USA, Canada / Poles Living in the Chicago Area [300]


Where is that deli located? Looks like a place I'd like to visit next time I'm in Chicago.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

My question has nothing to do with comparing America with Europe. My question is how does the German court ruling not offend the text of Article 11 of the EU Fundamental Rights Charter.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

Who determines what is controversial or inflamed rhetoric? Where in Article 11 does it say one cannot propose controversial opinions or inflamed rhetoric?

I haven't read the article, but if the priest is simply stating homosexuality within the priesthood is causing problems within the clergy, how is that not legitimate free expression?

You seem to espouse an autocratic streak against opinions that differ from either your own or the zeitgeist, Lyzko

If we are not to allow controversial opinions, how do we innovate or grow in knowledge? Think of all of the scientific and cultural discoveries born from controversial opinions. Hell, not too long ago, the thought that homosexuality would be considered normative was controversial and inflamed rhetoric.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

Yeah, good question.

I think it may be that most conservatives accept the right to have any opinion, and instead of calling it hate speech, they will defend themselves by arguing how they are not nazis. In other words, having a free exchange of expression.

Although, I've noticed that some (not many) conservatives are starting to call for such speech to be censured. The old what's good for the goose is good for the gander approach. A very slippery slope.

How does this work, BB? It seems obvious to me this ruling is a violation of Article 11. If the priest loses it on appeal, can he take it to EU? And, if EU sees it as an obvious violation of Article 11, will the German courts be forced to quash its ruling?

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

My main question is about this case in light of Article 11 as it is written. Not about the priest's opinion, so much. There seems to be a conflict between German law as BB explains it and Article 11. Because Article 11 does not seem to put the kind of limits on freedom of expression as does German law as described by BB. So, I'm wondering how this conflict gets resolved legally-if, indeed, there is a conflict.

I haven't read the article, and the links BB sent are in German-I'm one language trick pony, so I don't know what it's contents are.

I've have seen WAY TOO MANY instances of Catholics who have simply explained reasons for not accepting homosexuality as normative or critiquing homosexual activity/agendas without showing any hate toward homosexuals. Their only "offense" is not accepting homosexuality as legitimate or normative, yet they are accused of hatred. So, I'll reserve a judgment on this priests writings until I read it in English (that isn't translated by google).

As far as speaking out against priest who raped or molested children, he may be doing that in his speaking out against homosexuality in the priesthood. In America, over 80% of all known cases of abuse by priests were homosexual in nature, ie priests sexually abusing pubescent boys.

My guess is this Polish priest is bringing this topic up right now, because the Catholic Church in Germany is currently pushing a teaching on homosexuality that is contrary to Church teaching.; which is, by definition, heresy. It is known that there is a homosexual clique within the clergy and episcopate (eg the McCarrick Saga) that protects its own, so he may be up to something.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

I still can't find the article that caused the controversy--not even in German or Polish, let alone English.

However, I have found out more about the supposed hate-filled priest, Fr Dariusz Oko. I am quite familiar with him and his position on homosexuality within the Church and I've never heard him saying anything hateful. His whole starting point is about having a faithful Church that pastors the faithful to Christ. He has identified a major cause of the moral confusion within the Church coming from the homosexual lobby within the Church--he has stated this explicitly and has provided examples and stats to support his claims. He sees these priests and bishops within the homosexual clique as hypocrites who do untold damage to the veracity of the church's pastoral mission. I've never heard him call for the persecution of homosexuals or inciting violence against homosexuals.

Just recently it has been uncovered that apps for gay hookups have been used within the Vatican, in places where only clergy and official staff are allowed. Just recently the general secretary of the US Bishops Conference resigned because he was found to frequent gay hookup apps. Not to mention the many stories that have come to light since the turn of the millennium of homosexuals within the Church, including within the episcopacy.

I'd hope that anyone who may even disagree with the Church's teaching, hate the Church, or be full-fledged pro-homosexuality can see where this would be a problem of hypocrisy that does damage to the mission of an institution that does not accept homosexuality as normative.


