Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pope Urges Priests To Go Forth and Blog

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the heavy-content-filtering-at-the-seminary dept.

Communications 284

Hugh Pickens writes "Pope Benedict XV, whose own presence on the Web has grown in recent years, is urging priests to use all multimedia tools at their disposal to preach the Gospel and to engage in dialogue with people of other religions and cultures. 'The spread of multimedia communications and its rich "menu of options" might make us think it sufficient simply to be present on the Web,' but priests are 'challenged to proclaim the Gospel by employing the latest generation of audiovisual resources,' says the Pope. The message from the Pope, prepared for the World Day of Communications, suggests such possibilities as images, videos, animated features, blogs, and Web sites and adds that young priests should become familiar with new media while still in seminary, though the Pope stresses that the use of new technologies must reflect theological and spiritual principles. Many priests and top prelates already interact with the faithful online, and one of Benedict's advisers has his own Facebook profile. So does the archbishop of Los Angeles. The Pope adds, 'I renew the invitation to make astute use of the unique possibilities offered by modern communications. May the Lord make all of you enthusiastic heralds of the Gospel in the new "agorà" which the current media are opening up.'"

cancel ×

284 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Religion (2, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30881968)

Please, just please make it be one domain, like religiousblogs.com. Nothing worse than all the spam and pushed things and messages on the internet is such religious ones.

I do not think there is any god anyway. It's as likely possibility than that we would be living in a computer simulation. In fact, I suspect the later one is more likely possible.

Religion is something that was used in old times to control people and have them do "moral" actions (moral here being what the government considered good). It also was used to slay millions of people in crusades to other regions. The real reason most likely even wasn't about believing in god, it was the same power game that there is today. This doesn't apply just to Christians, it applies to every religion. Just see what a freaking mess the middle-east and areas around Israel is. All of that just because you believe in an imaginary person while the other person believes in an another imaginary person.

But since we are already talking about the god vs. computer simulation, is there any reason why we couldn't be living in someones simulation? Every year our own computer technology goes leaps forwards. It might seem simulating our whole world would be too much for a computer, but who really knows what the limits are? And if we are living in a simulation, how could we know we aren't? The system would prevent us from doing so.

And I do not mean this as the typical Matrix like system, which would be kind of stupid. I mean it as something where we don't exist at all outside of the simulation, other than maybe as some processes running in a data center (or someones bedroom closet). While I dont spend my days thinking about that, I think its a lot more likely thing than there being some invisible, everything knowing, a man who created everything somewhere in the space who listens to everyones wishes and tricks around with them.

Re:Religion (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882010)

Cue the Catholic--bashing in 3.. 2.. 1...

Re:Religion (0, Troll)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882886)

Cue the Catholic--bashing in 3.. 2.. 1...

At least while the priests are blogging we know they aren't buggering little boys.

Re:Religion (0)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882966)

Clerical multitasking has been supported since Win95.

Re:Religion (1)

pclminion (145572) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883018)

Cue the Catholic--bashing in 3.. 2.. 1...

Ok, I'll begin. I was Catholic. Then our priest was caught banging boys, and what did the church do? They sent him to California. I guess that sort of behavior is more acceptable down there. Since then, I'm atheist. Is that clear enough for you?

Re:Religion (4, Funny)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882022)

Well, could bring a new definition to "flame war" when the comments section of the blog turns ugly.

Re:Religion (2, Insightful)

jc42 (318812) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882730)

Well, could bring a new definition to "flame war" when the comments section of the blog turns ugly.

We already have a term for such discussions: "religious".

(I was tempted to add a "smiley", but decided it would be inappropriate. What we need is more like an "evil grinney", but I don't know if there's an ASCII symbol for that.)

Re:Religion (3, Insightful)

Nathrael (1251426) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883000)

(I was tempted to add a "smiley", but decided it would be inappropriate. What we need is more like an "evil grinney", but I don't know if there's an ASCII symbol for that.)

