All Comments (270)

My husband is desperate to know where the Pope got those fetching red leather laofers.

They would pair so well with his ermine-trimmed drool bib. He simply must find a pair. Size 8.

Here is what I would ask the Pope:

Do you live in the woods?

Here is what I would ask the Pope:

Do you live in the woods?

I find it outrageous that the Washington Post editors of this web site are either so ignorant or evil that they allow Hitch to post blatant LIES. Hitchins in fact KNOWS full well this is a myth because it has been publicly pointed out to him for years now.

Bernard Cardinal Law is in NO WAY under criminal indictment, or so far as is publicly known, investigation. He waited to be formally cleared by MA AG Reilly of any criminal wrongdoing before he took his new faculty position in Rome; if at any time he were to be indicted, or a warrant sworn out for his arrest he would return to the US voluntarily. In fact, since he has left MA jurisdiction all statutes of limitations for any possible past culpability are frozen "forever".

The idea that he holds diplomatic immunity and is hiding out in the Vatican is an absurd LIE that various personal injury lawyers have been peddling to their lefty media accomplices in their multiple Church extortion schemes and the Post is liable for not removing the above offending Hitchins lie and correcting the record. MA prosecutors would have no problem making a big issue out of the thing, Law was thoroughly investigated, questioned by prosecutors, personal injury lawyers in countless videotaped depositions and by grand juries for a period of years.

For all the Sturm and Drang generated by the media over a period of half a dozen years NOT ONE US BISHOP has been indicted, let alone convicted, of "conspiracy" or "cover-up" or "collusion" or "complicity" or any other ominous sounding buzz words for what boils down to failure of personal powers of clairvoyance or pre-cognition of what a particular priest may or may not have ever done, past, present or future.

In fact even Catholic priests, YES EVEN PRIESTS are entitled to the legal presumption of innocence and the CATHOLIC CHURCH is NOT THE POLICE; they are neither obliged or equipped to investigate decades old allegations against menwith no prior criminal records that have been tossed over the transom at them anonymously with no evidence by grifters and career street hustlers and their slip/fall & whiplash lawyers who shamelessly drool over the collection plate, despite being supposedly too retarded to report the allegations to the police themselves, and now need lots of money for their alleged psychic "troubles".

As I have written before, I formally challenge the Washington Post Corporation, Disney-ABC, GE-NBC, Time-Warner, NewsCorp and the NYT- Globe to perform similar comprehensive psychometric and criminological surveys of their employee databases as the USCCB has done and continues with the priesthood. We would soon see how smug the 4th estate would end up in its judgement of the 1st. But alas corporate profit motives and fears of billion-dollar class action lawsuits (easily dwarfing the exceedingly generous settlements the Church has made for cases fundamentally without merit against men in many cases long dead) from their victims would preclude any such voluntary surveys I suspect, to hell with all YOUR victims. We know how the gameis played.

Church doctrines from first to last are built on a house of cards - from Jesus' divinity to the Holy Trinity to Papal Infallibility .... and many others in between and all designed to give both weight and consistency to the entire body of doctrinal metaphysics that comprises the belief system of both Catholics and Protestants - although Protestants draw the line here and there as regards what's really real, and what's metaphorical and symbolic.

Curiously, those very Protestant fundamentalists that don't buy into various of the Catholic doctrines are the ones that buy into the biblical literalism, lock, stock, and barrel. Go figure.

As an old, make that very old, altar boy, I left when I couldn't get a straight answer on the whys and wherefores of these various doctrinal conundrums, other than to say - 'there are deep mysteries, my boy'........well, that said it all for me.

On the other hand, if we start our New Reformation with the most recent and modern of Church doctrines, that of Papal Infallibility - and work backward, we might be able to straighten out this metaphysical miasma of supernatural ideas all the way back to the first swirlings - and shed some light on those ancient and ineffable 'dark' mysteries of our distant youth.

Will this make it through the blog screen?? I seriously doubt it ..........

Hey, it's way too late for John Paul II to do anything about Mahoney, Law, and the other perv-enablers. Benedict is captain of the ship now, so it's up to him. But I hear he's going to miss his White House birthday party.... must have been that late-night sleepover at BoysTown DC! And BTW, you ARE arrogant, Hitch. Stay that way! We need you.

Dear Pope:

Welcome-o to the USA-o!

I know you're busy touring and such, but I was wondering if you could do an old altar boy a little favor?