The law, even good ones, are discriminatory. They are in place to ensure certain behaviors are protected and others are disallowed and penalized, i.e. discriminated against. So, it's not so much about discrimination as it is about the values of a society that are to be promoted and protected. So, can we not have an open exchange of ideas about discrimination without it devolving into hatred and violence? Can it not be a discussion that works out a society's values--arguing the pros and cons? I'd think, in a democracy, that's kind of how it works.


Well, it's conjecture, but if I had to place odds, I'd go with 2:1 he is.

I'm still confused about how all the laws of EU and individual countries work. Is the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights actual law or more of a guiding principles type of thing?

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

@Novichok

Well, they are enemies of free expression and an open exchange of ideas. Now, they do need a righteous ass-whooping.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

@jon357

The RCC never banned or tried to ban books. It's another one of those myths about the RCC that floats in the aether that the intellectual gullible like to gobble up. The Index Librorum Prohibitorum contained books that were judged theologically erroneous or immoral that was incongruent with the faith of the Church and a corruption of morals. It didn't outright forbid the reading of these books.


It's a good question. It does seem odd that the German priest filed the suit. Did Oko attack Rothe directly? If not, why would Rothe file the suit?


That's good to hear. But, before I take your assertion and run with it, can you provide the basis for your claim? Where does your expertise in this matter lie? Are you a member or on staff of a local or Vatican RCC curia? Have you spent significant time investigating whether or not there are homosexual cliques and lobbies within the RCC? Because, I happen to know people who are, and they conclude something different than you, based on experience or the evidence they have been privy. Plus, Pope Benedict (who I am positive is exponentially more knowledgable about the inner life of the Church than you and me put together) even acknowledged homosexual cliques within seminaries in an essay he wrote somewhat recently about the church and sex abuse.


Support in the form of blessing homosexual couples, which is contrary to the clear teachings of the Church. Again, you can disagree with the Church on this, but I'd hope it'd be evident that this priest is in conflict with the Church he is ministering in and representing. The Church clearly teaches that homosexual acts are grave sin, to minister in a fashion that condones homosexual acts by blessing it is clearly in violation of Church teaching. This does cause confusion, tension, and erodes confidence within the Church--like a cancer or a plague.

I think what Oko is guilty of is confidently shedding a bright light on homosexuality within the the Church (no one has offered proof to the contrary, all you get is proclamations of "there is no cliques and lobbies" without proving the claims there are cliques and lobbies are false or explaining how so many prelates and clergy kept keeping on (some ascending high up the ecclesial ranks) as accusations of sexual impropriety mounted against these guys) and offending the sensitivities of the over-sensitive.


Firstly, have you read anything by this guy? I have and he doesn't say anything hate-filled in what I've read and heard from him. Secondly, it is believed by some (including members of the College of Cardinals) that one of the reasons Benedict XVI resigned was because he realized how big a problem this was in the Church and he didn't have the energy to tackle it--B16 never said that, so it's conjecture, but we he did address this issue several times and was met with a lot of interference, including from Cdl McCarrick here in the US who repeatedly downplayed the Vatican's directive of tighter scrutiny of seminary candidates and disallowing guys with deep-seated homosexual tendencies from entering seminary.


I'm glad it's not just me.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

I think Iron is right.

BB and Tacitus, it seems like you are going off the rails. Have you read the article Oko authored (not an article about the article, but the actual article written by Oko)? Did he say that homosexuals are the cause of pedophilia? I thought this guy's "offense" was saying that there is a gay clique and lobby within the church that is acting as a cancer, a plague, etc on the church.

If he is saying pedophilia is a result of homosexuality, then, I agree, he's wrong. It may be different in other parts of the world, but from credible recorded cases in the US, less than 10% were pedophilia; most of the abused were post-pubescent boys. So, the main problem isn't even pedophilia, and I fail to see how homosexuality equals pedophilia.

But, I don't think his point has anything to do with pedophilia. His main point is homosexuality is rampant among the ordained within the RCC and they are protected by a group within the clergy and leadership of the Church.

