongdoing.

--
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Re:Which is why... by Opportunist · 2012-04-26 09:49 · Score: 3, Informative

The "legality" of a government is usually tied to some kind of justification as to how it is entitled to act as a government. There are various forms of justifications. Some a bit more outdated than the others, but none are less or more valid from a purely objective point of view. If you do not accept a non-democratic government, that's your prerogative, but it's not yours to tell anyone whether he should or should not respect the rule of someone.
The Vatican chose to be an elective monarchy (the only one left, btw). And as long as the marjority of those concerned (read: the majority of roman catholics) accepts this legitimation, it's valid.
It's a bit like money. It only has some value as long as people believe in its value.
Personally, I would not accept that kind of government as mine either. But it's not on me to tell the Vatican that it cannot be an elective monarchy.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 10:05 · Score: 0

ANY nation is only a sovereign state so long as other nations recognize it as such. It's the ultimate in perception dictating reality.
Re:Which is why... by opus_magnum · 2012-04-26 10:07 · Score: 1

Technically speaking, most prelates get a service passport making them Vatican citizens (or subjects or whatever).
Re:Which is why... by Dynedain · 2012-04-26 10:57 · Score: 1

and Italy only matters because the Vatican is functionally an Italian state even if they are allowed to claim sovereignty.
Hmmm... they have their own currency, stamps, armed security forces, ambassadors, and have permanent observer status at the UN (self chosen, as opposed to being a formal voting member).
How are they functionally an Italian state? They operate on the world stage with formal diplomatic ties and global recognition as an independent country, whereas they are not participant entities in the Italian governing system.
By your logic, San Marino (completely land-locked by Italy) would not be it's own country either.

--
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 11:23 · Score: 0

Corruption doesn't stop being corruption just because there aren't laws against it. If the generallisimo of some tin-pot African dictatorship dictates that the laws don't apply to him, is he any less corrupt when he takes the country's oil revenues and puts them in his Swiss bank account?
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 11:24 · Score: 0

The Vatican is a "sovereign" state, in that its sovereignty hinges on the Italian Government continuing to honor the treaties between the two
With such a sufficiently jaded view, all sovereignty is a joke: e.g. "Belgium is a "sovereign" state in that its sovereignty hinges on the Germans continuing to honor treaties and not invading it."

What is worse imho is how the Roman Catholic Church can flaunt local governments with this so-called "sovereignty" with regards to the affairs of the Church
You're committing the common error of conflating the Vatican (a sovereign city-state) with the Holy See (the governing body of Roman Catholic Church). It's a reasonable error to make, as both are headed by the Pope and share much of the same power structure, but technically and politically, the difference is real and important. Your local Catholic priest or bishop is almost certainly not a citizen of the Vatican, and is not controlled by the Vatican itself. He is, because of his religious calling, beholden to the Holy See, but that doesn't involve any sort of sovereign immunity, etc.
(The confusion is compounded by the habit of referring to the central power structure of the Catholic church "the Vatican", but that's a metonym - like referring to the US Federal Government as "Washington". The city of Washington, D.C. has absolutely no power over any other part of the United States, it's just where the actual controlling entity happens to reside. Likewise, the Vatican proper doesn't have any power over Catholics elsewhere, it's just where the Holy See is headquartered.)
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 12:23 · Score: 0

"sovereign state" You mean a theocratic state just like Iran? I love when the religious fundies trip themselves
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 12:52 · Score: 0

Divine Right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieu_et_mon_droit
Re:Which is why... by __aaltlg1547 · 2012-04-26 14:54 · Score: 1

There isn't a veil of liability for criminal violations. The individuals who committed the crimes are simply prosecuted.
Re:Which is why... by VoidCrow · 2012-04-26 17:57 · Score: 1

> Perhaps the British were right way back when w.r.t. the Catholic Church.
Henry VIII may have been a fat, murdering bastard, but he was *our* fat murdering bastard.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 21:12 · Score: 0

Rights? Rights are nothing more than legal constructs, agreements between people for specific treatment. Legitimacy is also a legal construct and agreement.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 21:25 · Score: 1

Henry VIII inadvertently set the Western World onto the path of modernity. He settled the issue of which body has supreme political power, the Church or the State, in favor of the State. Yes, it took a while for the other heads of Europe to do the same (Spain being a serious laggard in this case), the political power of the Catholic Church declined.
The next great steps didn't occur until the American and French Revolutions, when State "divorced" Church entirely instead of maintaining an official religion.
Re:Which is why... by tehcyder · 2012-04-26 23:20 · Score: 1

Actually I am willing to bet the areas where there is less corruption (At least in corruption/dollar) is probably in business as everyone expects them to already be corrupt.
So if a charity worker or union official accepts a free sandwich from a donor, it's corruption, but if a multinational invests/bribes a foreign country millions of dollars for a sweet deal it's just business?

Gotcha.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:Which is why... by tehcyder · 2012-04-26 23:30 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure bribery is illegal in most places in the West. So it's not just morally reprehensible, it's illegal and thus doesn't serve the shareholders. Funny how it all comes back to corruption in government, amirite?
So your argument is that because something is both wrong and illegal, therefore it never happens?

You might want to look up the word "criminal" in a dictionary for a hint as to why this is nonsensical.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:Which is why... by Vlaix · 2012-04-27 02:05 · Score: 1

I don't see how is democracy more legitimate than any other kind of government to enact anything. - Guys, a random bunch of everyday schmucks has decided that you should pay 60% more taxes, eat only poop-grown strawberries and dance salsa on one foot every first Tuesday of the month but, hey, it's the People, so it's got to be okay, non ?
Re:Which is why... by operagost · 2012-04-27 04:21 · Score: 1

I dunno; ask a former Enron stock holder.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:Which is why... by operagost · 2012-04-27 04:33 · Score: 1

No, that isn't what I was saying, Captain Straw Man. I knew someone would totally misinterpret my statement.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:Which is why... by BaileDelPepino · 2012-04-27 05:06 · Score: 1

I very much doubt that Canon law and Vatican law have anything to do with one another. Canon law governs the Church and all Catholics, not the Vatican state. The Church is distinct from and exists independent of the Vatican state, although it is physically seated there.
Now, the Vatican state law may or may not reference Canon law; I wouldn't know.

--
Miren al Pepino! Los vegetales invidian a su amigo, como él quieren bailar. Pepino Bailarín!
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-27 12:15 · Score: 0

The Vatican state is not legitimate. The land was separated from Italy by Mussolini in a desperate attempt to get RC church recognition of his illegitimate fascist regime. The Vatican has no citizens. No one was born there. It is not so much a government as an accounting trick.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-27 15:59 · Score: 0

Its the humans that have rights.. states, even the Vatican are fictions without rights. Fictions are created from thin air by law, but do not exist in nature, hence they have only the rights which humans are willing to give them and such gifts come and go.
Fictions are animated. The animators determine the activity and behavior of the fiction; but the governed are told it is the fiction, instead of its animators.
Corruption is defined as an infringement of human rights. Laundering money infringes the pursuit of the happiness of the many, for the benefit of a few, hence corruption is a violation of human rights, even if done by actors who animate a fiction.
Hence, the Actors who animate the fictions might be guilty of corruption, but fictions are inanimate objects and can be guilty of nothing.
Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-01 00:29 · Score: 0

Where do you think rights come from?
They come from strength, fight and rivers of bloods. Look at the french revolution or the civil war or the civil liberties movement. Rights have come from the violence of a revolted population.

News for Nerds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:28 · Score: 1

How is this nerd news worthy exactly?
Cue the conspiracy theory loonies and church haters now.

Editors, stay in your lane and post tech news please.

Re:News for Nerds by Jeng · 2012-04-26 05:48 · Score: 3, Insightful

Although the story is interesting, this is not the place for it.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:News for Nerds by XxtraLarGe · 2012-04-26 05:55 · Score: 2

I don't see how this is related to anything relevant to this site, even with them wedging Wikileaks into the summary.

--
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Re:News for Nerds by gstoddart · 2012-04-26 06:07 · Score: 2

Although the story is interesting, this is not the place for it.
I don't know, the extent to which organizations want to track down and silence whistle blowers is kind of interesting and apropos to other things we see.
They don't seem to be denying the allegations, just trying to shut them up.
Since it's still people involved, it's not a huge stretch to think there might be some corruption going on.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:News for Nerds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:37 · Score: 0

I noticed they had to shoehorn in the "It's just like Wikileaks, only with parchment and quills — probably." to at least vaguely attempt to make it have a point on the site.
Said attempt failed horrendously.
Re:News for Nerds by Jeng · 2012-04-26 06:41 · Score: 2

It's in Italy* and involves the Catholic Church, of course there is corruption going on. Actually, since corruption is the norm is it really corruption, or just an undocumented procedure?
And although I do agree that there are a fair number of stories on this site regarding action against whistleblowers, does that mean that each story regarding the hunt for whistleblowers should be discussed here, or just the ones that are nerd based?
* Italy, Vatican City, close enough to the same thing.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:News for Nerds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:45 · Score: 1

This is relevant to nerds because of how many nerds track the operations of the illuminati, the vatican, neo-cons, and other secret societies.
Re:News for Nerds by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 07:12 · Score: 2

This is relevant to nerds because of how many nerds track the operations of the illuminati, the vatican, neo-cons, and other secret societies.
We're also fond of examples of the Streisand Effect.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Re:News for Nerds by gstoddart · 2012-04-26 07:32 · Score: 1

And although I do agree that there are a fair number of stories on this site regarding action against whistleblowers, does that mean that each story regarding the hunt for whistleblowers should be discussed here, or just the ones that are nerd based?
Don't know, I don't set editorial policy at Slashdot. :-P
But, many of us are quite interested in such stories in terms of the societal context. Admittedly, it might be a bit of a stretch for Slashdot though since there's little connection to technology.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:News for Nerds by Lehk228 · 2012-04-26 07:59 · Score: 1

Why would anyone hate an organization which allowed pedophiles to flee to the vatican and refuses to extradite them, and rewarded the guy who arranged it with a promotion to Pope?

