Is the Pope of Rome welcome in Ireland? (32 counties)

[deiseach]

Popes and Patriarchs are the same thing. Some of these men titles are Pope others are Patriach and even within this there appears to be a hierarchy of Popes/Patriarchs. Even within the Latin Rites (Western) Roman Catholic Church there appears to be some kind of mini-Popes/Patriarchs below the Pope (I presume below), the Patriarch of Milan and the Patriarch of Rome. Not sure the one in Byzantium appears to be of equal rank to the Bishop of Rome, but much as the Reformation much later the schism between the East (Roman) and West (Orthodox). Most use the title Patriarch, a few use the title Pope, and I notice several other titles used to denote the same. Yes I know Wiki is not the best reference.

Or you could just admit that when you used the phrase 'Pope of Rome', you meant to say 'Bishop of Rome', something you basically admit to in passing. It's a trivial thing, but instead you seem to be determined to cling to a notion that you were using the phrase to distinguish him from the leader of the Coptic Church or the Patriarch of Alexandria.

Does the Bishop of Rome conduct confirmation cermonies in his diocese?

[Nally Stand]

OK well I see what I did there, I'll give ya that one Nally    Well this is about the Pope not the Queen, perhaps I shouldn't have gone on to a tangent either.

But to answer you, the Primeminister, the British Government and the British Parliament control the British army and define British internal and external policy, including the use of their military. The Queen is a figurehead who hands out silly powerless titles.

The Pope of Rome is the true commander and chief of all things Vatican, Papel or Roman Catholic, the buck stops with him, he is both the figurehead and Absolute Monarch.

Your problem should be with the British Primeministers, Pariament and Government not the Queen. Of course you prefer to hate the Queen because that fits into the traditional Irish attitude of blame the Monarch. As idiotic the British system of having a Monarch as head of state, they haven't had any real power for centuries.

So MGHU, if you genuinely don't believe there are parallels between the two visits, why then, when you believed Gaoth Dobhair Abu voted that he would welcome the Pope, did you reply to him with the question "So you welcome this Absolute Monarch, this Head of State, this Leader of a Religion, this Leader of a country which has done great wrong to Ireland & very recently. What was your reaction to Elizabeth II coming to the Irish Republic?" ??

You are tying yourself i knots here MGHU. You have now contradicted yourself twice:
1st: Attacking me for mentioning the queen of Britain's visit, claiming that I was changing the subject, despite having mentioned it yourself two hours previous.
2nd: Drawing parallels between the visit of the Pope and The Queen of Britain in response to GDA, yet claiming they are not a parallel when replying to me.

Make up your mind which story you want to go with and stick to it

Ha you see, to GD I never said the Queen was the leader of the United Kingdom or in charge of the British Army, I was careful with my words, I left it open for GD & the likes of yourself to make your usual and boring conclusions. Read it again, you have just walked into the wording I left for the likes of You. Thanks for saving me time of having to find the quote. 

Jaysus you are laughable. Why would you have to mention that the queen of britain is the head of the UK and the british army?! The question remains, why did you ask about the queen of england in terms of GDA's supposed welcoming of a Papal visit? It is simply because you seen parallels between the two visits and now you are trying to worm back from this. Its strange that you were waiting to "catch" me responding to that quote yet you ignored me repeatedly when I asked you about it until now. You are a bullshitter trying to cover your ass, as you have once again tied yourself in knots.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Popes and Patriarchs are the same thing. Some of these men titles are Pope others are Patriach and even within this there appears to be a hierarchy of Popes/Patriarchs. Even within the Latin Rites (Western) Roman Catholic Church there appears to be some kind of mini-Popes/Patriarchs below the Pope (I presume below), the Patriarch of Milan and the Patriarch of Rome. Not sure the one in Byzantium appears to be of equal rank to the Bishop of Rome, but much as the Reformation much later the schism between the East (Roman) and West (Orthodox). Most use the title Patriarch, a few use the title Pope, and I notice several other titles used to denote the same. Yes I know Wiki is not the best reference.

