Topic awaiting preservation: The popes' a dope

I always find it bewildering when these high holy men, who spend their lives extolling their love for their god and the virtues of the heavenly afterlife, then take advantage of every available medical resource to keep them from ascending to that richly deserved reward.

It is a good thing that this pope has shown compassion by embracing the deformed and diseased. It is unfortunate he could not find it in himself or his god to extend the same sort of compassion to the hundreds or thousands of children abused by paedophilic catholic priests. Choosing, instead of a hearty mea culpa, heartfelt apology and a generous application of green poultice, to deny the crime and continue to hide and protect these predatory villains.

I shall shed no tears for this man.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

I have always loved this Pope. I believe he is a man who genuinely loves God and humankind. I do not know for sure, but I doubt he was personally involved in the scandal. I honestly hope he was not.

The pedophile scandal is a huge blight on the RC church and there will be hell to pay for some as a result, both victims and perps, quite literally. It is horrific. The only consolation I can take in it is that it has finally been brought to light and people are cracking down on it.

Ehtheist, since I'm just getting to know you, is your beef primarily with the Catholic church, all of Xianity, and/or all religion? I assume your an atheist? I am not Catholic but I am Christian. In fact, I often get into debates with jade on that topic.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Wouldn't it be idealistic to think that the Pope was not informed of the "dirty laundry" of the Church?

If he wasn't aware of it, that leaves a huge amount of questions, about exactly what he truly was/is aware of, and how much control over the Church he really had.

I don't care about the pope. Still I doubt he was aware of every pedophile affair. He gives guidelines to the RC Church but he does not control all his minions.

I sincerely doubt that the pope was aware of every case of pedophilia! I am however pretty sure that he knew that it was a problem, and that there were pedophiles under the clergy that were being protected by the Church.

If he was totally unaware of the problem, then that raises serious questions about his ability to control and steer the Church, doesn't it?

Bugs,

Thank you for your kind words on Pope John Paul. He truly is a very holy man. I would ask for your prayers at this time as he is very sick. I know we don't agree all the time but know you are very sincere in your words.

I agree. Although I haven't been able to see as much of what Pope John Paul has done, I have been able to gather that he is and was a righteous man. I hope that he does get better, because he has been a great pope so far.

Okay guys, the Pope (I am guessing) is in the same boat that Paul was in when he was around. Paul wanted desperately to leave this plane of existance and be with Jesus again. Desperately. But, he stayed. Why? For the people. For God's children. Paul stayed here so that he could instruct and help out those who still needed his help (he was the primary Gentile Missionary of the time). The same could be said of Pope John Paul. I have no doubt that he can't wait to get a hug from Jesus on a job well done. But he is trying to stay here so that he can still help those out who need it.

As for the Pope not knowing about everything, I'm sure he doesn't either. The Pope can't know everything, everywhere. That is why he has help. There are many people who handle things on a smaller and local scale. (correct me if I'm wrong Jade) The Pope is more in touch about international measures.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

Man, where DO I start?

There is a phrase used in law to do with liability and responsibility "...knew or ought to have known".

It means if you are in a position of authority and you claim you didn't know what was going on, you should have and are still responsible. Applies here.

Cracking down is hardly the applicable term, there are some clergy being prosecuted and not just in the catholic church. At the same time, the offenses are sytill taking place and the churches where they figure they can get away with it are still covering them up.

If this were not the case, if the various churches had purged themselves of pedophiles, the new charges which keep coming to light, would not.

Bug I pretty much have no use for any religion, but most particularly for those which hold themselves up to be paragon's of moral virtue and who yet allow such things as the pedohpilia matters continue. No I don't believe in any gods.

POI, he didn't have to be aware of every instance, merely the fact they were taking place. He knew and did nothing. He is a perfect example of a religious hypocrite.

Jade, let me see if I have this correct, you expect this god, with the whole universe to manage, to intercede and fix the pope's flu just because you pray? Talk about hubris.

As well, where is your humanity? The poor man is at death's door and in extreme discomfort. You want him to continue to suffer?

Gid, methinks you have a terminal case of rectumlinear vision.

I notice none of the Bible Thumpers addressed the issue of why, if heaven is so wonderful, all those religious people spend so much money extending their time on earth?

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

I must say, I am shocked and appalled at the level of naivety that has been shown by the religious members in this thread.