As you may have heard (God already knows all about it), we've been having some problems lately here on the On Faith blog. For no apparent reason our
posts are getting sequestered by the blog editors and we're having one heck of a time exploring the depths of faith. (I've considered the possibility that it's all actually just been a divinely-inspired test of the limits of faith, but that seems too diabolical even for God.) Accordingly, would it be too much to ask if you could add the sin of "Screwing Up A Blog" to the
list of sins? It wouldn't have to one of the deadly ones (they aren't being gay or anything) just something that would ensure an eternity of suffering would be nice. (To aid in your dicision I've been careful to include the word "Screwing".) As to the punishment, I'll leave that up to you pros ;).

Anyway, how about those hateful, spiteful, bitter ex-Catholics that post here!?! Grrrrr...

Your chum,

Neal::

Dear Paganplace -

The gremlins could be associated with the new formatting of the home page.

In any case, it would be nice if the blog owners deigned to post a note to their readers explaining WTH is going on.

I can't find any rhyme or reason to what posts are being cut, Mr. Mark. My understanding is they tried to change something to curtail spamming, and it just doesn't work right.

I'll try again.

Two major papers on opposite coasts have front page stories today about a certain visiting icon who is very saddened by certain bad things that were done to children by adults who wear a certain type of collar and work at said icon's certain non-profit venues.

I then pointed out that neither article bothered to mention the other certain personality who is being discussed at Length At Wapo's blog (you may decipher this person's name by reading only the uppercase letters in the 4 words preceding this parenthetical phrase).

It seems that certain media outlets continue to avoid discussing the so-called law in any way whatsoever.

Let's see if that makes it through.

Anyway, trying this bit again. No one is trying to 'force Catholics away from their beliefs,' there, Speed. In the wider world, you've got to respect others rather than presume an institution like *that* has some 'moral authority' over people who aren't harming anyone.

As for Pagan ways, well, they're not so hard to keep, of themselves. People tend to make it harder for us to live, but we find they aren't so darn *conflicted* as some other ways seem to be.

I don't know where you're claiming 'doubled taxes' from, ...I understand religious institutions are still getting tremendous tax *breaks* and even trying to get the state to pay the tuitions through vouchers and all.

Posts are still getting clipped, Speed. Longer answer got lost.

It's not like I haven't described my grievances about the Church in politics before, though.

My comments in this thread are being embargoed. Anyone surprised?

Terrils:

Most regular, diocesan priests do not take a vow of poverty.

The discussion of the catholic church's aiding and abetting child rapists also brings up this question:

Do you know why they call it "organized religion"?

Because "organized crime" was already taken.

Someone call the pound - there's a rabid dog on the loose.

I dont get it, Pagan, who is attacking you?

Catholics have set beliefs, but no one is forced to be a Catholic...you can be anything you want.

More likely than not, it is seculars that try to force Catholics away from the beliefs - i.e. attacking hospitals, doubling taxing religious education, diatribes in the media and propaganda etc.

I am sure it is not easy sticking to pagan beliefs; however, I assure you being a Catholic is no cakewalk...

Oh, and, last I looked, Law was still under indictment in the Commonwealth. Gods know how many subpoenas. 'Wanted' in the sense of does anyone want to open that can, politically, that's different.

Let's also say that if you have been aggrieved by that institution and its management, they really don't mind attacking you wholesale if you aren't wanting to get back on your knees to them, no matter how badly you may have been hurt.

This is not hysteria, this is, 'Put it right and stay out of my life.'

Actually, much of how to put it right would be to stop opposing my civil and religious rights. An apology which doesn't insult my religion and person in the same breath would also salve things just a bit.

"In terms of intrusion in American politics and life, though, these always take a back seat to the legislation of personal morality when it comes to kingmaking, however. And this is the kind of thing that angers people."

Respectfully, the policy battle goes both ways and the idea that the secular public school system, for example, is "objective" in regards to respecting the ideas of faith and limited government is really something of a joke.

Also, there is increasing legislation trying to force Catholic hospitals to preform actions (such as abortion) that are against their beliefs.

If anyone should be held accountable for obstructive policies and invasive practices, it is uncle sam...who, btw, sees religion as an obstacle to control of the people.

Hence, comrade Hitchen's attention and attacks.

Speed, the current and past Popes' positions on war have really nothing for me to fault them on, don't get me wrong.

