German government trying to force children to go to mosque

[Ben Kenobi]

The survey was from he Vatican ... so what you are saying is, that the Bishops should protect their sheep from the Vatican/the pope himself (or more exactly, the sheep should be protected from the next Synod for which the Questionnaire was prepared)?

Thank you. I was under the mistaken impression that the survey was coming from outside. That changes things. Yeah the German bishops have an obligation to report to the pope. Also, whomever leaked the survey is really not in good shape either. This looks to be an internal document and should have been taken that way. It's not much different then the ones I do, although I use different questions...

Also, its purpose should have been clear ... the pope/vatican obviously wanted to know what his sheep really thought about certain things in the churchs doctrine and to give them a chance for their voices (and possible criticism) to be heard at the Synod (for which the Questionnaie was destined to be used)

Um, that's your opinion. It seems clear to me that he intends to know the state of the flock so that he can truthfully work with what he's got.

[Bereta_Eder]

In order to understand why there is a large intermixing of church and state in the balkans you have to go to the roots of the problem. Aka the way to achieve social consenus after the liberation. after all it's widely known that the ottomans were using the church to "pacify and control" the christian folk.
After the liberation the balkan states initiated national churches in order to again control the population. )and of course to forge completely independent national entities).
The churches went along because the benefits were tangible but the main responsibility lies with the states that enacted this unholy alliance and made the churches financially dependent on them in order to control them. Then it was too late

About the yugoslavian conflict, I suppose when the socialist system went down and nationalism took its place, the states again took recourse to the "founding principles" of their respective nations, churches being one of them, with the sad result. IMHO it was a two way street. church and state

[Bereta_Eder]

Perhaps the most ghastly and ridiculous transformation was how european secular bozniaks became "fighters of islam" (sic) overnight. Just another example of the corosiveness of nationalism and the power socialism had to make people live together in harmony.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

They are not really "fighters for Islam" even today, (OK 99% not), but they had to build their identity on something.

In my view the whole ex-Yu core, we are technically one nation (more so than Romanians for example), but being cut by the 1054 schism, and we never had political unity until 20th century. More than enough for separate centres of local power to form.

Muslims in Bosnia who were there as the remnant (50%) of local population who converted to Islam over 500 year Turkish reign, has to claim something as they cannot claim that they are Turks (which clearly they are not and Turkey is too far away geographically today anyhow), as without "national identity" of some sort there is no political power and you are bound for prosecution by others who have an identity.

[Proteus_MST]

Thank you. I was under the mistaken impression that the survey was coming from outside. That changes things. Yeah the German bishops have an obligation to report to the pope. Also, whomever leaked the survey is really not in good shape either. This looks to be an internal document and should have been taken that way. It's not much different then the ones I do, although I use different questions...

Well, we don't know how it got there.
It may well be, that the bishops in UK or NZ were more open to their sheep (compared to the german bishops) and officially allowed the questionnaire to be published (in uncensored form). I guess this is within their rights, unless the Vatican/Pope declares the document top secret.

Um, that's your opinion. It seems clear to me that he intends to know the state of the flock so that he can truthfully work with what he's got.

It seems to be both, statistical questions as well as questions in which the believers have the chance (through their pastor) to voice opinions (example: 4 d, e, Block 8, 9 and more)

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, we don't know how it got there.

It may well be, that the bishops in UK or NZ were more open to their sheep (compared to the german bishops) and officially allowed the questionnaire to be published (in uncensored form). I guess this is within their rights, unless the Vatican/Pope declares the document top secret.

It's actually not in their rights to publish something that's intended for the Pope. Not how it works. That's why we've not seen names attached to it's release. The bishops know that should they do that - there will be consequences, including reassignment, etc. I actually don't think it's the bishops that released it. My speculation is that one of the German bishops staffmembers thought it would be helpful to certain parties to leak the information. I certainly don't see 'edification of the faithful' as one of the leaker's motivations for doing so.

It seems to be both, statistical questions as well as questions in which the believers have the chance (through their pastor) to voice opinions (example: 4 d, e, Block 8, 9 and more)

4d:

d) In all the above cases, how do the baptized live in this irregular situation? Are aware of it? Are they simply indifferent? Do they feel marginalized or suffer from the impossibility of receiving the sacraments?

I don't see how this is the laity voicing an opinion. He's asking the bishops and the priests about those in irregular situation and their opinion as to how those in these situations feel.

e) What questions do divorced and remarried people pose to the Church concerning the Sacraments of the Eucharist and of Reconciliation? Among those persons who find themselves in these situations, how many ask for these sacraments?

This, I find a fascinating question - that Francis wants to know not only what they believe, but also whether they are asking for the sacraments. Interesting.

Blocks 8 and 9 are pretty standard pastoral care questions. I personally wouldn't ask those questions, and I don't think any of these are particular significant portions of the questionnaire.

[Elok]

Look, I don't believe, and I also don't think religion necessarily has to be an important part of society, but you sure as **** can't deny that it ****ing has been. If you want to understand anything about Western culture circa 2000 AD, then Jesus H. ****ing Christ Almighty On A Stick you have to know about... well... I think you get the idea.

It is kind of dreary that they don't even properly understand what they're rejecting.

[Bereta_Eder]

They are not really "fighters for Islam" even today, (OK 99% not), but they had to build their identity on something.

In my view the whole ex-Yu core, we are technically one nation (more so than Romanians for example), but being cut by the 1054 schism, and we never had political unity until 20th century. More than enough for separate centres of local power to form.

that's very interesting. Haven't thought about it like that

Muslims in Bosnia who were there as the remnant (50%) of local population who converted to Islam over 500 year Turkish reign, has to claim something as they cannot claim that they are Turks (which clearly they are not and Turkey is too far away geographically today anyhow), as without "national identity" of some sort there is no political power and you are bound for prosecution by others who have an identity.

exactly. that's what I meant too. Just that it was sad that secular open minded young people would become so "devout" believers and fought under "islam"
Of course what happened to them was even sadder.

[Lorizael]

It is kind of dreary that they don't even properly understand what they're rejecting.

Well, I don't think it's necessary to properly understand Christianity in order to reject it, for the same reason that you, in all likelihood, don't properly understand the thousand varieties of Native American animism or Shintoism or what have you. I think it's important to understand Christianity in order to understand the world today. Additionally, if you want to reject Christianity based on its merits/arguments, you need to understand it. Personally, I reject all religion out of hand for philosophical reasons, and there is no religion you could present me with, regardless of the details, that would make me reconsider my position. To me, this is the same as saying that you reject out of hand all rocks if you're looking for a (non-fossilized) fish. No rock you are presented with will be a fish and you don't need to examine each individual rock to make sure.

[Elok]

Okay, rephrase: It is kind of dreary that they don't even properly understand what they're ridiculing.

[Lorizael]

Agreed.

[Elok]

Though the distinction between "rejecting" and "ridiculing" may be similar to that between the two schools of philosophy you mentioned in the other thread. It's not that I reject Shinto or animism, it's that I've never had cause or been curious enough to learn about or consider them. You can argue that I effectively reject them by not believing in them, or by not taking the effort to investigate them, but that's not really rejection as we usually think of it.

[Giancarlo]

I reject all religion, including Christianity, as it creates hatred, division and bigotry. Not hard.

[Lorizael]

Religions also unite people. Bigotry exists because humans are awful. Sometimes human awfulness gets expressed through religion, other times through greed or patriotism or simple psychopathy.

[Giancarlo]

Religions often unite people for the wrong reasons and while it isn't the sole cause of bigotry, it is a big reason for a good amount of it.