The pedophile scandals of the Church have been going on for a long time. It has been in the news. I haven't seen one word on this from the pope himself. Did he at least express his deepest apologies and regards to the hordes of victims affected? Did he pursue these clerics hiding behind their frocks, and deliver them to justice?

I think he was more concerned on how this could impact the image of the Church, and actively worked to keep it quiet and covered up.

This is not some little type of misdemeanor here. It is a very serious crime, and it does terrible things to the victims. That the Chruch bent so much time and effort into attempting to keep it quiet and out of the media and the courts - the pope must have known about this - it was (and is) a crisis!

Thanks WS for re-iterating my point. It is the refusal by the religious to even admit this sort of thing is going on which allows it to continue. Note how they gloss over it or simply ignore it.

This is soto voce approval of the practice and of the cover-up.

It is a problem for all churches as well, not just the Catholic and is taking place somewhere as you are reading this.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

What strikes me the most is that nobody seems to be shocked by a 84 years old man experiencing several disabilities and still running the catholic church...

On the contrary thousands of catholics are praying for him to recover.

Yes, there really is a crisis in the catholic church. And the problem is that most christians are blind about how outdated and static their dogma is. If young and dynamic people lead this religion perhaps things would change, but christians want senile popes who please themselves in their immobilism.

Pedophelia is just an example. Remember, 26 years ago John Paul II acknowledged Galileo was right. Yes, it was in 1979, 10 years after men walked on the moon, and 346 years after Galileo was sentenced to life by the church for his work.

----
If wishes were fishes, we'd all cast nets.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

I must say, I am shocked and appalled at the level of naivety that has been shown by the religious members in this thread.

---

I don't exactly have any say in the affairs of the RC church. I have been extremely critical of the pedophile scandal, beginning 10 years before it was common knowledge when I had first heard of it.

Ehtheist is right about this not being limited to Roman Catholicism. It is very difficult for human beings to rise above their natural behavior and in no way are Xians excepted from that. But since they hold themselves up to a higher standard they need to be prepared to own up to their actions. In our culture pedophilia is illegal, and the RC church should not have protected their priests from legal action. They could still have worked to restore and rehabilitate all the while following the laws of the land and taking the moral high ground after such a terrible travesty. This goes for all churches.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

If he was totally unaware of the problem, then that raises serious questions about
his ability to control and steer the Church, doesn't it?

---

I would think so, yes. I tend to think he's been out of if for quite some time now. I don't agree with the Catholic model of church government. As you may recall, I favor only Christ sitting where the Pope sits and having autonomous congregations accountable to Christ and not to Rome. We've had some threads in the past that have explored this topic in more detail.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

I agree completely that the issue of sexual predation is a human, not a catholic, problem.

Why it becoms a catholic problem more specifically is a multi-tiered issue.

1) A priest is placed in a position of almost absolute power. Even today, people are taught that they are to listen to the priest on all matters (at least many are). Priests act as counselors in many situations, and I have many times heard some of the most detrimental advice come from them.

2) A priest is looked at as somehow better than normal humans. They are looked as stronger, more moral, more in control of temptation. The problem here is twofold -

a) nobody is better than human. we're all human, and while some of us are better than others at controlling ourselves...we're all still human.

b) the priesthood is a sort of refuge for a certain caste of person. The type of person who feels he *cannot* control his temptations....the type of person who feels he needs to keep away from the public as a whole, the type of person who has deep-seeded issues to work out (such as homosexual feelings that they cannot come to terms with....feeling that they are wrong for having such feelings....or even true sexual deviancies like a predaliction for pedophilia. {** please note I am not equating homosexuality with pedophilia...jsut listing the types of issues that people do have...}).

3) The catholic church, as has been demonstrated throughout it's history, is more concerned with appearing to be right than they are with being right (the Galileo issue is a fine example, and there are thousands more...).

The combination of these things makes the catholic priesthood a virtual breeding ground for sexually abusive behavior. Something needs to change, very drastically.

Does this mean that all christians are responsible for the actions of these priests and their protectors? Of course not. But many beyond the priests themselves most *certainly* bear responsibility. In some cases, the parents themselves are at fault to a rather large extent as well.

And the rest of the congregation who follow blindly, and refuse to believe that the evil happening right in front of them is real...
How much insult is added to injury when a child is raped by one of the people he is taught to respect above so many others....and has nowhere to turn because nobody will hear it...?

