Badmovies.org Forum

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7744282.stm

What arrogance on the Vatican's part for forgiving a man for basically speaking a momentary truth.

i think they where a few years to late

My thought exactly.  An apology may have been more appropriate.    Along the lines of the one the Anglicans kinda-sorta gave Darwin.

None too sharp on the timing either are they?  But then, maybe forgiving dead guys is where it is at in their business.

Geez, I hate when somebody slaps a misleading headline on something to make it more sensational than it is. According to the story, the Vatican did nothing of the sort. The Vatican newspaper ran a piece commemorating the 40th anniversary of the White Album and whoever wrote it expressed the opinion that Lennon's comment was no big deal.

It was a non-story about another paper running a fluff entertainment piece. If I had to guess what happened, after the writer filed his perfectly accurate copy (describing what he read in another publication), some editor fixated on this insignificant detail and decided it was most newsworthy. Interpreting it as broadly as possible, this jackass stuck on a headline that was not exactly false, but clearly aimed at grabbing attention at the expense of accuracy. And for that, the Vatican gets a bunch of undeserved criticism.

One of the reasons I'm glad to be out of the news business again. I worked the last two years at a paper that operated like that. Makes me sick.

In South Africa at that time, the reaction to John Lennon's quip was quite unexpected as the local radio stations then banned The Beatles' music from airplay and the censor board attempted (but failed) to have their music banned altogether.

About a year or so later, the SA DJ David Gresham had an interview with John Lennon in which he explained what he said and why. The SA Broadcasting Corporation refused to play the interview.

Wonderful thing, freedom of words and freedom of the press.  :question:

You might very well be right about this, Andy, and I'm 100% sure you're correct about how the media distorts truth and bends statements for headlines, but you know how in some reality show like The Real World, they broadcast someone saying something rotten about a roommate, and then at the reunion show the person they quoted bemoans how his or her words were taken out of context, and the host then points out that, "Yeah, but you did say that..."?

Whether the Lennon remark was the main thrust of what the Vatican said or not (and I believe you about it not being the focus of the Vatican's statement, I'm sure it wasn't) this apparently was still said about Lennon by someone there, and I still think it shows arrogance on the Vatican's part to "forgive" someone for using freedom of expression and opinion in modern society.

Actually I don't wanna kvetch at the Pope and company too much because I think the Vatican has recently come a long way, admitting Galileo was right about the earth's position relative the sun, and in stating that Jews alive today aren't guilty of killing Jesus. Baby steps before big ones.

That's just the point. It wasn't a statement by the Vatican. It was an entertainment story in their internal newspaper. Read the BBC story. It says nothing about a statement by the Vatican or about anyone being forgiven.

For that matter, I don't recall the Vatican officially condemning Lennon's remarks in the first place. Most of the outrage at the time was amongst American Bible Belters.

I'm not taking any particular side, except the side of responsible journalism. As far as I'm concerned, it was idiotic of Lennon to say what he said, and just as idiotic for some people to react to it as they did, but I don't really care either way. Celebrities and Bible thumpers have said and done stupider things since. What does burn my ass is people who make news out of nothing. I spent a lot of years fighting against that.

I heard that the Vatican didn't admit the Earth was in orbit around the sun untill 1992. In a few more centeries they might admit gravity. Typing this while floating is quite tricky.

Again, not wanting to look like I'm rushing to the Catholics' defence, I don't believe it was a matter of finally admitting a scientific fact they'd denied up to that point. More a case of tying up loose ends.

It's like those crazy laws a lot of places still have on the books - no longer relevant and no longer a reflection of what is considered correct. But rather than being corrected, they just kind of get overlooked.

In the case of the Vatican, they abused Renaissance scientists such as Galileo for theories that over the centuries were proven and widely accepted. It happens gradually enough that everybody originally involved is long dead and none of it seems terribly important. Ancient history. One day, somebody figures out that the church is taking criticism for something it did 500 years ago, and the Vatican clears it up by revising their official position on the matter.

In some ways, it's analogous to the former school bully who feels compelled to seek out his victims years later to apologize. It seems really weird, and it comes as a surprise to the former victims, but it's the right thing to do, and it hopefully relieves everyone of some old baggage.

Unfortunately, the Vatican gets criticized for taking so long when they do it.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't, I suppose.