--
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Re:News for Nerds by Will.Woodhull · 2012-04-26 08:11 · Score: 1

And most of slashdot has read the Da Vinci Code, too. So the current activities of Opus Dei are of some interest to the community.

--
Will
Re:News for Nerds by Muros · 2012-04-26 08:41 · Score: 1

I noticed they had to shoehorn in the "It's just like Wikileaks, only with parchment and quills — probably." to at least vaguely attempt to make it have a point on the site.
Said attempt failed horrendously.
Stupendously incorrect too. The vatican has been collecting tribute from its vassel peoples for almost two millenia. It is incredibly wealthy, and I'm sure that when it feels like bringing the wratch of its dubious god into full force, it will have technology slightly more sophisticated than goose feathers and dried sheeps arses at its disposal.
Re:News for Nerds by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 13:30 · Score: 0

I would have assumed the DaVinci Code was way too 'pop' for the refined science-fiction tastes of Slashdotters.

Hope they make an Anime of it by TJ_Phazerhacki · 2012-04-26 05:28 · Score: 4, Funny

Most of the Catholic-church-secret-agent ones are pretty fun to watch...

--
Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!

Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by sandytaru · 2012-04-26 05:41 · Score: 3, Informative

Any time Japan tackles anything related to Christianity in an anime the results tend to be quite awesome. Wolfwood from Trigun is probably still my favorite. (Not Catholic, but still awesome-funny.)

--
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Ihmhi · 2012-04-26 06:02 · Score: 3, Informative

Don't forget Alexander Maxwell from Hellsing and Rosette Christopher from Chrno Crusade!

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by OzPeter · 2012-04-26 06:28 · Score: 1

Most of the Catholic-church-secret-agent ones are pretty fun to watch...
Well if you want the Church of England version .. you can always hunt down Gerry Anderson's The Secret Service which features Father Stanley Unwin, the parish priest of a rural English village who also worked as a secret agent for BISHOP - a covert branch of British Intelligence that combats international criminal and terrorist threats.

It also featured the "Minimiser", a gadget that shrinks Unwin's assistant Matthew Harding to a fraction of his normal size for the purposes of conducting secret reconnaissance

What could be more exciting as that!

--
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:39 · Score: 0

Also, Witch Hunter Robin.
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by v1 · 2012-04-26 06:56 · Score: 1

Don't forget Alexander Maxwell from Hellsing and Rosette Christopher from Chrno Crusade!
Time for Alucard to open a can...

Limited release approval is confirmed, releasing control on restriction system to level ONE!

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Penguinisto · 2012-04-26 07:00 · Score: 2

I can give props to how Rev. Wolfwood was portrayed, big-time. It showed a shitload of character depth and humanity in the guy.
OTOH, I can point you to at least one series with Catholicism as a subtext: Samurai Champloo - from teh same fine gent who brought the world Cowbow Bebop. Context and Plot? No problem: The main characters were helping the girl looking for her father. This father of the female character (most likely Catholic given the historical context, because he...) was a rebel who participated in the Shimabara Rebellion.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Nrrqshrr · 2012-04-26 07:36 · Score: 2

And Bridget from Guilty Gear... oh wait
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by blue_teeth · 2012-04-26 08:04 · Score: 1

<quote>Most of the Catholic-church-secret-agent ones are pretty fun to watch...</quote> I read "ones" as "nuns". Sorry, I will now wash my mouth and hands.
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Muros · 2012-04-26 08:48 · Score: 1

What could be more exciting as that!
Tea and cucumber sandwiches?
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Muros · 2012-04-26 08:55 · Score: 1

Nuns are the spawn of satan. As an ex-catholic atheist, I have to say that I have never really had a problem with priests I have met, except for the obvious arguments a teenager migh have when confronted with a teacher who was obviously spouting pure garbage. However, I have met nuns who I am convinced were evil. Particularly the one who terrified me as a 4 year old who had just started school and bullied me into eating foul concoctions the school had deemed "nourishing", and the evil bitch from hell who used to cane me when I was 7 and went to music lessons.
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Ryanrule · 2012-04-26 12:27 · Score: 1

Level 0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtN7XTGBDiQ
Re:Hope they make an Anime of it by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-01 06:08 · Score: 0

Robin from Witch Hunter Robin

Crack team? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:29 · Score: 1, Funny

I suspect the Vatican's definition of crack team coincides nicely with Jerry Sandusky's.

Re:Crack team? by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 06:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

Funny that a religious organization would hunt down whistleblowers, but provide shelter for child molesters.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Re:Crack team? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:58 · Score: 0

I dont think the child molesters are blowin whistles....
Re:Crack team? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:13 · Score: 1

This the best you can do? Any good jokes about USA-as-punishment, or is that all too depressing to joke about?
Re:Crack team? by Nrrqshrr · 2012-04-26 07:39 · Score: 1, Funny

It's because children are blowing molester whistles... [/badumtish]
Re:Crack team? by Will.Woodhull · 2012-04-26 08:20 · Score: 1

That seems like consistent behavior to me. The problem with whistleblowers is that they won't necessarily limit themselves to mundane things like bribes and corruption, they might just as easily start giving out details on the clerical ecstasy of introducing young boys into the Sacred Mysteries.

--
Will

What's new here again? by hackula · 2012-04-26 05:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

Has the Vatican not been wasting vast amounts of gullible people's money on stupid shit for over a millennium?

Re:What's new here again? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:33 · Score: 0

wasting vast amounts of gullible people's money on stupid shit for over a millennium
I think that would be a great corporate slogan for the Vatican (^_^)
Re:What's new here again? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:38 · Score: 1, Insightful

Yeah, we should burn down that Sistine Chapel. What a monstrosity sketched by a Ninja Turtle.
Re:What's new here again? by GungaDan · 2012-04-26 05:54 · Score: 0

A fondness for art absolves all wrongdoing? Here's a nice shopping page for you, if you have anything left after tithing to the baby raping mother mary mafia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murderabilia

--
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
Re:What's new here again? by Mindcontrolled · 2012-04-26 07:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

Compared to the money the ebil socialist governments have spent on aid and charity, the contribution of the churches vanishes in the noise.

--
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
Re:What's new here again? by Penguinisto · 2012-04-26 07:27 · Score: 1

I'm not talking totals, I'm talking percentages. Given that "government waste" is (and pretty much always has been) endemic, I suspect you may be on a fool's errand in trying to defend governments (apparently as is the feverish mod with the itchy trigger finger ;) ).
By the way, I never mentioned socialism.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:What's new here again? by Raved+Thrad · 2012-04-26 07:46 · Score: 1

Remember what Uncle George said: "God loves you! He loves you and he needs money!"

--
Life, ultimately, boils down to the Four Fs: Fighting, Fleeing, Feeding, and Mating.
Re:What's new here again? by Mindcontrolled · 2012-04-26 07:47 · Score: 2

"organizational waste" is endemic. Be it government or private. Talking percentages is meaningless, in the end - what is relevant is the total effected. And in that regard we could go without churches without noticing it.

--
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
Re:What's new here again? by peppepz · 2012-04-26 08:46 · Score: 1

The Catholic church only spends 20% of the budget they receive from italian taxpayers in charity. The rest goes to self-sustainment, financing political parties in Poland, etc.
Re:What's new here again? by Penguinisto · 2012-04-26 09:13 · Score: 1

So "italian taxpayers" = all of Christendom?
Wow.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:What's new here again? by Penguinisto · 2012-04-26 09:24 · Score: 2

"organizational waste" is endemic. Be it government or private.
It usually is, but that's too much of a generalization, as it encompasses all organizations, period.

Talking percentages is meaningless, in the end - what is relevant is the total effected.
1) Given differing monetary systems and centuries of counting for inflation, percentage of all income is the only fair measuring stick I could think of (otherwise, if you really want to go there with absolute dollar/euro/whatever figures, one could almost say that the Vatican would have given almost as much towards charitable purposes in total monies than the entire current US National Debt, if not more. I'm pretty sure you don't want to be stuck painted into that corner.)
2) "total effected"? Well, considering that literacy itself only remained alive because of clergy during the Dark Ages, that most hospital organizations more than 100 years old were founded by churches or religious organizations, that art and architecture (including most of the Renaissance) was nurtured by religious groups of various types, and... seriously? You still want to make the argument that "we could go without churches without noticing it"? I'm certain that much of the better portions of history would call bullshit to that.
Atheism is one thing, but being blindly so to the point of supporting some stupendously silly assertions is another thing entirely.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:What's new here again? by peppepz · 2012-04-26 11:10 · Score: 1

We're talking about the Catholic church here, not the whole christendom.
Moreover, the amount of money they receive from the italian government makes up a large entry in the church's balance sheet. If you have information about the other slices, it's welcome.
You said that the church is more effective than governments in managing its money; but - at least in Italy - they actually get lots of (most of?) their money from the government, and they only spend 20% of that money to help the needy; that can't be seen as an example of efficiency.
Re:What's new here again? by Man+On+Pink+Corner · 2012-04-26 17:18 · Score: 1

But by all means, let's stop spending money on aid programs in Africa, South America, and Asia.
Many of which wouldn't be needed in the first place, if the Catholics weren't threatening the superstitious natives with eternal damnation for failing to out-breed the local rabbit population.
Fixing a problem you created does not count as an act of "good."
So, what would you have them spend the money on instead?
Like Michael Dell once said, they should wind down operations and give the cash back to the stockholders. Of course, he was referring to a different cult.
Re:What's new here again? by makomk · 2012-04-28 06:49 · Score: 1

Let's have them stop putting up hospitals in places which traditionally had none otherwise
...and telling people in countries with AIDS epidemics that using condoms causes AIDS? Yes, let's.

and not just Mother Teresa's outfit in India either, because historically this includes a very large number of cities in the US
Mother Teresa was incredibly overrated, possibly because she's religious - she spent most of the donations on prostelytizing rather than actually caring for the sick and dying, most of her own time swanning around the world hob-knobbing with the powerful, apparently refused to provide painkillers to her patients because the suffering would bring them closer to God... the list's quite a long one. The Catholic hospitals in the US, on the other hand, just have a nasty habit of allowing pregnant mothers to die in screaming agony along with their unborn baby when the only way to save the mother is through an abortion. Oh, and since they're normal hospitals, pregnant women who just call up an ambulance or go to the nearest hospital when they have a medical emergency often wind up there without realising it and then can't get transferred out.
Re:What's new here again? by vandamme · 2012-04-30 12:30 · Score: 1

"...and telling people in countries with AIDS epidemics that using condoms causes AIDS?...." etc.
A friend of mine is a priest in northern Uganda, and...you are misinformed.
Read this, you will learn something. http://hliuganda.org/ These are people who are actually helping instead of pushing costly artificial contraception (which is like human Roundup).
And there's a button on the upper right where YOU can help.