For a Church that sees homosexual acts as contrary to the natural moral law, don't you think that those who engage in homosexual acts, accept it as it normative, live a gay lifestyle, etc may cause a corruption of the teaching and velour of hypocrisy? Again, you can disagree with the Church about its teaching all day long, but do not the men and women of the Church who agree with this teaching have the right to express it? Can they not voice their concerns and assessments of what they, at least, perceive as something that is damaging the Church, whether they characterize it as a cancer, plague etc.?

Oko isn't the only one who thinks there are gay cliques and lobbies. (And this is also answering Jon) Benedict 16 wrote an article a few years ago explicitly acknowledging there are cliques, Pope Francis has acknowledged it, Cdl Maidiaga ((sp?) who is one of Francis' closest confidants and not a "conservative" churchman) has explicitly acknowledged a gay lobby, a book, Goodbye, Good Men published in 2000ish (before the US sex scandal exploded) makes the claim--to name a few.

My major concern over this case against Oko is that, to me, it appears that freedom of expression is being diminshed to freedom to express only those things the zeitgeist approve.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

BB, you answered Taci excellently. The above post is representative of why you are not only my favorite German, but, also, my favorite pagan. :D


Please do not misunderstand this as some kind of attempt at mitigation, but the Church problem isn't any different than the general society according to the studies that have been done here in the US b(so, it may be different in other parts of the world, but I doubt it). It's believed that about 2 to 4% of priests have been responsible credible sexual abuse claims; which is about the same in other, for lack of a better term, sectors of society. Also, most abuse has not been rape but other gross and harmful sexual acts of abuse like fondling, exposing of genitals, showing pornography to kids--rape or not it's diabolical and damaging to the victim. So, again, please understand I'm not mitigating, only making a distinction. NO SEX ABUSE is tolerable and ALL should be punished, but most importantly it should be prevented. And, the Church has done a pretty good job in recent years to address this scourge by putting things in place to prevent this, at least here in the US.


No. I broke Rule #2 and spent more than an hour on the computer after work the last two nights looking for it and haven't come across it. Maybe my searching skills really suck! Have you searched for it using German?


I don't think he is. From what I read and hear from Catholic sources and outlets, including anecdotal things I hear from the priests and seminary professors I know in my archdiocese, what he says adds up. It seems to be more prevalent in certain dioceses than others, but there does appear a prevalence.


Good question and it's really hard to know for sure if it's always been that way. There is some possible evidence that it hasn't always been that way: after Vatican II there was a good number of priests who left the priesthood and the vast majority got married. I also recall a couple decades ago there was a petition signed by priests calling for a married priesthood. Take that for what it's worth.

Regardless, and this is my point, the church has a clear teaching on homosexuality and it is a reasoned teaching, why shouldn't a member of the church (clergy or lay) not be able to express himself in favor of this teaching and assess the damage done to the church by its members in the clergy who act contrary to that teaching by comparing it to a disease?

We are closing in on becoming imprisoned by the zeitgeist and those of us who see it differently from the zeitgeist are all going to become Bernard Marx (Brave New World) or something. Those who dig today's zeitgeist should remember that the geist changes with the zeit, it ain't static, although the purveyors of the zeitgeist may try to make it static through autocratic means, like "hate" speech laws and the such.

Anyhow, my work break is over and I got earn my daily bread.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

Thoughtful post, Tacitus.

I, and millions of other Catholics, join you in blaming leaders in hiding this filth.

I don't agree that Benedict handling of sex abuse was appalling-imperfect, but not appalling.

The Church's response to change has never been about changing it's doctrine, though. Whether it was responding to the Reformation during Trent or Modernity during V2, etc.

For the Church to "come around" and accept homosexuality as normative would fundamentally be doctrinal and totally upend the Church's Christian anthropology. Many in and, especially, out of the church want that; but, the Church would cease being who she is. So, don't hold your breath.-you're better alive than dead :).

Geez, BB, the Pope Mary Mag thingy...seriously? ! :D

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

No. But, I'm sure that isn't enough to satisfy your curiosity. :)

I find these kind of conspiracies boring, but, fortunately, some don't. If I am willing to break my Rule #2 again tonight I'll forward you some links that address it.

