Pope faces protests and apathy on visit to Britain

[DJKillaQueen]

From Guardian.co.uk

Survey reveals that 77% of people questioned felt taxpayer should not contribute to cost of pontiff's trip.

When Benedict XVI lands at Edinburgh airport on Thursday, he is unlikely to get the rapturous reception that greeted John Paul II on his visit to Britain in 1982.

Over the coming days, the pope will be faced with protesters demanding action on clerical sexual abuse of children and voicing anger at the ?20m cost of the state visit, and must also contend with public apathy.

A recent survey revealed 77% of people questioned felt the taxpayer should not contribute to the cost of the visit, with 79% saying they had "no personal interest" in the pontifical trip.

But others believe Benedict's visit provides a rare chance to put the Vatican in the spotlight and ask the pontiff difficult questions.

Human rights activists, secularists, survivors of clerical sexual abuse and reform-minded Catholics have formed a loose coalition to ensure the opportunity is not wasted.

The movement is spearheaded by Protest the Pope, a group with nearly 9,000 Facebook members, which is planning a march in London in a week to demonstrate against the visit.

Disparate as many of the constituent groups of Protest the Pope are ? from Doctors4Justice to Southall Black Sisters ? they appear to agree that child abuse is at the top of their list of grievances.

Terry Sanderson, the president of the National Secular Society and a leader of Protest the Pope, said that while secularists objected to the government co-funding a religious visit, theresex abuse was "the one thing that the pope personally needs to answer for".

He added: "He said that penance is a better approach to child abuse than altering the structures of the church. We are being told constantly that the church has changed its ways, but he's saying that they're not changing their ways."

Andrew Copson, the chief executive of the British Humanist Association, said he saw the abuse as "another good example of how the Holy See uses its powers to frustrate justice".

Copson, who does not believe the Vatican should be recognised as a state, wants to use the visit to question its status and practices.

"We hope that people will realise that Pope Benedict is not just the head of a religion that has many adherents and does a lot of good work, but that he and the Holy See use their powers to make people's lives worse," he added.

Others have a more personal interest in seeing the pontiff held to account. "There have been words of apology and statements, but as survivors, and for survivors, we want something substantive to come from the church," Anne Lawrence, the chair of the support groups Macsas (Minster and Clergy Sexual Abuse Survivors) said.

"We want them to commit themselves to finding out how many victims there are. We want the pope to say what he will do for victims of abuse."

Until the Vatican developed a coherent policy on child abuse, set up redress boards and held inquiries, "the absolute scandal" of the church's involvement in sexual abuse would continue, Lawrence added.

Although it is the secularists who are making the most noise, Pope Benedict also faces criticism from within his own flock.

Pat Brown, the spokesperson for the British group Catholic Women's Ordination (CWO), said: "We are looking for the church to be more collaborative and to talk and listen to people more. It seems to us that the church is moving backwards, not forwards."

Despite being a religious organisation, Brown said CWO had common ground with Protest the Pope. "We often find ourselves aligned with people we do not agree with on everything, but on the basic principles, we do agree: it's a nonsense that the Vatican should be seen as a state."

But some progressive Catholics are giving the protests a wide berth. "We're not in the business of demonstrating or anything like that," Bernard Wynne, of Catholic Voices for Reform, said.

The group, which describes itself as the church's "loyal opposition", wants a frank conversation on issues such as women's ordination, sexual orientation and clerical celibacy. To that end, it will pass six questions to the pope through his entourage.

"What we have in the church is an appalling misogyny where priests, bishops, and some lay people would be appalled at women being involved," said Wynne.

"There is a whole series of issues about the equality of women, but also sexual orientation ? One could only say that [the church] is intolerant of people of a different sexual orientation."

Austen Ivereigh, a Catholic journalist and the organiser of an unofficial response unit called Catholic Voices, said that although the church was being "put under the spotlight as never before", he believed people were looking forward to the visit.

"There has been criticism from a small proportion of the population who oppose the visit in principle and they have been very ferocious in their attacks, but one wonders who these people speak for," he said.

"The attacks seem to be coming from militant secularists and radical humanists disturbed by faith who want to chase religion entirely from the public square and deny it any voice at all.

"Their irrational hostility and fanaticism undermines their claim to pluralism and demonstrates that actually it is the pope who is the true humanist."

Oddly, Benedict may get the warmest reception from Muslims, whom he most famously offended. "It's a brilliant opportunity for two of the biggest religions to come together and we're playing a part in some of the events," Kawsar Zaman, a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain, said.

He said the pope had "clarified" remarks in which he quoted a Byzantine emperor who described Islam as "evil and inhuman", but conceded that a "small minority" of Muslims might still be angry.

"As with every issue, there are people who are going to be against it, [but] we can't have string attached to every Muslim," he added. "You always have the risk of people protesting."

The pope's spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, said that there had been opposition on past visits, but added: "In this journey to Britain, it's broader because there are more groups of an atheist nature or that are anti-papal which are active and have demonstrated."