Re:But.... by cayenne8 · 2012-04-26 05:32 · Score: 4, Funny

Opus....?

This is the penguin from Bloom County, right?

When did he become a cardinal???? Last time I heard he was still with Bill the Cat in the band Deathtongue!!!!

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........

Now even the Pope hates the truth? by fredrated · 2012-04-26 05:33 · Score: 1

It has seemed like society has been going down hill as more and more people are dishonest.

Et tu, pope?

Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by hackula · 2012-04-26 05:37 · Score: 1, Troll

Especially the pope. He is the head of the largest cult in history. The "Truth" is not high on the list of important things for people who believe in magic, much less preach it.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:46 · Score: 0

The Pope has always hated Truth. He does, however, love little boys.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

Have you noticed 0 Catholics said a word about this article? Believe me its not because we don't know anything or because we are stupid and we just like to give our money out... Think about it for a second.
Most important: Why hate? i mean there is no constructive criticism here, only hate and disrespect. If you don't agree with a religion (Catholicism is a religion not a cult =p) Its cool, but what is the necessity to insult it or the people who believes in it? If you are fat or gay, yellow, black, etc Would you like to hear other people insulting your race or religions/believes?(Even though many people do as you guys are doing it here, wouldnt it be better just to keep silent instead of writing insulting words to other human beings?)
Please people be a better person
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:04 · Score: 0

Catholicism is not a religion, Christianity is a religion. Catholics are a faction or sect of Christianity. It is an old sect, the ones who brought the dark ages over Europe just so they could hold onto power in the region. Following the ways of the Roman Empire. But what happened to the empire, it fell, so we all know the path.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:08 · Score: 0

From Dictionary.com:
cultâ â[kuhlt] Show IPA
noun
1.
a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.
an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.
the object of such devotion.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
Going by the dictionary definition of cult, all religions are cult. In every day vernacular, cult has a negative connotation, but I suppose that depends on one's perspective. The formal definition still applies to all religions.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Penguinisto · 2012-04-26 06:41 · Score: 1

Actually, as slow as the organization moves, it has been cleaning up the messes, both of criminal conduct by some of its clergy, and a lot of the crazy-assed 'theology' that has actually encouraged and hushed a lot of it, for quite awhile now.
I suspect that these (and many other) crackdowns have created a lot of disgruntled people among the clergy.
But you're right in a way - dishonesty is a symptom. It also stems from craven desires and from a lack of personal responsibility - both inside and outside of the church.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:50 · Score: 0

Fuck you, jesus freak.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Cragen · 2012-04-26 06:59 · Score: 1

No, sorry, Your statement is akin to saying "Why hate on Ford (or GM), dudes?"

And, for the record, the dictionary definition of the word "cult" is simply any section of a genre of any religion. Only here in America have people mis-used the word to indicate what they regards as "whackos". So, , by definition, Catholicism is definitely a cult of Christianity. (And generally a group of "whackos" who have drank their own brand of kool-aid, their own completely unsubstantited "beliefs", which are no more substantiated than the belief in spaceships flying in the wake of comets. Just more "believed". Good grief.

Have a nice day.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Mindcontrolled · 2012-04-26 07:15 · Score: 1

Staying a member of the Catholic church implicitly makes you complicity in child rape and the devastation of Africa by AIDS. You may very well be a decent person, hell, most Catholics are decent persons, at least most of those that I know. However, I do not get how you can reconcile staying within that organization with your consciousness. The part of the Catholic church actually wielding political and clerical power is rotten to the core. You can not prop up those people and tell other people to be "better persons".

--
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:27 · Score: 0

I am the AC video poster, and I am a Catholic. You need to go over those lyrics again to make sure you understand what exactly is being said. I believe that you have entirely missed the point.
http://www.lyricsmania.com/the_pope_song_lyrics_tim_minchin.html
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:38 · Score: 0

Staying a member of the Catholic church implicitly makes you complicity in child rape and the devastation of Africa by AIDS. You may very well be a decent person, hell, most Catholics are decent persons, at least most of those that I know. However, I do not get how you can reconcile staying within that organization with your consciousness. The part of the Catholic church actually wielding political and clerical power is rotten to the core. You can not prop up those people and tell other people to be "better persons".
If that is true, then staying a member of the Catholic church implicitly makes you part of the largest charitable organization in the world, feeding more people, educating more children, care for more sick, providing for more underprivileged people than any other charitable organization in the world.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Mindcontrolled · 2012-04-26 07:51 · Score: 1

Yeah, except for, uhm, governments? Church spending puts the "noise" into SNR when it comes to that. Besides, the raped altar boy does give a rat's arse about token charity. It's not like this is a balance sheet. Evil stays evil, even if it accidentally does good every now and then.

--
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:05 · Score: 1

As a Catholic, I am mixed on your comments. While I agree little being said here is constructive, I completely understand the vitriol. The church has buried its head in the sand for most of the last 30 years with regards to the molestation and they continue to insult the flock by pushing John Paul II for sainthood when he was obviously as responsible as anyone for allowing them to continue. While I understand the desire to defend our religion from non-Catholics, I think we are better served by being open and honest and holding our leaders feet to the fire. Instead, Catholics are rapidly falling into two groups: Ultra-conservatives who seek to take the church backwards and those who choose to leave the Church. More and more I find myself in the latter category.
As far as I am concerned, there should be no greater covenant for the Church than protecting the innocents in the flock. While the church has tried to look outwardly impressive, standing up to communism and religious persecution, it has failed in its most basic task. As a result, followers have left the church in droves, both in the US and Europe. The church has responded by only becoming more entrenched and conservative, giving organizations like Opus Dei a larger role and diminishing the influence of women.
I do not agree with the comments that being part of the church makes me complicit in child rape and Aids in Africa, any more than I feel complicit in the deaths of Afghanis and Iraqis as an American citizen, but that's only because I am willing to speak out about it. While I cannot control everything the Church does, I can speak up and fight against its injustices. Only silence makes me complicit.
And if anyone meets Cardinal Herranz, please tell him that Jesus would DEFINITELY be a whistleblower. He was a real man and he wasn't afraid of the truth.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:39 · Score: 0

Staying a member of the Catholic church implicitly makes you complicity in child rape and the devastation of Africa by AIDS.
Also, owning stock in Apple implicitly makes you complicit with human slavery. Right?
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 13:02 · Score: 0

So - you would renounce citezenship, membership, marriage, etc or any other kind of membership in a larger (eternal) organization because of corruption at a specific point in time in some of its members?
It's more complicated than that - you can't state that all US citizens are murderers because of some CIA operation you may or may not be a fan of, etc - same goes here.
Re:Now even the Pope hates the truth? by Nemba · 2012-04-27 11:00 · Score: 1

Yes.

Whistle blower - really by approachingZero+ · 2012-04-26 05:36 · Score: 3, Funny

Never would have thought having a reputation as a whistle blower in the Catholic church would have been a career killer. Matter of fact I would have thought it would result some serious upward mobility.

--
'I don't know what it's called. I just know the sound it makes, when it takes a man's life.' ~ Four Leaf Tayback

Re:Whistle blower - really by TheMathemagician · 2012-04-26 05:57 · Score: 0

Really? You're very naive then. Any whistle-blower who embarrasses the leadership of any organisation is invariably kicked out.
Re:Whistle blower - really by approachingZero+ · 2012-04-26 06:13 · Score: 0

We're not talking about the same kind of whistle blower. It was a really horrible joke. I'll go back to work now.

--
'I don't know what it's called. I just know the sound it makes, when it takes a man's life.' ~ Four Leaf Tayback
Re:Whistle blower - really by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:34 · Score: 0

"Really? You're very naive then."
Look who's talking. He meant the kind of whistle that is blown on your knees.
Re:Whistle blower - really by TheMathemagician · 2012-04-26 06:40 · Score: 1

Oh my bad. I've never heard that term before. Hohum.
Re:Whistle blower - really by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:42 · Score: 0

With that explanation, your joke gets a lot more funny. It like it.

Nobody Expects by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:36 · Score: 0

Nobody Expects The Opus Dei Inquisition!

First order from the Cardinal: by Fned · 2012-04-26 05:36 · Score: 5, Funny

"Round up all the choir boys, we need to probe them to see if they've ever leaked."

Re:First order from the Cardinal: by Anonymous+Codger · 2012-04-26 05:54 · Score: 1

Damn, I have mod points and I couldn't decide whether to mod this Funny or Flamebait. Guess I'll sit it out.

--
No sig? Sigh...
Re:First order from the Cardinal: by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 06:18 · Score: 2

Damn, I have mod points and I couldn't decide whether to mod this Funny or Flamebait. Guess I'll sit it out.
Sometimes flamebait is funny.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade

So much for the morality of the Vatican by StillNeedMoreCoffee · 2012-04-26 05:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

Keep your legs crossed and your mouth shut, expect in the confessional where you can tell us all but no one else. Whats wrong with this picture?

Re:So much for the morality of the Vatican by X0563511 · 2012-04-26 06:17 · Score: 1

That you used the wrong word?

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...

Paging Mr. Stephenson... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:37 · Score: 0

Sounds like the plot of a Neal Stephenson book.

my MIT classmate works at Vatican by peter303 · 2012-04-26 05:39 · Score: 5, Informative

I assure you its more up to date than pens-and-quills. He is one of their dozen astronomers and they have state-of-art observatories around the world .

Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by ks*nut · 2012-04-26 06:10 · Score: 2

Well, they've had some catching-up to do since they finally have pardoned Galileo and admitted that the Earth is not the center of practically anything.
Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:10 · Score: 2, Interesting

Who cares what state-of-the-art equipment they have, when they still believe in ghosts and goblins? All the scientific work in the world does not for one second make up for what this circus of repressive idiots did to Galileo Galilee, or for the actions of the Inquisition, so it makes no difference if they're doing observations, their data cannot be relied upon because they think an imaginary creature created all the stuff they're looking at, with the supposedly state-of-the-art equipment you claim they're using.
Also, as for pens and quills, although every single thing of theirs may be hilariously outdated, let me ask you this: have you ever heard the expression "getting medieval on their asses"? The Catholic Church excels in exactly ONE AREA: tormenting people, and making them regret having ever been born. They're EXPERTS at that shit, the fucking assholes... no one, not even their phony-baloney "god" knows how much misery that fucking organization is responsible for, it's uncountable and boundless, and as long as it continues to exist, it will continue to pervert and warp the minds of its members, and try to spread the evil of its dogma around the world. Much like just about every other religion on the planet. How sad.
Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by iztaru · 2012-04-26 06:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

Oh, come on!
Please read history before you post.
The only reason Galileo was not burned alive is because he was a close friend to the pope.
It was his colleges who wanted him death because his ideas were against the ideas they had based their entire carriers on.
The academic establishment is even more reluctant to change than the catholic church.
Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by peter303 · 2012-04-26 06:23 · Score: 1

A priest did suggest the expansion of the universe before Hubble (the man) documented it. Put the "Fear of Creation" back into astronomer's souls.
Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:28 · Score: 1

> It was his colleges who wanted him death because his ideas were against the ideas they had based their entire carriers on.
Bullshit. Provide any evidence for this.
Galileo had connections, yes, and while he wouldn't have been burned at the stake at any rate, he probably would have died penniless and in prison had he not recanted.
> The academic establishment is even more reluctant to change than the catholic church.
Codswallop. The academic establishment is a bunch of back-biting egomaniacs precisely because their entire field is about challenging each other's assumptions.
Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by Penguinisto · 2012-04-26 07:04 · Score: 1

The only reason Galileo was not burned alive is because he was a close friend to the pope.
...and the only reason he got arrested in the first place was for misusing the pope's Imprimatur (look it up) in his book.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 10:25 · Score: 0

angry much?
actually, the Church does quite a bit of good. no other organization feeds/clothes/houses more people than the Church. One example would be Catholic Charities here in the US, that houses and feeds more homeless than any other organization in the country.
your anger is quite misplaced.
Re:my MIT classmate works at Vatican by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 13:31 · Score: 0

imprimatur
— n
1. RC Church a license granted by a bishop certifying the Church's approval of a book to be published
2. sanction, authority, or approval, esp for something to be printed
[C17: New Latin, literally: let it be printed]

Dan Brown help us all!!! by dryriver · 2012-04-26 05:41 · Score: 5, Insightful

Must... find... albino... assassin... religionfreak... and... send... him... after... whistleblowers... (Amen?) ------ But seriously, what a weird story this is. Isn't the Vatican supposed to be all about "The Truth Shall Set Thee Free" because, erm, Christian belief mandates it? So what is wrong with a little whistleblowing? Why is someone exposing the truth even a "whistleblower" in this particular case? Very strange story all around...

--
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.

Re:Dan Brown help us all!!! by Thud457 · 2012-04-26 05:47 · Score: 2

Isn't the Vatican supposed to be all about " The Truth Shall Set Thee Free "

No, that's the CIA.
Draw what amusing conclusions you will from the above juxtaposition.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Re:Dan Brown help us all!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:21 · Score: 0

>Isn't the Vatican supposed to be all about "The Truth Shall Set Thee Free" because, erm, Christian belief mandates it?
Not at all. There is nothing about that in Christianity. This is an example of people projecting their personal values on the religion. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, is about as close as it gets.
Re:Dan Brown help us all!!! by Peter+Simpson · 2012-04-26 06:57 · Score: 2

Isn't the Vatican supposed to be all about "The Truth Shall Set Thee Free" because, erm, Christian belief mandates it?
You forgot the *first* commandment of any large organization:
- The organization does whatever is necessary to insure its own survival.

True at IBM, true at Merrill Lynch, true at Halliburton, true in the Oval Office and true at the Vatican.
// except that these plumbers stop leaks of "holy water", I guess
Re:Dan Brown help us all!!! by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 07:08 · Score: 2

Isn't the Vatican supposed to be all about "The Truth Shall Set Thee Free" because, erm, Christian belief mandates it?
Not at all. There is nothing about that in Christianity.
Unless you consider a saying attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John to be "in Christianity".

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Re:Dan Brown help us all!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 14:38 · Score: 0

So what is wrong with a little whistleblowing
Last time I did that I had this weird aftertaste in my mouth.

Amongst our weaponry are.. by mevets · 2012-04-26 05:43 · Score: 2

... and nice red uniforms.
I like how banishment to the States has replaced the comfy-chair as the punishment of choice.
Too bad they didnâ(TM)t unleash this hound on the child-rapists theyâ(TM)ve hidden for so long...

Re:Amongst our weaponry are.. by Megane · 2012-04-26 06:20 · Score: 1

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition Inquisition!

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }

Typical Vatican thinking by wickerprints · 2012-04-26 05:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

Let me clearly state from the outset that I bear no ill will against any individual Catholics who wish to abide by the religion of their choosing. But to look at the long history of the corruption and arrogance of the Catholic hierarchy and not feel completely outraged is to facilitate their wrongdoing.

Just two recent examples: First, the child rape scandal. It was going on for decades, while superior members of the clergy would help cover up the abuse of children by pedophile priests by shuffling them around, colluding with local law enforcement to intimidate families, and paying hush money. To this day they fight the allegations, trying to minimize the impact of what they did and frame their actions as that of a small number of isolated "deviant homosexual" priests, while complaining about paying money to victims that they could be using "for the greater good." They don't talk about making reparations or holding accountable the officials who turned a blind eye or even assisted in the systemic corruption of covering up these atrocities.

Second example: this case. So the Vatican has been shown to be corrupt in its financial dealings, and what is their reaction? Hunt down the whistleblowers, rather than punish the ones doing the actual crime! It's the same kind of thinking--what threatens the Church, in their view, is not the failure to do the morally proper thing. It's whomever exposes their leadership for the arrogant crimes they commit under the guise of being holy.

I don't understand how Catholics can sanctify these dirty old men as the self-appointed leaders of their faith. If that's what your spirit tells you, then maybe you should consider the possibility that you're being held spiritually hostage by these people as a way to further their power, and the reality is that if you truly want to be closer to God, there are far better ways to do that than through these morally bankrupt charlatans.

Re:Typical Vatican thinking by crazyjj · 2012-04-26 05:53 · Score: 2

AFAIC, anyone who still gives their money to the Church at this point *deserves* to get used. As long as they're not using my tax dollars, only the money of gullible suckers, the Pope could be throwing orgies for all I care.

--
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by shentino · 2012-04-26 05:56 · Score: 2

I'm all for fools being parted from their money, but not for the bad guys getting to keep it.
Especially when said bad guys are brainwashing people into being more fools.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:59 · Score: 0

Well said.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:02 · Score: 0

"First, the child rape scandal"
80% of the abuse was pederasty, adult men having sex with teenage boys, which is different than pedaphilia. The primary cause of this was the acceptance of people who did not beleive Catholic teaching into seminaries in the 60's/70's/80's. It was further compouneded by the Bishops taking the advice of secular psychologists that this behavior could be cured via therapy. That resulted in the majority of the passing around of offenders. The rate of offence was several times LESS than that in public schools or other religious organizations. The child protection programs insituted in the US Church makes the Catholic Church the safest organization for children; sorry if the facts get in the way of your hatred.
"I don't understand how Catholics can sanctify these dirty old men "
Ignorant generalization.
Let me know when you find an organization of perfect people. Otherwise why don't you do something more meaningful and address the actual teachings of the Catholic Church and try to develop some arguement against them. Making statements that amounts to "People are sinners" are meaningless and a waste of time.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by SirFatty · 2012-04-26 06:13 · Score: 0

"Let me know when you find an organization of perfect people." Apples and oranges you anonymous fuckwit. Most organizations are not full of self-righteous snobs. The priests are pedophiles btw, it assholes like you who try to make the behaviour less vile that it actually is. Now you should get back to sniffing glue.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:16 · Score: 1

You missed the point. It wasn't that child abuse happened, it's that it was covered up and not dealt with when it did occur. Saying this happens other places does not make it okay.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:17 · Score: 1

I don't understand how Catholics can sanctify these dirty old men as the self-appointed leaders of their faith. If that's what your spirit tells you, then maybe you should consider the possibility that you're being held spiritually hostage by these people as a way to further their power, and the reality is that if you truly want to be closer to God, there are far better ways to do that than through these morally bankrupt charlatans.
There have been far worse cardinals in the past. A look back at the Middle Ages through to the Counter-Reformation shows popes that were barely religious and spent as much or more on whores and amusing gymnastic midgets as they did on charity. The problems this causes for devout Catholics have been addressed by various theologians such as St Thomas Acquinas. Basically, the doctrine is that the personal failings of the priest (or bishop, cardinal, pope etc) do not affect the validity of the sacrement. In fact, even a completely fake priest can still give valid confession, last rites etc from the point of view of the layman (although the fraudster is, of course, going straight to hell).
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:18 · Score: 0

Their belief system is not rooted in or based in any way upon reality, so it should come as no surprise that they (the vatican leadershit) is corrupt and evil. Organized religions are NOT about saving people, or making them happy or healthy, they are about CONTROLLING IDIOTS who are willing to believe in superstitious bullshit. Always have been, since the outset of organized religion. It was true of Judaism, it is true of Catholicism and Islam, and it stands to reason that it is also true of Eastern religions too... it is in the nature of the evolution (yes, I said it) of religions that ones that refuse to admit the possibility of the existence of other deities will be subsumed and destroyed by those that don't. So if a religion exists, and is practiced, (that is to say, if their bullshit dogma is believed in) by many people, it almost has to be exclusionary, and some person or group will at some point figure out how to exploit people's stupidity to control them and enrich themselves. The human tragicomedy goes on, and the players are mostly unaware of the game. How sad.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by iztaru · 2012-04-26 06:22 · Score: 1, Insightful