>:D

Re:Religion (4, Informative)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882068)

I don't know. I'm not Catholic, but I read Fr. Z's blog at wdtprs.com [wdtprs.com] fairly frequently. It's not spam by any stretch. It's interesting to peep into another world.

Re:Religion (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882728)

I know. Formally I'm still Catholic (can't be bothered to do a long travel just for apostasy). Your example is hardly a "peep into another world"...it's just how one representative of that world wants to be seen.

Unleash more of them, and it will get "funny" :)

Re:Religion (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882114)

While contemplating how irritating this might be, remember that...they don't really have any other choice but try to shift their methods towards new reality. And it's not so bad; might a bit messy for a time, but ultimately those are convulsions of the old ways - which simply won't fit to that new reality.

Whether that will result in human consciousness at large being, finally, freed from those ideas (extremely doubtful) or new variant of them taking hold (more likely; and you might try to influence it) - it doesn't matter. Since it should end up, again, more tolerable generally. Until next step...

Re:Religion (1)

jc42 (318812) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882860)

Since it should end up, again, more tolerable generally.

I wouldn't bet on that. To many religious people, one of the main points of having a religion is that it gives you an excuse to be intolerant of other people.

It has always seemed to me that if there is a God, He (or She or It) must be rather frustrated by this. After all, if we were created by such a being, it's pretty clear that we were designed to be highly variably in pretty much everything. So this purported God must find it rather annoying to be used to justify all the nasty stuff that His (Her/Its) followers routinely try to inflict on the world of complex and varied people.

OTOH, there are a few religious people around who are interesting to talk or listen to. Maybe the rest of us just need to learn to not answer the intolerant ones. We can just close the window and ignore them. So far, at least, there's not really much the religious intolerant types can actually do to us across the Net, except "flame" us in the sense that term's used on the Net. And the tolerant ones might be able to engage us in some interesting conversations.

Re:Religion (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882932)

That's why I said "should" - there's no guarantee, of course. But two things suggest it will end up slightly better this time, IMHO; not only the general trend in recent times, associated with similar kind of civilizational advances, but also, somewhat unexpectedly, "reverting" to a state when people regularly came into contact with other faiths. Necessitating greater tolerance among other things.

Re:Religion (4, Insightful)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882128)

Please, just please make it be one domain, like religiousblogs.com

What a wonderful time and space saving idea. Hey, while we're at it, lets limit and compact all thought on the Internet. We'll start by forcing all geeks into one domain... something like geekblogs.com, and why stop there? We'll put political people into one domain and... by the way, who do we put in charge of forcing all this to happen?

Re:Religion (1)

ral8158 (947954) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882142)

Jeeze, learn to take a joke, man.

Re:Religion (1)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882206)

Jeeze, learn to take a joke, man.

He made it pretty clear that he wasn't joking.

Re:Religion (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882178)

by the way, who do we put in charge of forcing all this to happen?

CowboyNeal. He is our last hope.

Re:Religion (1)

MadFarmAnimalz (460972) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882994)

by the way, who do we put in charge of forcing all this to happen

Al Gore?

Re:Religion (1)

Gonoff (88518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882468)

used in old times to control people

I cannot think of any type of philosophy that has not been misused in this way. They have all been used as ways of dealing with, or resisting, that control as well.

Just because some ideas are used to control people, it does not mean the ideas are bad or untrue.

In a few hundred years, how do you know that people won't look back on us and feel sorry for us being oppressed?/p?

Re:Religion (2, Interesting)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882776)

Nihilism. There you go, at least one.

Just because some ideas are used to control people, it does not mean the ideas are bad or untrue.

No, if some idea is consistently and reliably thorough history used for nefarious purposes, that is what this idea represents and not what it claims to represent.

Re:Religion (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882724)

I object to religion and general, and churches in particular, but I don't think segregating by religiosity (let alone by religion) would be a good think. I disagree with them, but I like knowing WHAT I'm disagreeing with. And sometimes I don't disagree quite as much as other times. Also, there a bunch of stuff/lifestyles that not only don't interest me, but bother or irk me... should we segregate everything and everyone, like those sad people who live in a very small peer group of like-minded people ?