Or you could just admit that when you used the phrase 'Pope of Rome', you meant to say 'Bishop of Rome', something you basically admit to in passing. It's a trivial thing, but instead you seem to be determined to cling to a notion that you were using the phrase to distinguish him from the leader of the Coptic Church or the Patriarch of Alexandria.

Does the Bishop of Rome conduct confirmation cermonies in his diocese?

No thats exactly what I meant, a Pope is just another word for Patriarch, I meant exactly what I said. I was suprised that there were so many when I went to look, I presumed there were only about 6-8'ish. The Roman Catholic Pope is no more THE Pope than Man.Utd. is THE Utd.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

OK well I see what I did there, I'll give ya that one Nally    Well this is about the Pope not the Queen, perhaps I shouldn't have gone on to a tangent either.

But to answer you, the Primeminister, the British Government and the British Parliament control the British army and define British internal and external policy, including the use of their military. The Queen is a figurehead who hands out silly powerless titles.

The Pope of Rome is the true commander and chief of all things Vatican, Papal or Roman Catholic, the buck stops with him, he is both the figurehead and Absolute Monarch.

Your problem should be with the British Primeministers, Pariament and Government not the Queen. Of course you prefer to hate the Queen because that fits into the traditional Irish attitude of blame the Monarch. As idiotic the British system of having a Monarch as head of state, they haven't had any real power for centuries.

So MGHU, if you genuinely don't believe there are parallels between the two visits, why then, when you believed Gaoth Dobhair Abu voted that he would welcome the Pope, did you reply to him with the question "So you welcome this Absolute Monarch, this Head of State, this Leader of a Religion, this Leader of a country which has done great wrong to Ireland & very recently. What was your reaction to Elizabeth II coming to the Irish Republic?" ??

You are tying yourself i knots here MGHU. You have now contradicted yourself twice:
1st: Attacking me for mentioning the queen of Britain's visit, claiming that I was changing the subject, despite having mentioned it yourself two hours previous.
2nd: Drawing parallels between the visit of the Pope and The Queen of Britain in response to GDA, yet claiming they are not a parallel when replying to me.

Make up your mind which story you want to go with and stick to it

Ha you see, to GD I never said the Queen was the leader of the United Kingdom or in charge of the British Army, I was careful with my words, I left it open for GD & the likes of yourself to make your usual and boring conclusions. Read it again, you have just walked into the wording I left for the likes of You. Thanks for saving me time of having to find the quote. 

Jaysus you are laughable. Why would you have to mention that the queen of britain is the head of the UK and the british army?! The question remains, why did you ask about the queen of england in terms of GDA's supposed welcoming of a Papal visit? It is simply because you seen parallels between the two visits and now you are trying to worm back from this. Its strange that you were waiting to "catch" me responding to that quote yet you ignored me repeatedly when I asked you about it until now. You are a bullshitter trying to cover your ass, as you have once again tied yourself in knots.

Nally you  are a simpleton, you really are. I said the likes of you, not you, you arrogant narcissistic twit. I was careful to word my sentence to not say that the Queen was in charge of of any army.

[Nally Stand]

OK well I see what I did there, I'll give ya that one Nally    Well this is about the Pope not the Queen, perhaps I shouldn't have gone on to a tangent either.

But to answer you, the Primeminister, the British Government and the British Parliament control the British army and define British internal and external policy, including the use of their military. The Queen is a figurehead who hands out silly powerless titles.

The Pope of Rome is the true commander and chief of all things Vatican, Papal or Roman Catholic, the buck stops with him, he is both the figurehead and Absolute Monarch.

Your problem should be with the British Primeministers, Pariament and Government not the Queen. Of course you prefer to hate the Queen because that fits into the traditional Irish attitude of blame the Monarch. As idiotic the British system of having a Monarch as head of state, they haven't had any real power for centuries.

So MGHU, if you genuinely don't believe there are parallels between the two visits, why then, when you believed Gaoth Dobhair Abu voted that he would welcome the Pope, did you reply to him with the question "So you welcome this Absolute Monarch, this Head of State, this Leader of a Religion, this Leader of a country which has done great wrong to Ireland & very recently. What was your reaction to Elizabeth II coming to the Irish Republic?" ??