What makes it implausible and impossible is that the Petrine ministry, aka the Papacy aka the pope, is established in scripture and the tradition of the Church.

Scripturally, Peter begins this ministry when Jesus tells Peter that He's gonna found His church on Peter. So, it's handed directly to Peter from Jesus.

Traditionally, it has always been understood that the papal line has been unbroken from Peter to Francis. We even have a list of names.

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]


When did he do that? He has been a champion of V2.

You are confusing doctrine with practices/rituals/policies. Doctrine is a teaching or belief based on the Church's understanding of an objective truth--the very nature of doctrine makes unchangeable as it is objective truth--you may disagree with that, but that's what the Church believes. Wheras, practices, rituals, and policies are not beliefs. Then, you have things like limbo, which is a theological theory that has neither been rejected or accepted as objectively true, they are theological developments that may never be accepted as true.


And, you have that right, but that only tells us something about you and your beliefs and attitudes.

If these teachings are taken selectively, I also then must suppose that Paul got it wrong and his writings should be stricken from the canon of scripture?


Not only him, but the Church Fathers, as well as a plain reading of scripture.


I find that lacking. It being in Rome is incidental, it could have been anywhere. That's not the theological argument. The theological argument is in the person of Peter who, according to scripture, was told by Jesus that He would build His Church on Peter and to whom the "keys" to kingdom of God were given. In scripture, we also see how the early Church defers to Peter when conflict arises.


I'll see if I can get you in touch with one :) .

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]

@Tacitus

I think we can be very confident that Paul is talking about cultic prostitution during the part of his letter to the Corinthians when he is explaining away the Greek theory that there is a kind of separation between the body and the spirit and how what one does with one's body doesn't necessarily effect the spirit by extolling the body as being made for the Lord and morality. But, the part right before that when he's talking about lawsuits among Christians in the Roman court and admonishing them for being unable resolve their conflicts and causing scandal among the faithful. It's here when he lists the unrighteous who will not inherit the kingdom of God, in that list he includes homosexuals. My greek is very rudimentary but in a conversation I had with a couple of trained classicists they explained that the term used in the bible is not about men who are attracted to other men, but men who engage in sexual activity with other men. Which, is consistent with Paul's letter to Timothy when he uses the term sodomites as contrary to the Levitical law and sound doctrine.

As far as having absolutely no shred of evidence of Peter, that's not true. Early Church Fathers have placed him there. Clement of Rome, Dionysius of Corinth, Tertullian, Hermas to name a few. But, again, whether Peter is in Rome or not is immaterial to the Petrine ministry. The Petrine ministry is established in scripture and has continued throughout the millenia. No doubt the temporal power of the Pope was strengthened through politics, diplomacy, and the sort--it was essential for the Church to survive; but, the essence of the Papacy isn't temporal power, but the promotion and defense of the Gospel (which happens through doctrine of faith) and bringing people to Christ.


Well if we're only to rely on the perfect then we'll have no one or no thing to rely on.


I beg to differ. He was unwilling to go the way of Kung, Schillebeckx and those guys and chart a course separated from Tradition, a course that was never meant or inherent in V2.

In the article that the article you link to that "discusses" B16's article, he does expound on the harm the sexual revolution has caused, but to say he resented anything happening after 1960 is hard to square with what he has said or written since 1960. I've read enough of his work to know he is not the ogre people like to betray him as. Read Salt of the Earth.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/41013/full-text-of-benedict-xvi-essay-the-church-and-the-scandal-of-sexual-abuse

Off-Topic / Freedom of Expression in the EU? [87]


Good point (as are many of your points), so point taken!

Off-Topic / Where are you from? [59]


You'd become a USian citizen, but not necessarily a USian. You have to assimilate to the USian way of life to become a USian-and that takes years, usually.

Same if I went to Germany, just because I get German citizenship doesn't make me German (even though most of my people come from Germany). To become German, I'd have to allow the German culture and way of life seep into my soul and accept it as part of me.

My wife has been here in USia for 16 years, and just recently she says she's felt USian.

Off-Topic / Where are you from? [59]


Yes. From what I can tell 3/4 of my people come from Germany. Mostly Bavaria and Alsace-Lorain. According to the Germans at my parish church my surname is Bavarian.