Second example: this case. So the Vatican has been shown to be corrupt in its financial dealings, and what is their reaction? Hunt down the whistleblowers, rather than punish the ones doing the actual crime! It's the same kind of thinking--what threatens the Church, in their view, is not the failure to do the morally proper thing. It's whomever exposes their leadership for the arrogant crimes they commit under the guise of being holy.
Find and replace and will still make complete sense:
Vatican => United States
Church => Nation
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 06:23 · Score: 1

80% of the abuse was pederasty, adult men having sex with teenage boys
So they spent decades providing cover for those men, but now they're outraged that American nuns aren't sufficiently hostile to homosexuality.
Disgusting hypocrites.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:31 · Score: 0

Oops, meant the ones that DO admit the possibility will be subsumed... guess I need a proofreader. :0
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:54 · Score: 0

Not that I think the child molestation scandal was handled properly, but there are a couple points that are universally overlooked by people criticizing the church for it:
1) The church is in the business of "forgiveness". I.E. When someone says "I won't do it again", their tendency / job is to believe them.
2) When you have 50 jobs, and only 30 people to fill them, are you going to fire that (flawed) employee and fall farther behind, or hope that they don't do it again and keep that job filled?
Things that are likely provided by the catholic church:
Your local food bank
Your local hospital (less so now than it used to be)
Your local scout troop
Your local women's crisis center
Go figure... the CAPTCHA for submitting is "Convent"
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:43 · Score: 0

Let me clearly state from the outset that I bear no ill will against any individual Catholics who wish to abide by the religion of their choosing. But to look at the long history of the corruption and arrogance of the Catholic hierarchy and not feel completely outraged is to facilitate their wrongdoing.
Just two recent examples: First, the child rape scandal. It was going on for decades, while superior members of the clergy would help cover up the abuse of children by pedophile priests by shuffling them around, colluding with local law enforcement to intimidate families, and paying hush money. To this day they fight the allegations, trying to minimize the impact of what they did and frame their actions as that of a small number of isolated "deviant homosexual" priests, while complaining about paying money to victims that they could be using "for the greater good." They don't talk about making reparations or holding accountable the officials who turned a blind eye or even assisted in the systemic corruption of covering up these atrocities.
Second example: this case. So the Vatican has been shown to be corrupt in its financial dealings, and what is their reaction? Hunt down the whistleblowers, rather than punish the ones doing the actual crime! It's the same kind of thinking--what threatens the Church, in their view, is not the failure to do the morally proper thing. It's whomever exposes their leadership for the arrogant crimes they commit under the guise of being holy.
I don't understand how Catholics can sanctify these dirty old men as the self-appointed leaders of their faith. If that's what your spirit tells you, then maybe you should consider the possibility that you're being held spiritually hostage by these people as a way to further their power, and the reality is that if you truly want to be closer to God, there are far better ways to do that than through these morally bankrupt charlatans.
Your points are only valid if non-catholic institutions or societies don't have these corruptions. If both the catholic church and society as a whole have the same corruptions, then the corruptions are not an artifact of the church but something else.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Quila · 2012-04-26 08:27 · Score: 1

Find and replace and will still make complete sense:
Vatican => United States
Church => Nation
And we do sometimes put them in jail. Look at Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson. His fellow Democrats finally stripped him of his chairmanships almost a year after the infamous cash in the freezer was found in 2005. He was indicted for several bribery-related counts in 2007 and convicted in 2009, and he's still not in jail.
Okay, maybe that wasn't a good example. But hopefully he'll finally be in jail next month.
OTOH, the guy who blew the whistle on the Secret Service thing down in Columbia is coming out quite well.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by stephanruby · 2012-04-26 08:42 · Score: 1

So the Vatican has been shown to be corrupt in its financial dealings, and what is their reaction? Hunt down the whistleblowers, rather than punish the ones doing the actual crime! It's the same kind of thinking--what threatens the Church, in their view, is not the failure to do the morally proper thing. It's whomever exposes their leadership for the arrogant crimes they commit under the guise of being holy.
I don't understand how Catholics can sanctify these dirty old men as the self-appointed leaders of their faith.
What nationality are you? Are you American? It's not like the US treats its whistle-blowers on the banking system, or on the military any better. How can you sanctify the leadership of your country (whatever that term "sanctify" means to you when you used it for Catholics)?
And if you're of another nationality, I bet I can find similar examples from whichever country you come from. And no, I'm not catholic, I'm not christian, and I don't even believe in god. I just wanted to respond to your obvious fallacy of lumping everyone as one individual.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by wickerprints · 2012-04-26 09:31 · Score: 1

If anyone is committing a fallacy, it's you. I never spoke of similar hypocrisies in other social arenas such as secular government, nor do I disagree that there exist such parallels as you speak of. Your fallacy has to do with the fact that, just because these other problems also exist, that does not mean the leadership of the Catholic Church is any less corrupt or that its followers any less cowed for permitting such acts. If a person commits a crime, you don't just tell them it's okay because other crimes are committed every day all over the world.
As for the meaning of "sanctify," your asking of the question reveals your ignorance. I chose this word deliberately and carefully, for the reason that it is intended to characterize the nature of Catholic doctrine as opposed to secular government (in which at least politicians are ostensibly elected to office, and we are not exhorted to accept their decisions as the infallible representatives of God on Earth). You would do well to study and understand what it means to be a Catholic in the context of what its church leaders tell its followers to believe about the status of the Pope, for then not only you would see why I chose to use this word, but also how the Holy See exploits religious devotion and dangles the threat of eternal damnation to further their own evil purposes.
And again--just because governments and corporations exhibit corruption (albeit through varying mechanisms), does not mean its citizens or consumers are complicit; does not mean what the Catholic church or other religions do is any less corrupt; and does not mean all Catholics are complicit. It depends on what position you stake on the matter, either as a citizen, consumer, or adherent. As I said from the very beginning, I bear no ill will against any individual Catholics for their faith. But in my view, that faith does not require supporting or assisting to cover up child rape or systematic financial corruption. It does not require concepts such as papal infallibility. But if a Catholic somehow thinks that these are merely the small price to pay for what they consider to be the greater good performed by the church, then that's where I must vehemently disagree.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by madro · 2012-04-26 11:20 · Score: 1

I'm a lifelong Catholic (with mod points I'm burning, but oh well), and I agree with the majority of the parent post, and your original post. But there are two items I need to respond to.

concepts such as papal infallibility
Infallibility only applies when the pope speaks ex cathedra. It is reserved for doctrinal issues, not policy. The anti-contraception encyclical Humane Vitae is not an infallible teaching but a matter of individual conscience, and the Catholics who follow H.V. are rare indeed.

If that's what your spirit tells you, then maybe you should consider the possibility that you're being held spiritually hostage by these people as a way to further their power, and the reality is that if you truly want to be closer to God, there are far better ways to do that than through these morally bankrupt charlatans.
I think many liberal American Catholics have been forced to consider this. Among those who stay in spite of the hostility from the hierarchy, there is a general feeling that we have to work to change the church, over a long period of time. The priest shortage will only grow worse over time, and the church will perhaps be forced to change. I know someone who is gay and Catholic who stays because he believes he is called to change the church, even though many members of his family have left.
"Why bother staying?" is a very valid question. Financial and moral corruption should be rooted out, and Catholics and non-Catholics alike can work toward those goals both in the church and in other large instutitions. But as for why I stay, the most Slashdot-relevant quote that comes to mind is, "Because, there is good in him. I've felt it. ... I can save him."
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 11:45 · Score: 0

Actually didn't a monastery just get shut down for something similiar to that a few years ago? :D
I saw it mentioned in one of the previous stories on here.
Gotta do whatever you gotta do to keep your church open right? :D
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by company+suckup · 2012-04-26 18:50 · Score: 0

In many respects giving money to these dirty old men in the Vatican is no different than giving it to someone like Jimmy Swaggart or any other TV preacher. To know and understand even a fraction of their transgressions on this earth and to still support them does not represent faith in God. God does not hear your prayers or need a pedophile in Rome nor a scam artist in the Deep South to do his work.
Re:Typical Vatican thinking by LienRag · 2012-04-29 19:44 · Score: 1

An organisation as big as the Catholic Church is in no way monolithic, and there are intense power struggles, some of them dirty, some of them democratic and transparent. Individual catholics either side with some of the people involved in reformation (like the grassroot movement "we are the church" in Europe), "vote with their feet" by leaving practice, or go on with their religious practice while hoping that either history or God's will would bring an end to this corruption. Remember that the Church hierarchy has actually very little power over the individual follower; the most they can do is beg them for money or deny them a rite (theorically there is the possibility of an excommunication process, but the heavy bureaucratic machinery involved makes it difficult to put in action, and it still would have no effect outside of barring one from holy rite). Even the money given by individual followers to their local catholic church is usually used to pay for local costs; very few or usually none of it goes back to the Vatican. So "individual catholics which want to abide to their chosen religion" as you point it mainly deal with their local priest, which is often a nice chap, and make their decisions about practice mostly in response to the way the local priests behave.

Re:And? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:47 · Score: 1

Only thing more useless than this story is your overused, pointless comment.

A vatican scandal! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:48 · Score: 0

Shocking!

They are quite harsh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:48 · Score: 0

whistle-blower who brought to light excessive overpayments on contracts to friendly suppliers was sent to the USA as punishment

Now that's just cruel and inhuman.

Re:They are quite harsh by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 06:25 · Score: 1

whistle-blower who brought to light excessive overpayments on contracts to friendly suppliers was sent to the USA as punishment
Now that's just cruel and inhuman.
Maybe they sent him to where they thought he was needed most.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade

Checks calendar by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:53 · Score: 0

Okay let me check....no it's not April 1st... checks other calendars.... no....not even on some weird Julian calendar....is this for real???