Also, generally speaking, you don't want segregation:
- it breeds intolerance. If we are not regularly exposed to different people, way of thoughts, philosophies, sexualities... we become bigots. Religion is one lifestyle choice, one culture... it's nothing so special that it should be treated differently.
- it narrows the mind: some people are fascinated by things I don't care about, in favour of things I dislike, or the converse... occasional exposure to these gives me a chance to update my thoughts/feelings/attitude... or to keep them, but with good reason
- segregation works both ways: if those idiots bigoted holier-than-thou religious types start to engage other people, may be THEY will also get something out of the ensuing discussion.

Bad decision (1, Interesting)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882000)

Evens the playing field, makes what they preach much more vulnerable if it's not restricted to small community or closed channel of information.

I love it.

Re:Bad decision (5, Insightful)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882064)

Evens the playing field, makes what they preach much more vulnerable if it's not restricted to small community or closed channel of information.

I love it.

That's the silliest thing I've read this week. There are hundreds of millions... if not more... copies of Bibles in the world. There are thousands of churches and parishes. There are televsion and radio networks. You make it sound like they've been trying to hide, to keep what they teach to a small circle. Are you kidding? It's their job to go forth and preach. It's their job to interact with the public. "Closed channel of information"? Do you honestly think some nasty comments at a priest's blog is somehow going to usher in a glorious new era of atheism? Seriously?

Re:Bad decision (-1, Troll)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882226)

With all that insight of yours...you really haven't ever noticed that the thought of religious communities lives almost exclusivity in controlled (not in "Orwellian" meaning of control, ffs, in which you seem to interpret it) environments? That channels of information have strong values attached to them, and only those following the party line are held in high regard?

It isn't the case in the net anymore. Heck, even such overboard things as infiltrating those communities become bearable and easily done. And not only from "atheists" (why do you suggest only those are in "fighting mood"?...)

Re:Bad decision (4, Insightful)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882372)

"you really haven't ever noticed that the thought of religious communities lives almost exclusivity in controlled (not in "Orwellian" meaning of control, ffs, in which you seem to interpret it) environments?"

Show me someone that's advocating a position... on anything... that isn't "controlling" the message. That's what makes it a message. It's a point of view. Doesn't matter if it's coming from a church or club or political party or business. Everyone from the GNU people to the Pope "control" their message.

"Heck, even such overboard things as infiltrating those communities become bearable and easily done."

Again, you're falsely assuming some kind of conspiritorial security system here. Infiltrate? The whole point is to bring people into the church. Why would you need to infiltrate it? Unlike something like Scientology, Catholics are pretty open about their beliefs, practices, and methods. You're seeing conspiracy activity where there is none. Go to any Catholic church, walk up to the priest and tell him "I'm an atheist, and I want to see how and why you do things here". As long as you're not there to be an ass and disrupt the service, he'll invite you right in. He sees it as both a duty and a spiritual opportunity to bring you to mass, not some kind of invasion. So again, why would you think that flaming a priest's blog is going to make much of a difference?

Re:Bad decision (0)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882670)

Since you don't seem to want to get it...

The cute thing is that, contrary to what you claim, the level of oversight will change drastically. Currently not only the message is controlled but also the channels of information; if such loose organisation goes into a medium such open as the internet, they loose the latter. Which might jeopardize the former.

Please, and don't try to insult intelligence of Slashdotters insinuating that I suggested some kind of infiltration-based, secret system in place, I did no such thing; as anyone who can read can tell. It was just pointing out the hypothetical possibility of such thing once the channel is not controlled anymore (and it is controlled, contrary to what you claim; as you gave an example, you'll be kicked out of the church if not behaving "appropriately"...and also when asking uneasy questions, I can assure you that (I live in a country that's formally 90+ % Catholic)) - in such informal, loosely knit place as the net, how do you even know you're dealing with converts? Heard about /b/?