In terms of intrusion in American politics and life, though, these always take a back seat to the legislation of personal morality when it comes to kingmaking, however. And this is the kind of thing that angers people.

Also, where are the references that prove that Law is "wanted" by state authorities in MA????

Really, people, you seem to be hysterical....

So many baseless accusations and stereotypes on here it is really something.

This 2000 year of bastion of faith must really eat you up!

PaganP, the church was and is against the neocon agenda. It opposed the invasion and speaks out against the idea of "might is right"

Too bad the same couldn't be said about the neo-con, utopian Hitchens...who wouldn't he kill to spread "reason and humanity?"

Sadly ironic...

Given the extraordinary authority that the Vatican claimed, not to mention how cowed how many people were about trusting their system, only to find abusers shuffled around with impunity, ...this has hurt and angered a lot more people than one might on the face of it think. It really touched a lot of the Catholic community, and not in good ways.

Especially as the same authorities refuse to stop supporting Neocons to favor the Church's s ex agenda, politically, at the expense of things people really care about.

Still pretty raw to many, not the least those of them who were taught to try and 'make' their kids straight at 'any cost.'

Even 'diplomatic immunity,' J, can sometimes rightly be withdrawn by the 'state' (The Vatican) that it is derived from.

Why have they *not?*

My posts keep getting clipped, so I must keep it brief.

Mr. Mark,

Sanctuary? I don't know about that. It is beginning to sound more like asylum to me, as in political asylum, and now we have religious asylums for members of the clergy of religious entities - a "protected area" from persecution of the law of the land. We will have to look into possibilities of having "extradition treaties" between religious entities and the state to haul out errant, sinning and crime committing members of the clergy from being sheltered and protected by the religious entity. And enact new laws to stop religious entities from giving asylum to its errant members from the state's laws.

Bring us also to the question as to whether members of the clergy of any faith, specifically the Abrahamic faiths, as "diplomats" of God and for God, have "religious immunity" the same way diplomats have "diplomatic immunity" from persecution by the law of the land which are applied to us, mere civilians.

Cheers
"J"

BGONE asks:
"Ever hear of sanctuary? God provides it through His representatives."

Hmm? God supplies sanctuary to criminals, like those who aid and abet child rapists? How about murderers? Do god's representatives on Earth provide sanctuary to them as well?

Just asking.

B16 can appoint all of the Inquisitors he wants, so that they can falsely accuse children in Nigeria, or old women who own property, or women who are getting a little too uppity of being witches. I got news for him - the Witches will be fighting back. No more Burning Times!

D. RODRIGUEZ sez:
"The venom and spite and downright HATE I hear from atheists is what keeps me from EVER even thinking about their viewpoints."

Let me guess: you feel the same way about scientists (and anybody else, for that matter) who points out evidence that contradicts your fantasy world.

Here's the deal, DR - your fantasy world IS to be mocked, and why not? It's pure superstition married with fear and ignorance.

Let me ask you: do you pause to consider that you may upset a few people before you dismiss the existence of Zeus or Apollo or Odin or Thor? Do you feel that your saying that "Zeus was a mythical god who never existed" is a hateful, spiteful and venomous statement, or do you just consider it to be a fact that should be clear to everyone living on Earth in our enlightened times?

Well, that's the same way we atheists feel about ALL of the gods, including the Judeo-Xian versions. In fact, you probably agree with the atheists on 99% of the gods man has invented for himself over the ages, ie: you think they're all mythical. At the same time, you hold the belief that the god you worship is the one true god. That just happens to be a belief that is shared by every theist living on this planet RIGHT NOW who doesn't believe in your god but believes in their god.

There's absolutely nothing hateful or spiteful in saying that there is no evidence that any gods exist, that there is no evidence that Jesus ever lived and that to believe such nonsense is a form of self-imposed mass deception.

And here's the real kicker, DR: there is NO eternal comeuppance waiting the atheists after they die. No magic man, no right hand of god, no wailing and gnashing of teeth, no pure justice...none of the idiotic BS that your "holy books" tell you. It's all a fantastic lie, told by a group of scared little people who wouldn't make it out of 4th grade in the modern world. Yet, those are the MEn whose world view you choose to follow.

And you have the gaul to demand that atheists check their brains at the portal so you may continue to live in your fantasy world. Right.

Back at ya.

SPEED123:
"Mr. Mark - I am disappointed in your closed-mindedness..."

You'll get used to it...