You are tying yourself i knots here MGHU. You have now contradicted yourself twice:
1st: Attacking me for mentioning the queen of Britain's visit, claiming that I was changing the subject, despite having mentioned it yourself two hours previous.
2nd: Drawing parallels between the visit of the Pope and The Queen of Britain in response to GDA, yet claiming they are not a parallel when replying to me.

Make up your mind which story you want to go with and stick to it

Ha you see, to GD I never said the Queen was the leader of the United Kingdom or in charge of the British Army, I was careful with my words, I left it open for GD & the likes of yourself to make your usual and boring conclusions. Read it again, you have just walked into the wording I left for the likes of You. Thanks for saving me time of having to find the quote. 

Jaysus you are laughable. Why would you have to mention that the queen of britain is the head of the UK and the british army?! The question remains, why did you ask about the queen of england in terms of GDA's supposed welcoming of a Papal visit? It is simply because you seen parallels between the two visits and now you are trying to worm back from this. Its strange that you were waiting to "catch" me responding to that quote yet you ignored me repeatedly when I asked you about it until now. You are a bullshitter trying to cover your ass, as you have once again tied yourself in knots.

Nally you  are a simpleton, you really are. I said the likes of you, not you, you arrogant narcissistic twit. I was careful to word my sentence to not say that the Queen was in charge of of any army.

You didnt need to. We all know she is the head of the british army. So again, why did you feel the need to ask GDA about his views of her visit when you believed he voted in favour of welcoming a Papal visit? Seems an odd question or topic to raise for someone who later claims the two are in no way parallels.

[deiseach]

Popes and Patriarchs are the same thing. Some of these men titles are Pope others are Patriach and even within this there appears to be a hierarchy of Popes/Patriarchs. Even within the Latin Rites (Western) Roman Catholic Church there appears to be some kind of mini-Popes/Patriarchs below the Pope (I presume below), the Patriarch of Milan and the Patriarch of Rome. Not sure the one in Byzantium appears to be of equal rank to the Bishop of Rome, but much as the Reformation much later the schism between the East (Roman) and West (Orthodox). Most use the title Patriarch, a few use the title Pope, and I notice several other titles used to denote the same. Yes I know Wiki is not the best reference.

Or you could just admit that when you used the phrase 'Pope of Rome', you meant to say 'Bishop of Rome', something you basically admit to in passing. It's a trivial thing, but instead you seem to be determined to cling to a notion that you were using the phrase to distinguish him from the leader of the Coptic Church or the Patriarch of Alexandria.

Does the Bishop of Rome conduct confirmation cermonies in his diocese?

No thats exactly what I meant, a Pope is just another word for Patriarch, I meant exactly what I said. I was suprised that there were so many when I went to look, I presumed there were only about 6-8'ish. The Roman Catholic Pope is no more THE Pope than Man.Utd. is THE Utd.

I see. So I presume you routinely refer to Dublin, Ireland, so as to distinguish it from Dublin, Ohio. Or the Dublins in South Australia, Ontario, California, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland . . .

(And yes, I cogged that list from Wikipedia)

[Nally Stand]

Popes and Patriarchs are the same thing. Some of these men titles are Pope others are Patriach and even within this there appears to be a hierarchy of Popes/Patriarchs. Even within the Latin Rites (Western) Roman Catholic Church there appears to be some kind of mini-Popes/Patriarchs below the Pope (I presume below), the Patriarch of Milan and the Patriarch of Rome. Not sure the one in Byzantium appears to be of equal rank to the Bishop of Rome, but much as the Reformation much later the schism between the East (Roman) and West (Orthodox). Most use the title Patriarch, a few use the title Pope, and I notice several other titles used to denote the same. Yes I know Wiki is not the best reference.

Or you could just admit that when you used the phrase 'Pope of Rome', you meant to say 'Bishop of Rome', something you basically admit to in passing. It's a trivial thing, but instead you seem to be determined to cling to a notion that you were using the phrase to distinguish him from the leader of the Coptic Church or the Patriarch of Alexandria.

Does the Bishop of Rome conduct confirmation cermonies in his diocese?