BTW, Catholics are far from open at this point (which admittedly wasn't the case at the beginning) Why there is a need for secret documents? (notably regarding "revelations" of one kind or another; meantime the faithful are allowed to worship them...) Can you show me any reliable research about content of confessions?

I did (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882790)

I once talked to a priest about my inability to believe in God. I point blank asked him why is God real but not Santa Claus, Zeus, Apollo, Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy. He was cool, as in nice, about it.

Oh, the answer is, in a nutshell, it's all about faith.

The funny thing is, I think many Catholics are really atheists but they practice out of duty and routine - meaning the routine give them comfort in their lives. And if you say the rosary everyday you get into meditation. Whether you're saying "Hail Mary's" and "Our Fathers" or "Om Mani Padme Hum", you're pretty much accomplishing the same thing.

Now, the fire and brimstone and "give a dollar and get a hundred back" Born Again Christians are a bit creepy. Actually, they're not religious; they're superstitious.

Re:Bad decision (2, Insightful)

elocinanna (1640479) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883178)

What sznupi said in the original post is completely correct, this is a very bad idea for the church. It's not because of any conspiracy, or nasty comments on a priest's blog, but this is going to give them huge exposure.

Every slip-up from a member of clergy that's posted online will be number one on digg immediately. Even if they take it down, a simple screencap will emerge to resurrect the story into immortality. The possibility for PR disaster is huge. Right now the main audience of anything a clergyman says is of course the faithful. The internet will not be so forgiving!

Some priest is going to discover spam (which fits completely with the quote from His Holyness.) Some priest is going to get caught talking dirty to a 4chan prankster posing as a young boy. Someone's going to try using jesus as a password on a priest's blog to write something blasphemous or immoral... You don't need faith to know that one or all of the above are coming!

Re:Bad decision (3, Insightful)

Aurisor (932566) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882698)

You chose a pretty poor example. In the english-speaking world, priests originally used latin versions of the bible. A version of the bible that could be read and understood by the common man was viewed as a threat by the religious institutions and *violently* repressed. I believe, and it's reasonable to argue, that the fall of the bible from a carefully-guarded source to something that the entire internet can pick apart contributed to the rise of atheism.

Currently, the *contents* of sermons and services are not available for that same scrutiny. If religious indoctrination and propaganda starts to move online, that is a huge win for skeptics.

Re:Bad decision (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882846)

"that the fall of the bible from a carefully-guarded source to something that the entire internet can pick apart contributed to the rise of atheism."

Easy to see why Scientologists want to restrict access to THEIR doctrine...

Re:Bad decision (3, Informative)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882884)

Currently, the *contents* of sermons and services are not available for that same scrutiny. If religious indoctrination and propaganda starts to move online, that is a huge win for skeptics.

That's somewhat changing, too...in my country (90+ % Catholic officially) there were cases of, simply put, embarrassing sermons which were recorded. Of course those willing to record sermons and make a big deal out of ridiculous ones aren't very happy to force themselves regularly through mass.

Net, as we pointed out, changes this.

Re:Bad decision (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30883050)

How many self thinkers providing smug remarks and enlightenment do you find in a church during mess?
Answer: zero. It's kind of social suicide to stand up and yell, liar! You'd get lynched pretty fast.

The more they chose to preach in public where anyone can hide behind a cloak of invisibility, the more provoked and mocked they'll be. And naturally more people will be manipulated into changing their views... for better or worse? I don't care enough to care about those that can't think for themselves, but I guess majority here would think for the better.

Re:Bad decision (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882188)

Oh, man. The misanthropes on 4chan's /b/ are going to have a lot of fun with it.

Just be careful (5, Funny)

Tony (765) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882008)

I hope he warns them about FBI posing as 13-year-old choirboys.

Re:Just be careful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882038)

"And on this day the lord did provide unto me an entire box of candy bars,,,, Chiorboy69 are you here"

"Hi I'm Chris Hanson from Dateline NBC!"

The ratings for that show would be out the roof.....

Re:Just be careful (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882294)

I hope he warns them about FBI posing as 13-year-old choirboys.