"The venom and spite and downright HATE I hear from atheists is what keeps me from EVER even thinking about their viewpoints. [...] I am a very open-minded, educated, spiritual person and it offends me that there are people who would ridicule and belittle my faith, no even knowing anything about my morals and my lifestyle. "

The only knowledge required to ridicule you is that fact that you would type both of the above sentences in a single post with a straight face.

"I have NO patience for haters and liars. Most atheists I have ever encountered were one or the other."

Seems like a rather strong conclusion to reach without EVER even thinking about their viewpoints. In fact, it's starting to sound like you're a bit insecure in your faith.

"If you don't like it or want to believe it, keep it to yourself. Stop spreading your lies and your unhappiness. Just because you don't believe, doesn't give you the right to put down others who do. I am not trying to recruit you, so don't try to recruit me. "

Right, cause there's always atheists knocking on my door trying to convert me. Athiests are those clean-cut guys that ride around on bikes and wear thin ties, right?

"Bitter haters with pathetic little lives always want to drag happy people down into their abyss."

Wait... were you supposed to be one of the "happy people?"

Hey Terrils, Know-it-all- Would it make you feel better to know that I HAD indeed been sexually abused as a kid. Not by a priest, but what difference does that make? It happened. It was a terrible thing. It doesn't make me hate all men, so why should all Catholics have to be punished or all priests have to be put in the bad apple category because there were a few criminals.
Sexual perverts come in all religions, all races, all ethnic and socio-economic groups. Even some women are predators. So, take your comments and stick them. You have no right to preach at me or anyone else. You haven't walked in my shoes and you have no right to criticize my belief system or how I feel about sexual predators.

Mr. Christopher Hitchens,

We already know that you are an atheist and anti-theist just as we already know that the Pope is obviously Catholic.

What we also need to hear journalists ask, in a "level yet firm tones" (is the Pope to be spoken to as if he is a child?), what are the arrangements and agreements the US goverment has with religious entities on their internal affairs, and as to whether indiscretions, crimes or sins committed by members of the clergy is considered an internal matter.

Shelter him? Why whatever do you mean by such an absurd question? Is someone pursuing Bernard Cardinal Law?

Pickled limes are the funniest ones.

"I have NO patience for haters and liars. "

How's your patience for child molesters and those who aid and abet them? Fairly high, I'd wager, given your chosen faith and current defense of its officials.

"Before the universal institution of celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church, the deaths of these entitled clerics often resulted in claims against their estates by widows and offspring."

Off the top of my head, this was the first explanation I came up with - the church wanted control of all monies present (vow of poverty) and future(vow of celibacy). Thanks for the confirmation.

Ratzinger and science: He just promised to install the "education" of 3000 new exorcists.

We live around the year 1500. Using computers to inform everybody about it.

And there is no shortage of witch hunters, looking at 123 and his ilk.

Ever hear of sanctuary? God provides it through His representatives.

Mr. Hitchens, perhaps you would like the current Pope to spend all his short time with President Bush discussing why John Paul II did not take more decisive action against Cardinal Law. However, I would prefer if the current Pope emphasized more the continuing unhappiness the Catholic Church has with USA involvement in Iraq. From the beginning, the Catholic Church has regarded it as a fiasco. Now, I know sexual abuse is a terrible thing and should be dealt with by criminal authorities; but what do you say to a war, engaged in on false pretext (so-called WMD's), in which, so far, at least 4000 Americans have been killed, and 40,000 Americans wounded (many with permanent disabilities). As for the number of Iraqi killed, some estimates are 100,000 or more. Not only that, the war continues, with President Bush threatening Iran. As for religious solace, it seems much of the USA going to war has been supported by Evangelical Christians on the right-wing. Therefore, your counsel, as Pope, could be very important as you talk with our President, and hopefully convince him to stop the madness!

You trivialize the potential suffering of abused kids, there, Mr. Rodriguez.

A lot of the 'angry atheists' rather resent the recent intrusions of religion into their public lives, often, ironically enough, tarring me with the same brush as the people who abused *me,*

...I certainly get angry, repeatedly, when the Church treats as a mere scandal, the very systems that teach support abuse of all kinds, in the course of trying to defame *my* religion and take away *my* civil rights because of *their* desire for a sense of control.

It's not 'hate,' but, yes, I do get angry. I want to enjoy *my* life, and *my religion,* and not be persecuted for my faith in the Gods that quietly got me through the 'hell' I was put through.