DL, I think that is very well put. Not dealing with this problem will only allow it to continue. Reform is absolutely essential regarding this problem.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

How much insult is added to injury when a child is raped by one of the people he
is taught to respect above so many others....and has nowhere to turn because
nobody will hear it...?

---

I believe the life to come is more important than the present one, therefore I would take that even further. Representatives of the church who abuse young people in this way quite often commit murder of the soul. If by their abuse they drive the victim away from God forever, they have effectively damned them to hell on top of causing them years of damage in this life to deal with. How would you like that on your rap sheet?

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

If a pedophilic priest drives a youth away from the church, it would be the greatest favour he could bestow. Though it would be the wrong way of going about it. The churches have proven they are far more interested in damage control than in aid for the victims and so staying with the church would merely aggravate the injury.

At the same time the victim might have a chance to clear his head of all the foolishness pumped into it by the church and learn to see it for the tissue of lies it all is.

I'd like to see these buggers get there's here as there is no more an afterlife than there is a god.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

(Edited by Ehtheist on 02-27-2005 02:58)

Ehtheist, it is a given in the Asylum that the existence of God can neither be proven nor disproven.

So here's another getting to know you question. Do you *believe* there is no god, or do you hold there is no reason to acknowledge God's existence in the absence of proof to that effect?

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

As I said above, I don't care about the pope, did not follow the many pedophilic priests affairs, except some that happen in France, and didn't know the pope waited to denounce them.

Actually the hierarchic superiors of the pedophilic priests are penally responsibles for not denouncing the crimes they know of. Therefore they must be judged and sentenced just like the bas***** they protected.

quote:

---

If by their abuse they drive the victim away from God forever, they have effectively damned them to hell on top of causing them years of damage in this life to deal with.

---

I wish you good luck to convince a victim of a pedophilic priest to not renounce to "his/her" faith by fear of being damned to hell. I doubt the victims are willing to offer the other cheek and be abused again for the love of God and to "save their soul".

poi, that is exactly my point. Victims of this abuse are often driven away from God for good. From your perspective I suppose it is cause for rejoicing, but surely you know that from mine it is horrific.

But there is one thing that we can both agree on. The perpetrators must answer to the earthly authorities for these crimes.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Not only the perpetrators but also the people who covered them up must answer to the authorities for these crimes.

As they say, "to the fullest extent of the law". I suppose that varies by country.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

I have no belief in any god bug and there is a total absense of evidence in favour of any of them existing.

Again I repeat, as to the matter of proof, the burden of same is upon the one making the positive claim where there is no evidence to support the contention.

So perhaps the Asylum credo should be re-written to acknowledge this fact.

Which fact, in case you missed it, is: it is not necessary to disprove the existance of that which is not there.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

Which fact, in case you missed it, is: it is not necessary to disprove the existance of that which is not there.

---

it sure is old, but still, amen to that


People asked me to prove the nonexistence of God, I got confused and said..."How can I prove nonexistence of something that doesn't exist?"

I will not rule out the possibility of a Supreme Being. Just because we cannot to date prove or disprove the existence thereof, does not mean that it is not possible. Please keep in mind that Science has taught us that there are things that at a particular moment, could not be explained but were later explained as Scientific methods of measuring, etc advanced.

I like to keep an open mind here, and let the facts speak for themselves.

Thus, we have neither proof for or against the existence of God to date.

I believe that this is something that most of us "oldies" here have come to an agreement on and is a good basis to have such discussions on religion, without participating in flame wars.

Unfortunately, there are always those who for some reason cannot accept this stance (though it is reasonable).

To agree upon a common basis to debate and discuss on, allows us to exchange experiences, ideas and thoughts on these matters (both Religious and Scientific). It is also a basis that we can all accept - even if one does not totally agree with it personally, the evidence (or lack thereof) lends a reasonable credence to such a basis.

quote:

---

poi, that is exactly my point. Victims of this abuse are often driven away from God for good. From your perspective I suppose it is cause for rejoicing, but surely you know that from mine it is horrific.

But there is one thing that we can both agree on. The perpetrators must answer to the earthly authorities for these crimes

---

.