I don't understand. by gfxguy · 2012-04-26 05:54 · Score: 1

Why is it wrong for an entity to "reward" "friendly" suppliers? This isn't like the government collecting mandatory taxes, it's an entity that largely gets it's money from willing donors, they should be able to do whatever they want with the money. If donors don't like it, they can stop donating.

Or do all you slashdotters making fun of religious people's beliefs suddenly care that they're getting ripped off, as if you didn't feel they were getting ripped off all along anyway?

I would think with all the wealth and opulence of the Vatican, if Catholics already didn't feel like they were getting ripped off, then pointing it out is hopeless.

--
Stupid sexy Flanders.

Re:I don't understand. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:11 · Score: 0

Let's see, why would it by unethical to use donated funds to over-pay for goods and services?
Nope, I can't think of a single reason that an entity espousing the ethics and morality of caring for the poor, judging themselves by the way they treat the least of us or worshiping engraved images should use donations that make it possible for their management and staff to travel the world, keep one of the largest collections or art and operate with tax free status should be held accountable to a constituency that has no voting rights, no enforcement power and no reason, other than fear of the unknown, to operate ethically, either.
Nope, all those guys who dress like women, abuse children and lie about their personal habits should be left to their faith. And the clergy should be absolved as well.
Re:I don't understand. by phriedom · 2012-04-26 07:47 · Score: 1

You're confusing legal and ethical. Anyone who isn't Catholic may not have any say in the matter and there may be no legal authority to stop it, but it would still be wrong if some of the Vatican administrators are using their authority to award supplier contracts to their cousins and pay double. That still doesn't make it a slashdot story, but the parallels to the wikileaks affair, and punishing the whistleblowers does.

--
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Re:I don't understand. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:36 · Score: 0

There is nothing inherently unethical about paying someone an amount of money more than they asked for. In a government theoretically responsible to the people and funding itself coercively (hi, taxes), it would be unethical, because the excessive spending amounts to a type of theft. ... This does not describe the Vatican's relationship to its residents or donors. If a Catholic person does not like the way the Vatican spends money ... stop giving it to them.

You don't mess with these guys by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:55 · Score: 0

They do painful things to themselves constantly to purify their hearts, they look upon the Inquisition as "The good old days".

Re:But.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:56 · Score: 1

No, this is Opus Dei, the evil organization in Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code".

So beware, if you see one that's an albino, RUN. Because you've been transported into a shitty novel and you need to escape from that ASAP before your character development gets stilted and the plot takes an absurd twist and the Deus Ex Machina gets layered on thick.

Will they hang the whistleblowers under a bridge by radicimo · 2012-04-26 05:56 · Score: 1

Like they did to Roberto Calvi?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Calvi

"Claims have been made that factors in Calvi's death were the Vatican Bank, Banco Ambrosiano's main shareholder; the Mafia, which may have used Banco Ambrosiano for money laundering; and the Propaganda Due or P2 clandestine Masonic Lodge."

Seriously, a legitimate conspiracy involving Opus Dei, the Mafia, and the Freemasons. The truth is stranger than fiction.

http://www.threemonkeysonline.com/who-killed-roberto-calvi/

--
100 REM PISS OFF CODE FASCISTS 200 GOTO 100

Yup by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 05:58 · Score: 0

Nobody ever expects the spanish inquisition
(LOL! my captcha was 'witches'!)

WWJHD? by istartedi · 2012-04-26 05:59 · Score: 1

Who Would Jesus Hunt Down? 'nuff said.

--
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?

Re:WWJHD? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:28 · Score: 0

Jesus wouldn't hunt the bankers, frauds and criminals in the Vatican, but he would make sure their hypocrisy was evident, just like the whistle blower that Opus Dei (light) seeks to muzzle.
When the Vatican Bank is held to the same standards that the Church preaches for its flock, we'll all be better off.
Re:WWJHD? by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 07:10 · Score: 1

Who Would Jesus Hunt Down? 'nuff said.
Sounds like a great idea for a superhero crime fighter comic book.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade

And the Catholic church continues it's lost ways by Rob+Nance · 2012-04-26 06:00 · Score: 1

The Catholic church has been lost for a long time, and this is just a sign it's never going to change. They changed the commandments to suit them for goodness sake! Changed the day of worship to suit them. Hid the bible from their followers because they didn't think their congregation could properly interpret the word of God (and also see the truth). Now in a long list of other atrocities, they banish someone for showing what's going on rather than commending them for helping identify a problem. Sorry if this comes across as an attack, but the Catholic church is scary. I think a lot of the people who are Catholic just don't know any better, and I feel for them.

Sent to the USA as punishment? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:01 · Score: 1

a whistle-blower... was sent to the USA as punishment

Wow, that's harsh...

That scratching sound you hear... by sootman · 2012-04-26 06:02 · Score: 3, Insightful

... is Dan Brown furiously scribbling notes for his next book.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

Re:That scratching sound you hear... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:11 · Score: 0

... is Dan Brown furiously scribbling notes for his next book.
Oh, come on. Dan Brown never takes notes on anything factual.
Re:That scratching sound you hear... by mathfeel · 2012-04-26 08:37 · Score: 1

... is Dan Brown furiously scribbling notes for his next book.
Or Ubisoft coming up with Assassin's Creed -- the new millennium.

--
The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't
Re:That scratching sound you hear... by H0p313ss · 2012-04-26 13:23 · Score: 1

These day Brown's stuff is more plausible than reality. (ok, not really, but recent headlines keep reminding me of Stand on Zanzibar)

--
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction

Thanks, I had conspiracy theory for lunch. by Fished · 2012-04-26 06:03 · Score: 1

Could the summary of this article have been any more anti-religious? How is this even "News for Nerds" or, for that matter, News?

--
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1

Re:Thanks, I had conspiracy theory for lunch. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:23 · Score: 0

Parent's a Troll --- general complaints with no elaboration. What's "anti-religious" about the summary? That Catholic scandals exist? That the lead investigator is old? And if I have to read How is this even "News for Nerds" one more time... I'll probably just ignore it, like we all have for the last decade. If you don't like the stories, ignore them, and if you don't like the site then go elsewhere.

Well they could hunt down the whistle blowers.... by million_monkeys · 2012-04-26 06:04 · Score: 1

... OR another option for stopping the leaks would be to clean up the corruption that people are revealing. WWJD?

Re:And the Catholic church continues it's lost way by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:09 · Score: 0

The Catholic church has been lost for a long time, and this is just a sign it's never going to change. They changed the commandments to suit them for goodness sake! Changed the day of worship to suit them. Hid the bible from their followers because they didn't think their congregation could properly interpret the word of God (and also see the truth). Now in a long list of other atrocities, they banish someone for showing what's going on rather than commending them for helping identify a problem.

Sorry if this comes across as an attack, but the Catholic church is scary. I think a lot of the people who are Catholic just don't know any better, and I feel for them.

"They changed the commandments to suit them for goodness sake!"
Uh, no.

"Changed the day of worship to suit them."
It is within the Church's authority to do so.

"Hid the bible from their followers because they didn't think their congregation could properly interpret the word of God (and also see the truth). "
uh, wrong again. The bible has always been freely available. The lack of copies in people's posession in the middle ages is due to the fact that a copy of the bible back then would cost $50k in today's money.

"Now in a long list of other atrocities"
Get your history from folks other than protestants.

Read:
http://www.amazon.com/Catholicism-Fundamentalism-Attack-Romanism-Christians/dp/0898701775/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335463591&sr=8-1
http://www.amazon.com/The-Victory-Reason-Christianity-ebook/dp/B000SEV7OQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335463603&sr=8-1
http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Church-Built-Western-Civilization/dp/0895260387/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335463617&sr=8-1

I for one welcome ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:12 · Score: 0

Cardinal Fang and his comfy cushions.

Re:But.... by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 06:13 · Score: 0

Do they know kung-fu?

Yes, but the 82-year-olds usually prefer to summon an angel to do the ass-kicking.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade

About time we had one... by Harshmage · 2012-04-26 06:17 · Score: 1

An old fashioned witch hunt, that is.

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:20 · Score: 0

Wow, nostalgia rush.

I find this quote funny by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:26 · Score: 0

"was sent to the USA as punishment"
Times change I guess

Re:And the Catholic church continues it's lost way by Black+Parrot · 2012-04-26 06:27 · Score: 2

Wow! The Pope reads Slashdot!!!

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade

The Catholic church used waterboarding! by Megane · 2012-04-26 06:28 · Score: 1

See it right here!

Torquemada - How we doin', any converts today?
Guards- Not a one, nay nay nay.
Torquemada - We've flattened their fingers, we've branded their buns, nothing is working...send in the nuns!

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }

Opus Dei by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:29 · Score: 0

Opus Diablo?

Anyone with a lick of sense... by Jawnn · 2012-04-26 06:29 · Score: 1

...would let this outfit provide "spiritual guidance" (much less, give money to them) why? The RCC has a centuries long history of misdeeds and corruption. Recent events seem to indicate that they've cleaned up their act only enough to no get themselves lynched. WTF, people? Couldn't you pick a slightly less evil church to provide answers to those questions you're to afraid to answer for yourself?

Break out the rack and hot irons by jollyreaper · 2012-04-26 06:31 · Score: 1

The inquistion
Let's begin
The inquistion
Look out sin
We have a mission
To convert the Jews
(Jew ja Jew ja Jew ja Jews)
We're gonna teach
Them wrong from right
We're gonna help
Them see the light
And make an offer
That they can't refuse
(That the Jews just can't refuse)

Confess (confess, confess)
Don't be boring
Say yes (say yes, say yes)
Don't be dull

--
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne

Opus Dei by JDG1980 · 2012-04-26 06:32 · Score: 1

further sources of leaks are now being hunted down by a crack team headed by an 82-year old Opus Dei cardinal.

Opus Dei? If they catch the whistleblowers, will they be strangled to death by albino monks?

Re:Religion by marcello_dl · 2012-04-26 06:38 · Score: 1

> Religion is gay.
The gay news aka the good news aka the gospel, sure.
One guy reportedly comes and says I have a good news for you.
They put him to death and his followers go on like: he died and it's all YOUR FAULT. So your suggestion is quite apt but kind of specialized. Try with more universal/generic/devoid of meaning terms.