D. Rodriquez,

Shouldn't superstition be mocked?

People who derive "truth" from the absence of any evidence should be scorned. Just because many people believe something doesn't make it any more "true".

Most religious people portray themselves as being modest and having humility, but it shows extreme ARROGANCE to think that:

1. YOU have a special place in the universe
2. The creator of the universe watches YOU every moment
3. God sent his son as a human sacrifice to die for YOU! ... intrinsic sin (what a disgusting, violent idea)
4. YOU have telepathy and are able to transmit thoughts to God.
5. YOU can go to heaven and be immortal.

Its mind-boggling that billions of people can believe this nonsense without one shred of evidence.

The Pope personifies this arrogance that all religious people have...

Chris Hitchens has the right to ask the Poop (oops typo) anything he pleases. As for Hitchens retarded ideas about the Iraq war, what does that have to do with his Pope question? It's a different subject. Chris Hitchens is not an idiot, he knows he is wrong on the war, but if he changes his tune he won't get many pundit jobs!

The venom and spite and downright HATE I hear from atheists is what keeps me from EVER even thinking about their viewpoints. They are so CONSUMED with hate and rage against mommy or daddy or whatever other authority figure was too strict with them, or maybe was too harsh about religion, that they lose all credibility. I am a very open-minded, educated, spiritual person and it offends me that there are people who would ridicule and belittle my faith, no even knowing anything about my morals and my lifestyle.
I have NO patience for haters and liars. Most atheists I have ever encountered were one or the other. If you don't like it or want to believe it, keep it to yourself. Stop spreading your lies and your unhappiness. Just because you don't believe, doesn't give you the right to put down others who do. I am not trying to recruit you, so don't try to recruit me. Bitter haters with pathetic little lives always want to drag happy people down into their abyss.

Why should the Pope get more respect than any other leader of a tiny country?

My answer: Because to Catholic (which comprise a huge percentage of this nation) he is a spiritual symbol and a person of esteem.

He should get as much respect as the leader of Andorra, Luxumburg, or Monaco.
My answer: Because he has more than just a political role in this world. What about the Dalai Lama? Everyone falls all over him, what about that, Einstein?

Yet Bush is going to give him a 21-gun salute.

We all know Bush as is not the smartest person, and his treatment of Benedict shows us all (once more) what a gullible fool he is.
My answer: You are so full of yourself, aren't you? Are you just a rebel without a clue and you hate all authority figures? Did you dad disapprove of you or punish you too much? Poor Kenneth.

To all the Catholics (or evangelicals) out there, maybe one day you'll grow up and stop insisting there are invisible friends out there that you can talk to telepathically.

Grow up out of your insistence that celibate priests deserve any sort of respect.

Grow up and think for yourself, instead of believing all the garbage you were told when you were a child.

My Answer: You have issues. I suggest you go see a therapist.

Kenneth,

Since you attacked me and told me to grow up and what I should believe- I will answer your attack with this question- WHAT are you so afraid of?
WHO are YOU to tell me anything about what I believe? You don't know anything about me and yet, you tell me to grow up and abandon my faith. You, Sir, are just as repulsive as any religious leader you obviously despise. Go crawl back under your rock before you spread more of your negative disease. Sorry, Kill Joy- your atheist slander doesn't move me in the slightest. You are a sad little creature.

"You are indeed correct to state that the believers are unbelievable."

Mr. Mark - I am disappointed in your closed-mindedness...

why limit it to cardinal law? and, why limit it to sexual abuses? ratzinger should explain all the sinister acts of the catholic church in recent years at least if not throughout its sordid history.

Dear Secular -

You are indeed correct to state that the believers are unbelievable.

I sometimes wonder whether or not our species will ever grow up.

MARIA-TERESA Writes:

MR. HITCHENS, your quarrel is not with Benedict XVI.
It was John Paul II - who must have had his reasons - who called Cardinal Law to Rome and named him Arch-Priest of Santa Maria Maggiore.

Do you really think Benedict XVI would defy John Paul II's judgment on this matter in order to make a dramatic gesture that would be to his, Benedict's, benefit - at least, in the eyes of those who think that only some such dramatic gesture could begin to 'make up' for the sufferings of the victims of priest offenders?