It astounds me just how easily the Vatican gets away with so much.

[????]

It astounds me just how easily the Vatican gets away with so much.

Would you say the same thing about Islam?...Just wondered

[louisiana]

I'm right behind the NSS and the BHA but I can't be bothered to protest. So apathy rules :)

[cate]

I blame Tony and Cherie.

[DJKillaQueen]

I would Quids but Islam doesn't have a figurehead at it's helm like that of the Pope, the ultimate authority for all catholics in the world (whether they listen to him or not). The Vatican are practically untouchable in Italy...

He is what keeps Catholicism the same insane branch of Christianity it has always been. In that respect it is no different than the extreme branches of other religions whose leaders we freely condemn and wouldn't dream of inviting to visit this country let alone spending 20m for the privilege.

[louisiana]

"The Pope is a little gay" - Radio 4

I think they were referring to the shiny red Gucci shoes.

[DJKillaQueen]

He is quoted as having said that homosexuality was as big a threat to the planet as the destrustion of the rain forests.......I'm still trying to work that one out without wondering why he's wearing gucci shoes as well lol!

[keano77]

What absolute drivel!

DJKillaQueen, while I admire your opinion-on-every-matter approach, you are in serious danger of looking like a complete and utter fool here.

As a matter of urgency I advise you to plead with admin (on bended knees if necessary) to move this to the lounge where it is better suited as a jokey comment on the forthcoming visit.

Where does one even start on your cut-n-paste argument above?

1. What survey? (the BBC one where 500 people were questioned?)

2. Who are these non-entities you quote? (The movement is spearheaded by Protest the Pope, a group with nearly 9,000 Facebook members)(Copson, who does not believe the Vatican should be recognised as a state)

Are you really trying to make a serious point by quoting Facebook, and people who do not 'believe' a sovereign state is a sovereign state? I'll be very interested to see how many of the 9,000 Facebook members actually get out of bed (weather permitting) to march in London to protest (I'll wager 10).

[DJKillaQueen]

The article is from the Guardian (as the opening line of the OP says - or did you not read that?). It is current issues and I think given the Pope's despicable attitude to sexual abuse and other very serious issues that the drawing room is the right place for any discussion of him in light of the coming state visit. Admin do moderate the Drawing Rooom and would already have moved it if they thought nencessary.

The opening article is not written by me but I think many people would agree that there is much to debate about this Pope and to ask if we should be using tax payer's money for him to visit.

*And if ever I worried about looking foolish I would never step anywhere near a forum lol.*

[louisiana]

From the ticket sales - ticket sales! so ppl have to pay for this stuff! - it seems that apathy reigns.

[Ridgley]

I really don't have a problem,with the pope visiting Britain no doubt the Catholics will be pleased no different when you have other religious leader visiting our shores, some of them have very dark ages points of view you mentioned some of the things that has been happening in the Catholic church whose to say it is not happening in other faiths but it has not come out as yet I am not saying it is right but he is without sin cast the first stone

[taper]

Keano77

This is an entirely legitimate set of issues to flag in the Drawing Room. Hitler youth, red shoes, etc would belong in the Lounge.

[JonC]

There is a lot of money being shelled out on security for the Pope's visit to the capital. Quite right too as there are a lot of children in London.

[jctg]

JonC Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is a lot of money being shelled out on

> security for the Pope's visit to the capital.

> Quite right too as there are a lot of children in

> London.

Ba-dum ching!

[Medley]

Good one JonC.

I'm uncomfortable with public subsidy of whatever kind for such visits, just as I am for ex-premiers such as Blair and with the Civil List. I can see arguments in favour of all but think the Royals could well self-fund, Blair could well contribute to his own security costs given that they are partly driven by his globe-trotting to earn vast amounts of cash and that if the Pope wants to come here and the Catholic Church in the UK wants to have him they can at least pay towards the security costs for that too.

The focus on the Catholic Church in recent days has reminded me what a startling contrast I found between

- the open spirit of enquiry I saw in the Vatican's decorations (the Signature Room's murals by Raphael with one wall having the official line and the other wall interrogating it; Michaelangelo's work in the Sistine chapel being so full of questions, palpable humanity, doubt, the ups and downs of human emotions as well as the divine, godly and reassuring; even the depictions of biologically interesting animals collected by an 18C Pope)

and

- its recent occupants, with their depressing insistence that homosexuality is a great threat, that condoms do not work, the abysmal handling of the sex abuse scandals.

I must be an aggressive atheist.

[taper]

I'm a passive-aggressive secularist. I'm quite sullen about the lack of separation between church and state in this countyr.

[Santerme]

To me it is the same as allowing in the head of a drug cartel..

[Marmora Man]

To me it is the same as allowing in the head of a drug cartel..

I'm a libertarian atheist - to me the visit was just an irrelevancy. Spoilt the newspapers by filling pages with stuff I had no interest in whatsoever. If the pope and his followers wanted to "do their thing" so be it, it didn't affect me, no one made me join in and that was fine by me.

