Main content | Sidebar | Links
Advertising

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

There's no place like Rome, there's no place like Rome.

Newsweek's Barbie Nadeau calls Benedict XVI a "religious-fashion icon" and says he has a penchant for designer wear. The magazine's Web site doesn't happen to feature the photo of his red Prada loafers that you'll find on page 10 of the November 21 issue, but Deutsche Welle does have a picture of his Oz-worthy shoes in "The Cassock Wars" (11.4.05).

Copyright © 2005 by Philocrites | Posted 15 November 2005 at 5:33 PM

Previous: Biblical exegesis in the newspaper.
Next: Political survey of Unitarian Universalist ministers.

Advertising

Advertising

12 comments:

Bill Baar:

November 15, 2005 05:59 PM | Permalink for this comment

Italians wouldn't be happy if he bought stuff made in China from Walmart. I think it's buy Italian in Rome.

h sofia:

November 15, 2005 06:11 PM | Permalink for this comment

Skimming over that article, all I can think is: And what would Jesus wear?

Jason:

November 15, 2005 10:08 PM | Permalink for this comment

>>And what would Jesus wear?

Birkenstocks. He wore them in all of the pics in my catechism books.

Bill Baar:

November 17, 2005 08:23 AM | Permalink for this comment

One think bothers me here. UU is the only religon I've participated in where I worry about crude shots against other religions.

My wife was raised Catholic. My three kids raised Catholic through their pre-teens or teens. They can come up with all sorts of anti-Catholic sayings but I know a comment or joke about the Pope might sting a bit. I know it would hurt my in laws. They might joke about it too, but especially my in-laws have kind of left-over insecurity of being "fish eaters" in a protestant world. ("Fish eaters" is what my father-in-law claims protestants call Catholics).

I spent ten years in a Catholic Church and never heard anything close to this. I don't know why we take shots at other religions when we're really a religion that feeds off others for members.

h sofia:

November 17, 2005 03:40 PM | Permalink for this comment

Bill, are you talking about this article, or the responses to the article, or a different article?

Dudley Jones:

November 17, 2005 05:01 PM | Permalink for this comment

Rely to Bill Baar:

You are making a pretty accurate comment, based on what I have seen and heard. Maybe that is starting to change a bit - I hope so.


Bill Baar:

November 17, 2005 05:18 PM | Permalink for this comment

reply to h sofia,

Both really...

Vestments really turn me off by the way and I think it's some holdover from my Great Grandparents Dutch Calvinism. My Dad didn't like to see clerical collars on the Minister at the Congregational Church we attended.

Anyways, if the Catholic paper here ran stories on Sinkford's suits or shoes or car or whatever, I'd be a little put off.

h sofia:

November 17, 2005 06:53 PM | Permalink for this comment

reply to bill baar,

I was baptised Catholic and both of my grandmothers were/are. Still, I always thought the Pope's attire was overwrought. Reporting that he wears Prada shoes isn't a negative thing, it's a fact (apparently) - and the article didn't strike me as disparaging or disapproving, only a little irreverent ("popemobile").

I asked the question about Jesus not to be flippant, but in all seriousness. As much as I am emotionally attached to some catholic traditions, much of the pomp and circumstance bears little resemblance to the life of Jesus. In short, the papal robes, etc. are the trappings of a catholic history, but have nothing to do (in my mind) with the truths that Jesus spoke. People might find any critique of the Pope to be offensive, but perhaps it's better to wonder about the clothes than the entire system?

Bill Baar:

November 17, 2005 07:52 PM | Permalink for this comment

reply: h sofia

Why should we critque their system?

Ratzinger does wonder about it, and writes deeply about it, and I find that interesting. I take him seriously.