They should know better than to surf sites like hornypriests.gov

Re:Just be careful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882394)

I hope he warns them about FBI posing as 13-year-old choirboys.

Are you kidding? I hope he doesn't warn them. Let the sick freaks get busted!

(The captcha for this was "conjugal." LOL!)

Re:Just be careful (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882516)

"I hope he warns them about FBI posing as 13-year-old choirboys."

With current priestly pedo payoffs worldwide at roughly a (B)illion dollars (hundred of millions in the US alone) he would be wise to do so.

Re:Just be careful (1)

The FBI (1717712) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882560)

I hope he warns them about FBI posing as 13-year-old choirboys.

Hello, there, Tony AKA "Padre" Antonio di Montesilvano @ christianteenforums.com

Re:Just be careful (0, Troll)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882648)

I hope he warns them about FBI posing as 13-year-old choirboys.

No need, and no point. Some priests might be dumb enough to post videos featuring their 13-year-old altarboys performing biblical acts. "But your honor, we were just re-enacting the parable of Sodom and Gomorrah, as it is told in the Book of Genesis..."

Hmm... (0, Flamebait)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882032)

I thought that there had been an effort to keep sex offenders away from social networking technology...

Re:Hmm... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882058)

Fuzzyfuzzy, then why are you on the internet?

Re:Hmm... (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882118)

I could be wrong, but I come to slashdot thinking I will not be sexually abused. Maybe it's different now a days, /. having girls and all.

Re:Hmm... (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882220)

I could be wrong, but I come to slashdot thinking I will not be sexually abused. Maybe it's different now a days, /. having girls and all.

You can get sexually abused by a girl on slashdot now? Why don't people *tell* me these things?

Re:Hmm... (1)

el3mentary (1349033) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882322)

Because its a lie, there are no girls on t3h interwebz.

The pedophile priest problem (5, Informative)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882484)

I thought that there had been an effort to keep sex offenders away from social networking technology...

That's a real problem. Catholic priests should be monitored to make sure they're not communicating with minors. The Catholic Church, after all, is the only organization to have a slush fund to pay off victims of their pedophiles. [wikipedia.org]

Re:The pedophile priest problem (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882614)

Of course the society that you subscribe to (and pay taxes towards) never abused a child.

By logical extension of your "Catholic priests should be monitored", you must surely be in favour of monitoring married men (the most likely group of people to abuse children).

Re:The pedophile priest problem (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882692)

Accountability is an uphill battle.

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ [bishop-acc...bility.org]

Religion should be scorned and ridiculed, since the only way to free the world from the oppression of superstition is to weaken it.

Re:Hmm... (4, Informative)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882654)

Roughly a BILLION dollars in pedo payoffs worldwide make that post a candidate for Funny, not Flamebait.

From rescuing Nazis (not to mention largely ignoring the Holocaust, if THAT wasn't worthy of excommunication what is?) in Operation Ratline after WWII to playing hide-the-pedo across international borders, the Vatican has forfeited any respect except by its own brainwashed flock.

Enjoy!

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ [bishop-acc...bility.org]

Justice, courtesy of another inmate:
http://www.boston.com/news/specials/geoghan/ [boston.com]

Some fangirl support:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/11/23/coakley_details_her_role_in_1995_probation_deal_for_geoghan/?page=3 [boston.com]

The Pope is right (1, Insightful)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882056)

The Internet is a great place to let people know God is real. Before people had to travel to meet people. The Internet is less disturbing than a face to face meeting.

God is real? (1, Funny)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882138)

God is transcendental. The real number line can not contain Him.

Re:God is real? (-1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882214)

God is transcendental.

Pre-op or post?

Re:God is real? (1)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882224)

Heh, this should be modded funny, but some people will go "Eh?"

Re:God is real? (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882356)

"God is transcendental. The real number line can not contain Him."

Apparently Comcast can however. Go over your cap, and he's history...

Re:God is real? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882410)

The real numbers contain the transcendental numbers. However, everything transcendental is irrational.