--
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol

WTF? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:43 · Score: 1

I don't see how this is related to anything relevant to this site, even with them wedging Wikileaks into the summary.

Even if it isn't news for nerds the fact that such an extreme branch of Christianity is still apparently active and is now censoring people who should be allowed to speak up about the injustices they witness in anonymity does make me classify this article as pertinent to the "stuff that matters" side of things. I for one found myself more interested in this article than the second (of the hundred or so) Bitcoin articles that appeared on the front page.

If you don't like it don't click on it.

Inquisition? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:44 · Score: 0

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Re:Religion by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:47 · Score: 0

Then you must me one religious motherfucker.

The Grand Inquisitor is alive and well... by divisionbyzero · 2012-04-26 06:53 · Score: 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 06:54 · Score: 0

Wow...you'd think English my first language wasn't.

Re:But.... by sammy+baby · 2012-04-26 07:10 · Score: 1

They split up not too long after they changed their name to "Billy and the Boingers". Sad, really.

Brownback by ThatsNotPudding · 2012-04-26 07:13 · Score: 2

Kansas governor Sam Brownback is an Opus Dei member and given his staff already monitors Twitter for mean teenaged girls http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/26/1039899/-Gov-Sam-Brownback-s-staff-demands-apology-from-high-school-girl-who-correctly-noted-that-he-sucks, I'm sure he's already on Team Vatican.

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:23 · Score: 0

My Mac can get me laid so I'm not a sexually-frustrated, basement dweller like you.

The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Quila · 2012-04-26 07:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

God supposedly already knows your sins whether you tell them or not. In fact, he knows them before you even commit the sins, or before you even think of committing them first place. Telling a priest does nothing.

Thus the purpose of confession is so that the Church has the goods on everybody in the community.

Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:41 · Score: 0

you make it sound as thou free will is not at play I don't believe in anything to due with "god" but i do know that the god of the bible dose not know what you are going to do ahead of time free will given to Adam and ever when they eat the apple.
so no he dose not already know.
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 09:20 · Score: 0

I am *not* sympathetic to the Catholic Church as an institution--it is corrupt and needs to be completely reformed or abandoned. I don't even consider myself Christian--more ignostic or atheistic.
I also don't doubt your "confession for control" theory has a kernel of truth.
However, your example is sort of misleading theologically. Lack of God's omniscience isn't the reason for confession, the reason for your confession is your own enlightenment or redemption. E.g., the whole idea that changing your behavior requires you to recognize at some level that something you've done is wrong.
Say you know your spouse is cheating on you. That doesn't mean you wouldn't want your spouse to confess to you, recognizing what they were doing is wrong, and apologize.
As for the other poster, there's nothing twisted in this reasoning. Moral redemption requires change, which requires some recognition that something was wrong. In liberal Christian theology, moreover, the infiniteness of God's love doesn't mean you don't need to ask for forgiveness--you can't offer your forgiveness to someone unless they've asked for it. You still need to ask (God can forgive you anyway, but then it's not offered).
There are logical flaws in all religions, but it's not all about logic, and it's not all flawed.
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 09:22 · Score: 0

Excellent point! Makes me wonder why god doesn't just tell the ex-nazi pope who the bad guys are.
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Quila · 2012-04-26 09:41 · Score: 1

the ex-nazi pope

I'm not a fan of the current bishop of Rome, but calling him an "ex-nazi" is wrong. He was forced by law into the Hitler Youth at 14, drafted at 16 into an auxiliary unit of the Air Force, then later into the regular Army, after which he deserted. His story is much the same as any non-Nazi German of his age.
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 10:48 · Score: 0

Thus the purpose of confession is so that the Church has the goods on everybody in the community.
Um, No.
anyone who knows even the basics of confession knows that the Priest is morally bound NOT to speak about anything that was discussed in the confessional, not with anyone, not even with other priests (or Bishops, Cardinals, etc.). Any priest knows this, and to claim otherwise is purely ignorance of the Truth.
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Quila · 2012-04-26 16:44 · Score: 1

anyone who knows even the basics of confession knows that the Priest is morally bound NOT to speak about anything that was discussed in the confessional
They're also morally bound to not diddle the altar boys, but that went on for a very long time with the church covering it up. An institution will defend itself, period.
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by StillNeedMoreCoffee · 2012-04-27 03:53 · Score: 1

My point exactly, the fact that one person knows your deepest darkest secrets and promises not to tell, does open your wallet to keep in their good graces and makes you listen when they tell you to do something. (for most people, others feel they can do anything and the Church gives them absolution so they are hedging their bets in the afterlife, an insurance plan). But for the church, money and influence.
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by BaileDelPepino · 2012-04-27 04:57 · Score: 1

Thus the purpose of confession is so that the Church has the goods on everybody in the community.
This is such a load of rubbish, it's a crying shame that you got modded to +5 Insightful.
You can think what you will about the usefulness of confession, but you should find out what you're talking about before you show off your ignorance.
The fact of the matter is that if we Catholics had anything to fear after going to confession, we wouldn't do it. We're not as dumb as you seem to think.
You see, priests are not allowed to act on specific information they receive in confession in any way, so they don't. I have zero fear after I've gone to confession that the priest will reveal my sins to anyone. In fact, he's not even allowed to mention my own sins to me outside of confession. For that reason, most priests actively try to forget everything they've heard in the confessional.
But just in case you're uncomfortable (bearing your soul can be embarrassing), there's almost always an option to go to confession with a screen between you and the priest. You and the priest can't even see each other. So, unless you know the priest really well, he's going to have no idea who you are.
And, in conclusion: if a priest ever did break the seal of confession, his bishop would basically crush him to dust.

--
Miren al Pepino! Los vegetales invidian a su amigo, como él quieren bailar. Pepino Bailarín!
Re:The purpose of confession, to the cynical by Quila · 2012-04-27 05:15 · Score: 1

You must have missed the "to the cynical" part.

And, in conclusion: if a priest ever did break the seal of confession, his bishop would basically crush him to dust.
And if a priest ever did get caught committing another mortal sin of raping altar boys, his bishop would basically crush him to dust. Oh, wait, turns out the bishop just covers it up.
There's how things are supposed to be, and how they are. You only trust this institution not to use your information against you, you don't know it doesn't.

Re:And the Catholic church continues it's lost way by operagost · 2012-04-26 07:33 · Score: 1

Indeed. It is common knowledge that the 10 commandments are recited differently in Catholic churches in order to conveniently leave out the part about graven images. It's also historical that the Church resisted translating the Bible into the vernacular (even after the printing press was invented, which made books far more affordable) and this policy was party responsible for Tyndale's execution.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:33 · Score: 0

LOL! Sexually-frustrated, Basement dweller! That's a good one! I'll have to remember that oh so witty come back for the next mac zealot!
FYI - If you need a mac to get laid, you're doing something wrong AND I can access the same porn sites as you, I just don't need to.

The real story hidden here by phriedom · 2012-04-26 07:35 · Score: 1

The thing that got my attention is that one of the leaked letters discusses "the likely date of Benedict's death." Could that possibly be true? Or is the original article writer just trolling to get a rise out of conspiracy theorists? It is so bizarre, it just might be true.

--
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Raved+Thrad · 2012-04-26 07:38 · Score: 1

You, sir, are obviously an iDiot.

--
Life, ultimately, boils down to the Four Fs: Fighting, Fleeing, Feeding, and Mating.

Oh my by the+eric+conspiracy · 2012-04-26 07:41 · Score: 1

Where is Father Guido Sarducci when we need him?

Re:Oh my by Thuktun · 2012-04-26 08:50 · Score: 1

Where is Father Guido Sarducci when we need him?
And here I was thinking of Father Captain Federico de Soya.

doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 07:42 · Score: 0

The Vatican has the right to structure their reporting structure any way they want.

I don't recognize the legitimacy of non-democratically elected rulers (NB the set of theoretical democracies and the set of states with democratically elected governments are not identical). I may not be able to do much about that, but don't tell me they have some "right" to do this. They have the *power* to do this. That is all.

Re:doesn't matter... by peppepz · 2012-04-26 08:33 · Score: 1

The Pope is elected.
Re:doesn't matter... by Coren22 · 2012-04-26 09:23 · Score: 1

Theoretically, the pope doesn't even have to come from the clergy, though I don't know if it has ever happened that they didn't.

--
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?

And in typical Catholic fashion... by Raved+Thrad · 2012-04-26 07:43 · Score: 2

From the article:

'Since then, the Vatican has instead focused on finding out who leaked the letters, which it describes as "biased and trivial".'

Yup, instead of focusing on the problem at hand, or hell, even trying to determine if there really is one, they go looking to punish whoever failed to keep the information under the skirt. Or cassock. Or whatever they call that ugly black dress they wear.

But I guess that's religion for you. Think with your dogma, not your brain, and there is no problem a little reflexive unthinking punishment can't solve.

--
Life, ultimately, boils down to the Four Fs: Fighting, Fleeing, Feeding, and Mating.

Re:And in typical Catholic fashion... by 19thNervousBreakdown · 2012-04-26 08:53 · Score: 1

I particularly like how they call letters that apparently expose corruption, including money laundering, embezzlement, and possible motivations for kidnapping, as "trivial".
Calm down guys, it's no big deal.

--
<xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>

in case you haven't figured it out... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:07 · Score: 0

Don't F*** with the Vatican, dude.

Find and burn them at stake by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:28 · Score: 0

I'm sure the Lord would seak out and burn those who uncover people stealing or corruption.

The Vatican institution is much more important than being moral.

Just like a criminal organization, you go and get them.

Re:But.... by peppepz · 2012-04-26 08:29 · Score: 1

They resort to much more earthly means... And since they're an extra-territorial entity in a country with a strong mafia presence, their own bank can play many special tricks to bless money coming from less-than-pious activities.

whistle blowers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:33 · Score: 0

And I thought the only whistles they blew were made of meat ... and attached to kids.

And Thus... by DaKong · 2012-04-26 08:34 · Score: 1

And thus the Reformation began. Apparently prior to the Reformation it was not even sanctioned for the common people to have bibles they could read for themselves because they might get confused about what it actually says; it was necessary for Rome to tell you what it meant.