I read one of his books after reading this comment by Oriana Fallaci,

"I feel less alone when I read the books of Ratzinger." I had asked Ms. Fallaci whether there was any contemporary leader she admired, and Pope Benedict XVI was evidently a man in whom she reposed some trust. "I am an atheist, and if an atheist and a pope think the same things, there must be something true. It's that simple! There must be some human truth here that is beyond religion."
It's very true. I didn't agree with him on many things but I did not feel alone.

h sofia:

November 17, 2005 08:31 PM | Permalink for this comment

reply to bill bar,

I am puzzled by your question, "Why should we critique their system?" I'm just not seeing the connection between your reply and the article on the pope's shoes, unless you are saying that no one should comment on his attire because he is the Pope, or because he strikes you as a good man.

I'm not debating with you, by the way; I just haven't grasped what it is you're saying.


Bill Baar:

November 19, 2005 08:52 AM | Permalink for this comment

I don't feel like I'm debating with you h sofia. I feel like were just thinking outloud which is what blogging often is.

I don't think there is anything particulary wrong with the original post.

As far as the why critique comment, let me just frame my thinking here this way; with three facts from my own personal experience. They just exlpain one current UU's persepective. That's all you should take them for.

1) I was a UU for five or six years at Unity Temple in Oak Park. I was on the board for year or two (felt like a decade). You'd get these often ex Catholics who would unload all of their conflicts with the Pope; graphically unload it all.

2) I later married and had three kids (two step kids). We raised them Catholic because my wife was Catholic and the step kids Dad was Catholic. About five years ago we came over the UU Church in Geneva. I was concerned someone would say something troubling about Catholicism to my kids. I was more concerned about this than they were, but I didn't want them to have bad feelings about the faith of their Grand parents and some of their aunts and uncles and cousins.

3) Also, I grew up Protestant in a Irish Catholic neigborhood of south Oak Park Illinois. At that time Ascension Parsih was the largest in the Chicago Arch Dicocise. Catholic and Protestant was still a big deal. My folks drilled into to me you didn't voice opinions about other peoples religions. You didn't use the N word either, and didn't make fun of anyones job. That and be honest and go to college because no one else in the family ever had were the only rules I ever grew up with at home.

4) I hate the word 'acceptance'. I don't want anyones acceptance. But I spent ten years at St Pats Church here in St Charles Illinois with my family. I never joined. I never took communion. But I paid and made sure my kids went to CCD. So that made me a sort of Catholic in my practical book. I never felt UNaccepted at this Church. Only once did I hear a funny comment about Baptists singing and I think that was in the context of Catholics not being very good.

I remembered the days of my peers talking about the Jews killed Christ, and the specail levels in hell for Protestants and non Catholics.

I also belonged to St Catherines in Oak Park for a while. That parishes politics and theology makes most UU Churches look Tory.

The think I really noticed about St Pats though were how mixed the families were and how typical my families situation was. Interestingly, the Priests and Nuns I got to know all grew up in split families with one Catholic and one non-Catholic parent. I'd find that out at CCD and first Communions. I'd be standing with my kid but no way would I take communion.

Anyways, sorry if I'm a comment hog here. I wanted to let you know where I'm coming from and why I comment the way I do on some of these posts.

I think it gets down to something drilled into me very early. I remember a guy named Eddie Breen in Kindergarden telling me about hell and purgatory and where I would guy. I remember my Mom telling me next time he talked liked that to tell him politely "I was of a different faith" and didn't believe that" and change the topic. I didn't find that totally satisfactory and was still concerned about hell.

But I've still been trying to politely tell people I'm of a different faith if the topic comes up, and I try and be sensitive about not being like Eddie and unloading my hell on others.

I've rarely encountered any Eddies anymore though. I've never had anyone in twenty years unload their faith on me.

Happy Thanksgiving too. It's my favorite holiday.

Dudley Jones:

November 26, 2005 09:22 PM | Permalink for this comment

I saw somewhere that the Pope has red shoes because the Roman Emperor had red shoes. Part of the richness of his faith is the deep connection to our shared past. Sometimes I miss things like that.



Comments for this entry are currently closed.