Working yourself up into a froth about the visit by yet another representative of an ancient belief system based on legend and myth seems, to me, a waste of time.

[DJKillaQueen]

I only objected to the money spent on his visit by our government. The Pope can do and say what he likes but when he describes the likes of me as being 'as big a threat to the planet as the destruction of the rain forests', I have an asolute right to demand not a single penny of my taxes is spent bringing the obnoxious dinosaur here.

[Santerme]

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To me it is the same as allowing in the head of a

> drug cartel..

>

> I'm a libertarian atheist - to me the visit was

> just an irrelevancy. Spoilt the newspapers by

> filling pages with stuff I had no interest in

> whatsoever. If the pope and his followers wanted

> to "do their thing" so be it, it didn't affect me,

> no one made me join in and that was fine by me.

>

> Working yourself up into a froth about the visit

> by yet another representative of an ancient belief

> system based on legend and myth seems, to me, a

> waste of time.

Oh, it didn't effect me either personally, I am safely tucked away in Maryland in 32 degree daytime heat and 100% humidity..too hot to sleep.

I just object to our hosting a man who is personally complicit in covering the action of priests who are guilty of child abuse.

[Magpie]

The primary responsibility of the government is the security of its people. Therefore how can one object to security being provided on occasions where large numbers of people are gathered together (ie the Pope visit). The security is there to protect and police them as much as it is to protect the pope. Any major event requires additional policing costs.

The key complaints against the pope seem to be that he was member of the Nazi youth, he is against homosexuallity, proposes abstinance rather than condoms, and his organisation is associated with child abuse. Taking them one at a time

1) He was conscripted into the Hitler youth - he didn't join of his free will, to condemn him for that is to condemn all germans of his generation who effectively had no choice other than face death in a concentration camp.

2) Sex abuse issue - I doubt that sex abuse is any more prevalent in the catholic church than any where else - the church however is guilty historically of covering up sex abuse. The Pope has made numerous statements apologising for whats happened in the past, and has made it clear that in today's chuch it will not be tolerated. Not sure what else he is supposed to do

On other issues such as contraception, homosexuality, he is simply stating the doctrine of the church, and refusing to bend in face of secular assualt in the way that the COE does. Not sure why non-catholics feel they can demand the Catholic church changes in doctrine - its none of their business. If you don't like the doctrine you can leave the church, unlike in Islam where in some countries it is against the law for muslims to change faiths or be athiest.

[silverfox]

Santerme said:

"...Oh, it didn't effect me either personally, I am safely tucked away in Maryland in 32 degree daytime heat and 100% humidity.."

Most people on this thread seem safely tucked away in fairyland given the half-truths levelled against the Pope. Thankfully, the warm welcome and hospitality of the British people, who turned out in their hundreds of thousands, dispelled the apathy lie. As for protests, the handful of people that were visible were all a bit Private Eye, Dave Spart-ish "..."sickening... totally sickening... worse than Hitler..." "continued on page 94" stuff.

[DJKillaQueen]

On other issues such as contraception, homosexuality, he is simply stating the doctrine of the church, and refusing to bend in face of secular assualt in the way that the COE does. Not sure why non-catholics feel they can demand the Catholic church changes in doctrine - its none of their business.

Because human rights must always come before religious fanaticism, that's why. I live in a secular country that respects human rights. There is no place here for any religious leaders that sanction prejudice against an entire group of people. And THAT is why so many people have protested about the money spent on his visit......money spent on protecting him from assassination as much as anything else.

I assume you include the abused by catholic priests in your description of those in protest of the Pope Santerne? Or have you conveniently forgotten about those people.....or those who may not have got HIV if only they hadn't listened to their Catholic Priest and Pope? The views of this Pope have consequences that have ruined lives forever.......and yes the same can be said of other branches of other religions...and they are all equally destructive for it.

It is completely the business of anyone that seeks to end prejudice, and see the laws of common sense before archaic belief systems based on superstition and unproven myth, commonplace. And those people will continue to criticise freely where criticism in due.

[Brendan]

Funny, I thought freedom of religion was generally considered a human right. Adherence to Catholicism is entirely optional so their teachings, no matter how unpleasant, cannot by definition be an infringement of human rights.

Now if we were talking historically about the Holy Roman Empire say or about modern Islamic countries where the state and the church are one in the same thing it would be a different story.

[DJKillaQueen]

Freedom of religion is a human right, but there is no conflict with that and saying that expressing views that are clearly perjudice sactioned by that religion should be openly criticised. I just don' agree that it's no ones business what a religion decides to practise and preach. After all, the majority of people who are of any kind of religion are usually so because they were born into that culture and then given no freedom as children to learn any alternative. That's why I object to faith schools for example. Most religions operate on a system of oppression and fear...maintained by those that rule them. There's nothing 'free' about any of that.