Re:The Pope is right (4, Insightful)

sunderland56 (621843) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882144)

The Internet is a great place to let people know God is real.

True. Before the Internet, how many people had even heard of the one true supreme being? [venganza.org]

Re:The Pope is right (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882184)

Hey it worked for the supreme being Obama, with the internet now, how many of you heard of the community organizer before? No one, it took millions of dollars in book sales to even be a blip on the radar.

Re:The Pope is right (1)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882238)

The Internet is a great place to let people know God is real. Before people had to travel to meet people. The Internet is less disturbing than a face to face meeting.

Ultimately, it's just another line of communication. It's important, but getting priests to blog is not exactly a revolutionary idea. Some are doing it already, and have been for years.

Re:The Pope is right (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882270)

The Internet is a great place to let people know God is real. Before people had to travel to meet people. The Internet is less disturbing than a face to face meeting.

What does God need with a LAMP server?

LAMP/.NET (1)

starglider29a (719559) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882424)

"Thy word is a LAMP unto my feet, and a light unto my path."

Who knew that verse would end up being so literal. OTOH, "the kingdom of heaven is like a net" -- Matt 13:47. Whether an 'internet' or .NET is not clear in the Greek.

I realize that posting Bible verses on /. is like unto casting PERLs before swine.

Re:The Pope is right (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882430)

After all, his first words were: "Let there be light." And a lamp is a light-making device.

Things the Church needs with a LAMP server. (3, Interesting)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882630)

What does God need with a LAMP server?

You know what the Catholic Church needs with a LAMP server (or similar)? It some unified website, administered by regional authorities or the Vatican itself, which will provide a good way to find parish locations and mass times for each and every parish in a first-world country where Internet access is common. Then, when I'm on a trip to White Plains and three hours jet-lagged, I can get some idea of when and where I can attend church on a Sunday. Or when I'm back in Silicon Valley and it's a random Holy Day of Obligation in the middle of the week, I can know where to go after work (or possibly before work or over a lunch break). Right now, it's a crapshoot as to whether the church even has a website.

Calendering. Please. Inter-parish calendaring, ideally; I'd love to know everything going on in the Diocese of San Jose at a glance. Bulletins would be nice too, even if they're just .pdfs. Maybe they could coordinate those with what'stheirface, LPI? those liturgical-publishers who seem to put out a lot of those. If you're looking for gravy, throw in a quick podcast (and computerized transcription) of the homilies. If they can standardize on something, it would be pretty easy to plug into most existing parish sound systems, and reasonably cheap.

Next step out: Get the church behind some sort of free-content/Creative Commons angle with its liturgical music -- not necessarily to the exclusion of all else, mind you, but choir directors shouldn't have to jump through copyright hoops to legally express praise and worship. That, of all things, should be Free.

Re:The Pope is right (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882296)

If preaching ended up being a disturbing experience, the preachers should had noticed something right at this point...

Re:The Pope is right (1)

knarf (34928) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882368)

The Internet is a great place to let people know God is real.

Nah, any god worth a capitalised name does not need something as primitive as the internet. They just, you know, appeae out of nothing in burning bushes or goat entrails or burned toast. Internet is for wannabe-gods.

Re:The Pope is right (1)

Aurisor (932566) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882726)

I totally agree! One minor point, though. You misspelled 'Zeus.' From looking at my keyboard, though, it's quite easy to see how those d's and g's got in there.

Re:The Pope is right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882762)

My huge cock in your ass is real. Well, now you know. The Internet: it changes the radius of your anus.

Spanish Inquisition would be less disturbing? (1)

VampireByte (447578) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882882)

The Internet is less disturbing than a face to face meeting.