No thats exactly what I meant, a Pope is just another word for Patriarch, I meant exactly what I said. I was suprised that there were so many when I went to look, I presumed there were only about 6-8'ish. The Roman Catholic Pope is no more THE Pope than Man.Utd. is THE Utd.

Yes it's a good job you clarified which Pope you meant in the thread title. Otherwise most people would probably have just assumed you were talking about Patriarch Torkom Manoogian.

[Lar Naparka]

what religions are those multiple beardy guys heads of ?

I couldn't be arsed answering that in detail, read it for yourself

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

Maybe I am reading the wrong section , but there is no mention of the word 'Pope' in that wiki definition ( then again wiki is more often way wrong than anything else). That wiki piece also doesn't define which religions these Hearst guys are 'popes' of. Please can you let me know what section I should be looking at for this! Tia

I've been thinking the same thing.
Some of them beardy buckos were appointed by the Pope himself so they can't be real  popes; can they?

Pope/Patriarchs are leaders of churches, there appears to be a hierarchy among them of who they think is above them and who is below them.

What is a real Pope Lar?

I think the best person to answer that question is your good self. After all, you are the OP here and in the context of this discussion, you decide who shall be the Pope so we can all continue fighting.
As far as I'm concerned, there can be assloads of popes but only one Pope. Some of them hairy hoors you listed would start fighting the minute they smelled each other.

But you did mention the 'Pope of Rome' in the topic title and I take it you mean the individual  who is both Bishop of Rome and Kilfenora as well as the Parish  Priest of Liscannor.

[deiseach]

The one true Pope

[Hardy]

Maybe we should have a new thread - Person/people you like or respect who are popes.

[Donnellys Hollow]

[muppet]

The Church moved with Constantine to Byzantium.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/donatconst.asp

The Pope as Bishop of Rome has as much claim to be the successor of Saint Peter as the Bishop of Killala.

[Franko]

Interesting question.  I don't think I would personally feel comfortable with the Pope coming to Ireland (32 counties  . The atrocities committed by some within the Catholic Church and the subsequent cover up and obstruction of justice cannot be airbrushed from history.

As an aside, great to see MGHU giving us a laugh by tying himself in knots yet again. As wee Barry would say, "Keep 'er lit!" 

[AZOffaly]

what religions are those multiple beardy guys heads of ?

I couldn't be arsed answering that in detail, read it for yourself

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

Maybe I am reading the wrong section , but there is no mention of the word 'Pope' in that wiki definition ( then again wiki is more often way wrong than anything else). That wiki piece also doesn't define which religions these Hearst guys are 'popes' of. Please can you let me know what section I should be looking at for this! Tia

I've been thinking the same thing.
Some of them beardy buckos were appointed by the Pope himself so they can't be real  popes; can they?

Pope/Patriarchs are leaders of churches, there appears to be a hierarchy among them of who they think is above them and who is below them.

What is a real Pope Lar?

I think the best person to answer that question is your good self. After all, you are the OP here and in the context of this discussion, you decide who shall be the Pope so we can all continue fighting.
As far as I'm concerned, there can be assloads of popes but only one Pope. Some of them hairy hoors you listed would start fighting the minute they smelled each other.

But you did mention the 'Pope of Rome' in the topic title and I take it you mean the individual  who is both Bishop of Rome and Kilfenora as well as the Parish  Priest of Liscannor.

Brilliant

[lynchbhoy]

Popes and Patriarchs are the same thing. Some of these men titles are Pope others are Patriach and even within this there appears to be a hierarchy of Popes/Patriarchs. Even within the Latin Rites (Western) Roman Catholic Church there appears to be some kind of mini-Popes/Patriarchs below the Pope (I presume below), the Patriarch of Milan and the Patriarch of Rome. Not sure the one in Byzantium appears to be of equal rank to the Bishop of Rome, but much as the Reformation much later the schism between the East (Roman) and West (Orthodox). Most use the title Patriarch, a few use the title Pope, and I notice several other titles used to denote the same. Yes I know Wiki is not the best reference.

ah darn it , I thought from your opening comments that these guys were officially called 'pope'.
Am disappointed that it is only your own opinion and equating of the terms.
More fg/ff-esque type inaccuracies!!!