Many protestants still don't read the bible themselves and let themselves be led around by the nose by their pastors. However, they do have bibles and could, theoretically, read them. After 1,517 years of not having them, in Christian terms, that counts as huge progress.

--
If not us, who? If not now, when?

Re:Religion by HapSlappy_2222 · 2012-04-26 08:43 · Score: 4, Interesting

I think your post can be one of two things. Since I'm a charitable sort, I'm going to assume it's very witty and not a simple troll from a 12 year old. Here's why:

A few years ago, I was approached by a customer to create 1500 bumper stickers that said "Gay Guys Suck!". My boss got all squeamish, and was really hesitant to do this, as he didn't want our company to be seen as "anti-gay". I couldn't help but laugh at his discomfort, and went ahead with the job anyway.

The customer that wanted the stickers was a buddy of one of my buddies, and they were intending to hand them out at the gay pride parade in Salt Lake City (which is a surprisingly popular event here). The design was a psychedelic rainbow with black text. Oh, and when I say "buddies" I mean two guys that have been together for 15 years, and attend each and every pride parade, doing something like this each and every year.

The sticker was *designed* to generate a knee-jerk response from people who just don't get it, in a very clever version of "Bwahaha... sometimes you straight folks are so silly when you try not to be awkward..."

Don't always take what people say at seeming face value; sometimes there's a deeper concept you might be missing. The above post could actually be pretty clever, viewed in the right light.

Here we are folks: Anyone like Megadeth? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 08:50 · Score: 0

Symphony of Destruction: -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfpgpf6QVnI&ob=av2n & this starting to show its face all over this planet the past 1/2 decade now in many areas of "power".

Inquisition? by gelfling · 2012-04-26 08:54 · Score: 1

that's unpossible.

The definition of God by Quila · 2012-04-26 09:06 · Score: 2

Christians define their god as omniscient and timeless, so there is nothing he doesn't know -- past, present and future. Thus, he already knows what you will choose to do under your free will. If God didn't know, then he wouldn't be omniscient, which would seriously mess with Christian theology.

Reconciling the deity's claimed states of omniscience, omnipotence, timelessness, pure good and pure love with free will, evil, etc., has been a source of absurd twisted logic for quite a long time.

Re:The definition of God by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 10:41 · Score: 0

you apparently don't know anything about Theology, hence your brainless post.
try using the dictionary to look up the words you are using ( omniscience, omnipotence, timelessness, pure good and pure love ) and you will find that none of them exclude the possiblity of free will. for example, how does God's timelessness eliminate our free will? Free will means we can choose to follow God, or choose to do our own thing. This is one problem with Islam, which has no free will, and in most Islamic countries you will face serious consequences for rejecting Islam. Forcing someone to do good (or evil) does not make that person good (or evil), which is exactly why God gave us free will.
God is Love, but that doesn't exclude the fact the you will go to Hell for banging your wife's sister (adultery, another word for you to look up). Here's an analogy: Parents love their children, but still punish them for intentionaly punching their sibling in the nose.
Re:The definition of God by cffrost · 2012-04-26 13:25 · Score: 1

Reconciling the deity's claimed states of omniscience, omnipotence, timelessness, pure good and pure love with free will, evil, etc., has been a source of absurd twisted logic for quite a long time.
"Irreconcilable Complexity" ;o)

--
Thank you, Edward Snowden.

"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Re:The definition of God by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 15:28 · Score: 0

Knowing something will happen does not mean you caused it to happen.
Re:The definition of God by Quila · 2012-04-26 16:07 · Score: 1

Knowing something will happen does not mean you caused it to happen.
That's omniscient. Omnipotent means that everything that happens is directly caused by you, or at the very least allowed to happen by you (with your direct knowledge, you being omniscient), giving implicit consent to the happening.
Re:The definition of God by Quila · 2012-04-26 16:21 · Score: 1

Free will means we can choose to follow God, or choose to do our own thing.
The twisted logic I was talking about appears again. You have no free will other than your deity has granted you (him being omnipotent). In that he has granted free will, by the definition of omniscience and timelessness (past, present, future provide no limits to the knowledge) he already knows what choices you will make before you are even born.
If he does not know, then he cannot be omniscient. If he does not consent to a choice that is against his will, then he is not omnipotent. If you were destined to Hell, it was God's will, no matter how long he let out the leash during your lifetime. Appreciate the loving God who damned you to Hell before you were born.
If you want to check that out in an encyclopedia, refer to incompatibilism vs. compatibilism.

Parents love their children, but still punish them for intentionaly punching their sibling in the nose.
Good parents don't arbitrarily slash the throat of the younger sister who has done nothing wrong, then tell the siblings there is a good reason for it, but they can't possibly understand. The problem of evil in the world, another thing that can't be explained without tortured logic.

The Walker Brigade by bkmoore · 2012-04-26 09:14 · Score: 1

"...hunted down by a crack team headed by an 82-year old Opus Dei cardinal."

An 82-year old commander of a crack team? Sounds like the "The Walker Brigade"

They can be easily bribed by citizenr · 2012-04-26 09:30 · Score: 1

With 4 year old boys.

--
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.

Re:But.... by Opportunist · 2012-04-26 09:39 · Score: 1

Yeah, good documentary...

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Trust us! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 10:42 · Score: 0

The problem isn't our corruption, it's people knowing about it! What's important isn't that we're doing the work of god or in fact doing ANYTHING good, what matters is that we're unquestionably in charge! Shame on you for getting in the way of how things are supposed to work!

I got out while I could by HW_Hack · 2012-04-26 13:34 · Score: 1

My dear mom was a devout Catholic and tried to raise me and my sibs that way. I was kicked out of a Catholic school in the first grade. Many bumpy years later at age 13 I was declared a lost cause when I questioned the whole "He has risen" thing at an Easter Catechism Class. All I was there for was the chocolate eggs.

I'm a "civilian" now and glad to have nothing to do with these manipulative crackpots in the Vatican.

--
Its not the years, its the mileage .....

Re:And the Catholic church continues it's lost way by cffrost · 2012-04-26 13:47 · Score: 1

Read:

"Uh," you want me to read some unlinked URLs to a book retailer's product pages?

If you're going to tell me to read something, at least give me a working link to a working .torrent or .pdf.

--
Thank you, Edward Snowden.

"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by RobotRunAmok · 2012-04-26 14:46 · Score: 2

My Mac can get me laid so I'm not a sexually-frustrated, basement dweller like you.

Yes, but can it get you laid by a girl?

Re:Religion by VoidCrow · 2012-04-26 17:54 · Score: 1

Hmm... so what you're saying is: sufficiently nested irony is indistinguishable from a 12-year-old's humour? Okay.

Cake or death? by Richard+Kirk · 2012-04-26 23:32 · Score: 1

The church used to excommunicate them, and send them to hell. Now, Hell isn't scary enough. They have motorbikes in Hell if you believe in Meatloaf. So they threaten sinners with the US. The first circle of virtuous pagans go to Washington. The patricides and regicides go to... Detroit.

Lets put it to the test. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-26 23:48 · Score: 0

If they're really supported by God, The Supreme Being, then they will be immune to carpet bombing and invasion.

Lets give it a go.

Or is the truth that they are a legitimate government because OTHER legitimate governments agree it is one, therefore the "outside the government" would be "the rest of the world". Ergo, he's a whistle blower.

PS you're also wrong in that you have already said it's a sovereign government. However, there are OTHER sovereign governments. These, being sovereign, are not subsidiaries of the Vatican, therefore are "outside the government" and someone to blow the whistle to.

Re:Religion by HapSlappy_2222 · 2012-04-27 02:39 · Score: 1

Nah... more that 12-year-old humor (or, rather, insults) are so prevalent that we've decided it's not worth looking deeper for nested irony. I do like the term "sufficiently nested irony", though. Beauty.

This is what is termed DANGEROUS CULT!! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-27 03:04 · Score: 0

Here's how to measure how DANGEROUS the CULT is.
http://www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html

None are more or less valid? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-27 05:53 · Score: 0

I would argue that your use of the phrase "as long as the majority of those concerned" belies your claim that "none are more or less valid". It implies that you agree that governance is contingent upon the consent of those governed, which in turn implies that, at least, a 'majority rule-style of governance, in which a certain equality of rights of all people is recognized' is objectively more valid. :)

Re:None are more or less valid? by Opportunist · 2012-04-30 01:25 · Score: 1

Every government is by definition dependent on people at the very least not openly fighting it. That doesn't mean that they have any say. In the middle ages, divine right and feudalism were widely accepted and at the very least tolerated by the majority. But this majority had by no means any say in how government acts or how, let alone by whom, they want to be governed. Was it any less legitimate than our modern democracies? Objectively, no. Subjectively, we might disagree and argue that divine right is unacceptable for us and that we do not accept this kind of legitimation.
But governments are by their very definition dependent on the acceptance of those ruled and governed. Else their power is pretty close to mine when I choose to issue a law. I guess nobody will really care too much if I make eating candy a crime punishable by hanging. And if I should act upon said law, people will come and haul me to jail. Because I have no legitimation to do that.
So technically, yes, the legitimation of governments is, in the end, dependent on its subjects acceptance of said legitimation. That does not mean, though, that they have any say in the government. Only that they have to accept the legitimation it is based on. As people who grew up in a democratic society, it seems maybe odd to us to accept anything less than a democracy as a legitimate form of government, but maybe in 500 years people will wonder how we could tolerate people making decisions for us instead of making them ourselves, and how we could even fathom this to be any kind of legitimation, just because every four or so years we get to choose someone else to act as our "king".

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-04-27 08:13 · Score: 0

LOL! Sexually-frustrated, Basement dweller! That's a good one! I'll have to remember that oh so witty come back for the next mac zealot! FYI - If you need a mac to get laid, you're doing something wrong AND I can access the same porn sites as you, I just don't need to.

Hell--you can access some of the sites he *can't*. Do you have a fetish for ActiveX controls?

Slashdot Mirror

Opus Dei To Hunt Down Vatican Whistle-Blowers

286 comments