Makes me wonder if the Spanish Inquisition would be less disturbing if it were conducted over the internet. Spanish Inquisition 2.0

Don't say it couldn't happen. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

He also cautioned against file sharing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882102)

He also stated concern for the rampant sharing of unauthorized scripture on file sharing networks and torrent sites that was having a noticeable effect on publishers and that faithful catholics should not share their bibles with friends and neighbors. He also stated that public performances of the stations of the cross and masses without the expressed written permission of the copyright holders was expressly forbidden.

sweet virtual confession (1)

atarione (601740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882112)

virtual confession app

want to be forgiven for your sins

there's an app for that

Re:sweet virtual confession (1)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882192)

I know you're joking, but that raises some interesting questions. As long as it's direct communication between the priest and person, could that kind of stuff... like confession be done over an iPhone (or IRC, instant messaging, etc)? I wonder if something like that has ever been done over, say, videoconferencing? Suppose someone is dying, and is requesting last rites, and you just can't get a priest there physically in time?

Re:sweet virtual confession (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883234)

It is believed that if somebody can't obtain confession, but will express sorrow and wish to confess mortal sins, they should be "saved".

Explode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882162)

Does no one think this is going to explode? Now the whole internet can play the statements of priest A against those of priest B, and those of priest C at t_0 against those of priest C at t_1, and so on.

Off-by-one error (2, Informative)

Old Man Kensey (5209) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882168)

You guys mean Pope Benedict XVI, right?

Version Up (1)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882228)

I'm waiting for Pope Benedict XVII, a.k.a. Pope Benedict Forever. They've been talking about it since the 16th century. But, they better watch out, I've heard they might go the Catholic Wars Galaxies route.

Once again - copycats (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882174)

This is another 'idea' stolen from another religion (namely the Church of FSM, which spreads its message primarily through the tubes)...
-RAmen

It's a miracle! (1)

ProfessorDoom (82503) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882256)

The poster is missing the real miracle here. Pope Benedict XV died in 1922.

Cant wait for priest to go on /b/... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882286)

Cant wait for priest to go on /b/, a lot of weirdo could use some help there...
Wait, i think it might be preists that keep asking for CP.

Re:Cant wait for priest to go on /b/... (1)

el3mentary (1349033) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882422)

Silly AC, who do you think makes up most of Anon, after all who stands to lose the most from CoS.

Re:Cant wait for priest to go on /b/... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882462)

oh crap - /b/ has sprunk a leak and it has trickled into /. nerdfags ahoy!

Oh, God, Not Again! (3, Insightful)

creimer (824291) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882354)

If the Pope was serious about using new communication technology, he should make the entire Vatican Secret Archives [wikipedia.org] searchable on the Internet.

Re:Oh, God, Not Again! (5, Informative)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882486)

If the Pope was serious about using new communication technology, he should make the entire Vatican Secret Archives [wikipedia.org] searchable on the Internet.

That's not a bad idea, but people need to realize that "Secret" doesn't mean what they think it does in this case. From the same Wikipedia link:

"The word "secret" in the title "Vatican Secret Archives" does not have the modern meaning: it indicates instead that the archives are the Pope's own, not those of a department of the Roman Curia. The word "secret" was used in this sense also in phrases such as "secret servants", "secret cupbearer", "secret carver""

The article also notes that the archive has been open to scholars since 1881, and about a thousand a year access it for study. So let's nip any DaVinci Code-ish conspiracy theories about the archive in the bud here.

Re:Oh, God, Not Again! (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883118)

Though what you say doesn't change the fact that many really interesting documents are kept secret in "proper" meaning of the word.

SOAP (2, Funny)

symes (835608) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882380)

He gave a sermon on iptables in linux and simple object access protocols. It was call "Pope on a SOAP on a ROPE"... I'll get my coat

This could be alot of fun, unless your Irish. (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882388)

Irelands Blasphemy law [examiner.com] will extend to the internet if given a chance.

I recently started a blog Abstract Beliefs [blogspot.com] that some may find interesting.

Wanna know where god came from? How about what should be obvious contradictions in religion that require as much effort to apply suspension of disbelief as what you use when you see a fictional movie?

To have religious leaders communicating in the openness of the internet, can be a very good thing, so long as they don't censor what they might oppose (The catholic church exonerated Galileo in the early 1990's - lots of good it did him).