Besides, what does any of us know about what penance and restitution John Paul II may have asked Cardinal Law to do in private - or that Cardinal Law himself may be doing to make up for his apparent sins of omission on this matter? Can any Catholic seriously think that John Paul II would name someone irredeemably evil and tainted to be Arch-Priest of the world's first and greatest Marian Basilica?

Grow up. In your mind and the minds of those like Dohessy of SNAP, this sexual abuse issue has become like the Holocaust. Because nothing anyone can ever say or do will ever undo all the evil and harm done, there will always be those like you who will not let the issue go away, no matter what is said or done about it.

You believers are just UNBELIEVABLE. The accused Mr. Law was and is a citizen of USA, why is he not and why did he not hand over the misbehaving priests to the law enforcement. Your rhetorical question that John Paul II would not appoint an evil doer to such exalted post is indeed laughable. As if this John Paul II knows what the just punishment should be. Why would we believe that this guy JPII should judge Law. That accuse Law should stand trial like any other accused criminal. This guy Ratzinger, if he has any balls or morals should say throw the scoundrel to the wolves, if he is innocent the wolves will not devour him, if he is then he deserves it. Dont you think this guy of so much faith does not have faith that his god would not mete out injustice to this accused Mr. Law?

Silence Dogood sez:

"The first and most important form of Justice is the Pure Justice that awaits Mr. Law...and each of us. It will be administered."

??? What are you talking about? Death? Is death the final form of justice?

Oh, no...wait...you mean that there's some supernatural being out there who is waiting for us to die so that they may administer the "pure justice" you're talking about.

And automobiles run on fairy dust...

Get real. It is ENTIRELY within mankind's power to administer justice. The laws are on the books! We need not wait for an IMAGINED form of justice to take place in the fairytale lands of religious belief. Justice can and should be administered NOW. Simply send Cardinal Law back to USA to stand trial.

"Pure justice awaits us." I'm still giggling over that one.

Good luck Chris.

If I remember correctly this pope, before becoming pope, sent a directive to the effect that all child molesting, raping activities had to be covered up to the utmost, whenever possible and shield the guilty and the church from anyone investigating.

If you molest a child and get caught you go to jail and become a registered sex offender, but if you are complicit in millions such offenses they call you Your Holiness.

It's the Vatican's own No Child's Behind Left Initiative.

D. Rodriguez wrote (referring to Hitchens):

You, Sir, are a nasty, bitter, hater. You don't deserve to ask the Pope, whom you refer to by his last name, anything.
-------------------------------------------------

Why should the Pope get more respect than any other leader of a tiny country?

He should get as much respect as the leader of Andorra, Luxumburg, or Monaco.

Yet Bush is going to give him a 21-gun salute.

We all know Bush as is not the smartest person, and his treatment of Benedict shows us all (once more) what a gullible fool he is.

To all the Catholics (or evangelicals) out there, maybe one day you'll grow up and stop insisting there are invisible friends out there that you can talk to telepathically.

Grow up out of your insistence that celibate priests deserve any sort of respect.

Grow up and think for yourself, instead of believing all the garbage you were told when you were a child.

One wonders where this information about "the rape and torture of tens of thousands of American children" comes from. Surely not police reports. We have statutes of limitations for a reason: proof and the recollection of witnesses deteriorates after time. Most likely, the numbers are in the TENS, not tens of thousands. Just as passengers riding on a bus involved in an accident find it profitable to strap on a neck brace and claim compensation for imagined "whiplash," I fear tens of thousands of opportunists (and their blood-sucking lawyers) found it might be profitable to claim they were raped 30 years ago and collect a quick cash settlement. Again, where is the proof? And why were not these alleged rapes reported shortly after they occurred? Rapes reported by women after physical evidence has deteriorated are laughed out of court. Why the double standard? Does someone have an agenda to destroy the Catholic Church financially?

I'd ask God the Father of the most evil trinity in history exactly what drove his thug predecessor's associations with the likes of Hitler.

How about explaining why a pope long ago wrote Matthew 24:7-- and nation shall rise against nation.

Was that not exactly what WWII was? Of course.

Crosses filling the entire globe. His sons in megachurches in the US trying to cause Armageddon via a nuclear holocaust.

Crusades, inquisitions, people dying all the time, kids getting raped by evil old men.

The bible is a fraud and the world knows this. Snakes do not talk. Christianity is just a hybrid of free masonry anyways-- 33 levels of that cult; 33 years that jesus lived.

People keep wondering about end times, using the book of Revelation.