I'd guess less than 5% and growing.

I'm curious, now, BB, I'll look and see if I can find any data.

Off-Topic / Where are you from? [59]

@Bratwurst Boy

I misread your question before. I think most USians would say Muslims make up 10-15% of the population.

However, only 1% of population is Muslim.

prri.org/research/2020-census-of-american-religion/

They are increasing though, and the median age of Muslims in USia is 33, aka breeding age.

Off-Topic / Where are you from? [59]


Oh, I see!

I'd think at least half, if not 2/3 of USians would think Islam doesn't belong to USia.

And, if the elected Muslim congressman and women are representative of how Islam and USia intermingle, then 2/3 is still too small, IMO.

Polonia / Possible Green Surge in Germany [118]



Or, perhaps, plenty of Germans don't want to be ruled by a liberal mommy or liberal anything, but didn't like the choices given to them this cycle and decided to stay home rather than vote for a sh-t sandwich.

How was voter turnout?

It'd be interesting to get the perspectives from PF's resident Germans on the election. Two different perspectives: Tacitus is of the left, BB of the leaning right. Who knows, us non-Germans may actually glean something about the ground level of German society.

News / Poland in the European Union. Polexit? [559]


Where will Germany end up in a two-speed EU? Does the majority of Germans want a deep integration...to be part of an USE?

News / Poland in the European Union. Polexit? [559]


But, why? Maybe I've misunderstood some of the current trends in Germany we've talked about, but I thought Germany has kind of awakened to wanting to conserve it's specific culture--am I wrong about that? Wouldn't a deeper integration compromise that?

News / Poland in the European Union. Polexit? [559]


Is there much of a push within the EU to dilute the current grandiose scheme and pare it back down to simply a trade union?

I've never been able to see how the current scheme of the EU as a supranational organism could work. Too many disparate parts (disparate might be too strong a word) with deep-seated organic traditions and histories independent of one another; even though there are many shared traits among Euro nations, those differences shape the identity of a people.

News / Poland in the European Union. Polexit? [559]

Novi, I can see the epitaph you'll have on your tombstone:

Eff it! It's all sh!t!
P.S. All you blacks, gays, illegals, women, leftists & rightists can go eff yourselves.
I'm out!

:D

News / Poland in the European Union. Polexit? [559]


That underlying problem being...? Supranational interference with domestic concerns?


:D:D

That'd be the perfect grave monument for good ole Novi.

And everytime someone walks past his grave a sensor will start a recording of him yelling "Get the F@#! off my lawn!"

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]


If it is to be valued enough to be given legal protection, why should it be rare?

Where is it legal and rare? Even Bill Clinton, who coined the phrase, didn't actually mean it; he phrased it to unify abortion supporters.

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

@Cojestdocholery

I say this as an attempt to help with more productive conversation:

I'm pro-life and I can tell you that to make pro-life arguments by making it into a personal attack (whether the attack is mild or wild) rarely works and nearly always is counter-productive. Always keep in mind that even pro-aborts have the same human dignity and free will as a pro-lifer.

That's my public service announcement for the day. :)

News / Abortion still under control in Poland [2971]

I wish I had more time to go deeper, but my boss has the audacity to expect some production out of me today.


Is that true, though? You acknowledge it's a homicide, so we do make a call on it as members of a society by determining if it's a criminal or non-criminal act.


Why do you shut the man out? Why does the father not have a say? When I child is born we expect a father to share some responsibility of caring for the child. I can attest that a father can love a child as deeply as any mother.


When is a human being viable? At birth? One week? A month? A year? Those little babies seem to depend on others to keep them viable after birth.

News / How does Poland feel about influx of US troops? [60]


But not long enough. These sanctions are going to have zero effect on Russia when it counts: now and the immediate future.

News / How does Poland feel about influx of US troops? [60]

1) There is no such thing as an EU army. It doesn't exist.
2) Why would NATO or EU member army engage Russia in Uke? Uke is neither a NATO or EU member.

As a whole your post doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Care to elaborate?