Its time to properly address the issues and errors of our philosophies..... Imagine open source religion.

Re:This could be alot of fun, unless your Irish. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882504)

Irelands Blasphemy law [examiner.com] will extend to the internet if given a chance.

I recently started a blog Abstract Beliefs [blogspot.com] that some may find interesting.

Wanna know where god came from? How about what should be obvious contradictions in religion that require as much effort to apply suspension of disbelief as what you use when you see a fictional movie?

To have religious leaders communicating in the openness of the internet, can be a very good thing, so long as they don't censor what they might oppose (The catholic church exonerated Galileo in the early 1990's - lots of good it did him).

Its time to properly address the issues and errors of our philosophies..... Imagine open source religion.

There is open source religion, its called a bunch of arrogant atheists, grouped together on electronic machines spewing their hatred for something they don't care about, just wanting to destroy it for their own selfish pleasure.

Re:This could be alot of fun, unless your Irish. (0, Flamebait)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883062)

> There is open source religion, its called a bunch of arrogant atheists, grouped together on electronic machines spewing their hatred for something they don't care about, just wanting to destroy it for their own selfish pleasure.

The idea that doing something for the greater good should feel like a sacrifice is a particularly stupid religious delusion.

And: who cares? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882412)

So what has this to with ./ precisely?!

Re:And: who cares? (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882554)

Well considering that the stone image of the beast is.....

The beast is man and the stone is computers, what they are made of.
And of course the image of the beast is the image of mans thought process...... as in programs, computer programs.

And I don't need to post Anonymous either.

And hey, even you are using the stone image of the beast.
Now be sure to bow down to the beast. for you are not anonymous as you think.

Zardoz... (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882542)

"The Son is good. The penis is evil. The penis shoots seeds, and makes new life to poison the Earth with a plague of men, as once it was, but the Son defeats death, and purifies Souls of the filth of sin. Go forth . . . and Blog!"

Youtube Atheist Movement participation? (1)

Zombie Ryushu (803103) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882578)

I wonder how this will affect the Youtube Atheist movement? I wonder if it will mean that Youtube Atheists can refute the Pope immediately and in real time.

electronic speed may cause sloppy messages (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882610)

We all know examples where we sent an email or posted a comment quickly and had regrets later. I encourage any person in a position of influence- minister, politician, teacher, etc. - either have a second pair of eyes review what they have just written, or sit on the post 12-24 hours before pressing the send key. Haste, emotion of the moment, fatigue can all lead to poor replies.

All in One Place (0, Troll)

Hittman (81760) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882734)

Sounds like a way all the priests can keep their kiddy porn in one place.

Facebook fun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30882822)

Not the Cardinale Crescenzio Sepe you were looking for? Search more

Now lets talk about the "which parish" problem (2, Interesting)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882930)

If the current Pope is telling priests to go forth and blog
how would the situation of a Church in SecondLife be handled??
(bonus round question are there any real cross and steeple churches with SL locations??)

Personally i would challenge churches to extend their reach into this wilderness

This is a actually a really good idea (2, Funny)

PaganRitual (551879) | more than 4 years ago | (#30882960)

Posting your crap online makes it that much easier to ignore than if you bother people in the streets or coming knocking on their doors bothering them in the name of your chosen mythology.

This invitation should extend to all religious institutions and their constituents.

Matthew 5:37 (1)

klapaucjusz (1167407) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883048)

"But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."

(Saint Matthew about digital media.)

Terrific.... (3, Insightful)

azakem (924479) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883092)

So now I can look forward to being aggressively proselytized on the web as well as by obnoxious yokels in the real world. Wonderful.

To say it with Blackadder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30883142)

"Baldrick, go forth into the streets and let it be known that Lord Blackadder wishes to sell his house. Percy... just go forth into the street."

Amazing visionary (5, Informative)

leromarinvit (1462031) | more than 4 years ago | (#30883190)

Wow - this Benedict XV must have been an amazing visionary to tell priests to blog, given that he died in 1922! [wikipedia.org]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?