In the name of common sense-- when it says, the mark of the beast is the mark of a man, and it is 666- then it obviously meant Nero. It was some nutcase describing in gory detail (probably sucking acid and blowing coke as well)-- what was happening to early Christian mythologists.

I say, they deserved it-- the RC Church as an institution is directly responsible for the greatest mass murders and crimes against humanity in human history; it is a death cult; full of trash, pomp, extravagance, and lies.

If this man Jesus could come back (he never existed though I don't think)-- he would take one of those 7 swords coming out of his impish mouth in those Revelations and spear the evil old bastard Ratzinger through the nuts.

But hey, at least the Pope wears a dunce cap... too bad he doesn't merely sit in his golden corner.

Thus much for the greatest selling piece of trash and death cult in human history.

Yes-- that is what I would ask this evil old bastard sausage pope; he has evil in his eyes.

I think that someone has the right to challenge Pope Benedict on Cardinal Law, but that person isn't Hitchens. One can easily argue that Hitchens shares responsibility for the suffering of millions of Iraqi men, women, and children due to his championing of the Iraq War.

If we are going to hold popes responsible for their sins, we should do the same for columnists.

Mr. Hutchins,

At the core of your pointed question lies a valid expectation for pure justice.

However, such a notion cleaves into at least three categories:

The first and most important form of Justice is the Pure Justice that awaits Mr. Law...and each of us. It will be administered.

The second form is civil, and people of faith know that civil/criminal law is flawed. Maybe statutes of limitations in this second category have passed, where they can still be used, I vote with you, if there is probable cause...let's go for it.

The third form, ecclesiastical, has probably already been dispensed and, not being a Catholic, I can only agree with you and your implications...but I would rather find Christ's positions on hypocrisy in the pages of the Bible than from any man.

Oh what a day that awaits each of us.

MR. HITCHENS, your quarrel is not with Benedict XVI.
It was John Paul II - who must have had his reasons - who called Cardinal Law to Rome and named him Arch-Priest of Santa Maria Maggiore.

Do you really think Benedict XVI would defy John Paul II's judgment on this matter in order to make a dramatic gesture that would be to his, Benedict's, benefit - at least, in the eyes of those who think that only some such dramatic gesture could begin to 'make up' for the sufferings of the victims of priest offenders?

Besides, what does any of us know about what penance and restitution John Paul II may have asked Cardinal Law to do in private - or that Cardinal Law himself may be doing to make up for his apparent sins of omission on this matter? Can any Catholic seriously think that John Paul II would name someone irredeemably evil and tainted to be Arch-Priest of the world's first and greatest Marian Basilica?

Grow up. In your mind and the minds of those like Dohessy of SNAP, this sexual abuse issue has become like the Holocaust. Because nothing anyone can ever say or do will ever undo all the evil and harm done, there will always be those like you who will not let the issue go away, no matter what is said or done about it.

here some great news they dont want to tell you bush lovers.

Sullivan points out that the military''s causality reports also exclude the "enormous number [of new veterans] flooding the VA," often with medical problems developed due to the war. A January report by the Department of Veterans Affairs showed 299,585 veterans who recently served in the Middle East had been treated by the VA since 2002. Forty percent (120,049) of the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who sought care from the VA did so for mental health disorders.

thats a total americans hurt,injurd,sick,mental,maimed, ready america here it is 374,298 americans....

how many more americans has to get hurt,dead, or worst, how many more america

I know Cardinal Law is a bad man, Hitch, but you don't advance your cause when you claim that he "organized...the rape and torture..." I don't think anyone believes he set about organizing any priestly pedophilia (most of which, if you're honest you'll admit, did not involve either rape or torture). They all, including Law and Ratzie, deserve to be flogged in public; there's no need to indulge in hyperbole to make your point.

The entire Catholic Church (like all the other churches) is just a tax-free, money making business and anyone who thinks it is any more than that must be a descendent of someone who used to carve totem-poles or build pyramids.

Amen to that.

The Pope, like Dick Cheney, doesn't really care what people think. Mr. Hitchens interest in wasting time and energy asking the Pope questions would lead one to conclude that Hitchens is a bit more of a showman than the philosopher he claims to be....

You, Sir, are a nasty, bitter, hater. You don't deserve to ask the Pope, whom you refer to by his last name, anything. If you don't think he already knows and is going to address that issue, you are wrong. You aren't so clever that you are t