I agree with this, but let us not forget in the mind of a child, who is held in higher esteem in family life. Its the parents. The role models, and care takers. Parents & family members are sexual abusers too. Statistics are that a child's mind is severely damaged by the abuse he suffers from a family member than a religious. The crime of sexual abuse is rampant all over the world and does not discriminte. It happens in every class, race and age group and culture. A victim sees life differently and becomes bitter and trust is often shattered. A different road is traveled after a victim feels let down by a persons held in trust. Their heart turns cold, and its hard for them to love. They find ways to escape the traumas thur other abuses. Lets not be blind to the persons pointing the fingers crying about the religious scandal of child abuse, when in their own households crimes of sexual abuse are committed.

(Edited by jade on 02-28-2005 01:18)

Not in my houshold Jade, I don't know what goes on in yours.

Certainly sexual abuse by family members is rampant (I think in some parts of Arkansas and Georga it is mandatory)and abhorant, this does not excuse church authorities from their guilt. Every single person who knew of these acts and did not report them is equally guilty, every single person who was complicit in a cover up and shifting the offending clergy from one diocese (oh boy, fresh boys!) to another is equally guilty. The guilt extends all the way to the top and only the most facile liar or head-in-the-sand zealot would deny the fact.

Personally I hope the lawsuits bankrupt every chuirch involved in the lawsuits. Perhaps then they will learn to care more for the welfare of their flocks than for Mammon.

But I doubt it.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

So, once again, your answer is to point out that other peopel do it too, and try to ficus more on that instead of actually addressing the issue itself?

Yes, it happens in families. Yes, loved ones commit such acts on innocent victims as well.

But individuals committing these acts are not a global organization who shuffle the perpertrator's from town to town, intentionally allowing them find more innocent and unknowing victims over and over for the sake of not having to address the issue - for the sake of keeping the image of their organization clean while the underside rots.

People like you, Jade, who constantly downplay the seriousness of the issue, on all it's levels, are the kind of people who share in this burden of guilt!

Yes, I mean that very seriously. You have countless times swept under the carpet these attrocities, diverting and protecting, and belittling the horror they have done.

That is disgusting. Very truly.

Geem DL, I wish I had said that. Nice!

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

People like you, Jade, who constantly downplay the seriousness of the issue, on all it's levels, are the kind of people who share in this burden of guilt!

Yes, I mean that very seriously. You have countless times swept under the carpet these attrocities, diverting and protecting, and belittling the horror they have done.

That is disgusting. Very truly.

---

I never have downplayed the seriousness of the scandal. Think what you must of me if it makes you feel better. You thinking of me as a guilty partaker in the scandal just proves my point about anti-catholic bigtory. I am truly not suprised by your better than them attitude. To see 1 billion Catholics as child molesters is truly a extremely dicriminating view. If you only knew how absurd that way of thinking comes across. I can only wonder.

I was merely pointing out that sexual abuse happens on a greater level in the family home. Odds are that it happens more at home than at church(s). So, also shift you concern if it is genuine for the hypocrite who may live next door and who may be the pillar of the community and is complaining the loudest about church abuse.

I use to work in a rectory when I was going to school. I would see families coming in for domestic family and sexual abuse. Coaches, fathers, uncles, teachers would be the perpetrators too. The priest would bring in the family member(s) and counsel. So for the bad you see, there is also great good the church performs in helping families of abuse. One boy in particular had been penetrated by his father from 6 to 12 years old. The priest referred the case to an attorney to bring charges. The mother supposedly never knew of the abuse. I found this hard to believe being a parent myself that a mother could not know.

So, if you want to think a few bad apples in the family of the church soils the whole institution, then think again. Bringing the evil into the light, helps to cleanse and heal the wounded so it may never happen again.

quote:

---

Bringing the evil into the light, helps to cleanse and heal the wounded so it may never happen again.

---

Then stop making excuses, and stop belittling the actions that took place throughout the heirarchy of the catholic church, and have been covered up by priest, bishop, and parishiner alike.

Your other points are irrelevant, and put many words in my mouth, so I will not bother to address them.

My initial points stand as they were made, as does my opinion of your viewpoint.

Talk about downplaying the problem. A few bad apples? Man are you blind. We are talking about barrels of apples pal and over centuries!

I have also heard of abused children going to their priest for help and then finding themselves abused again.

Priest is generic as far as I am conerned BTW.

At least with family sexual abuse, we are making some inroads, better education and the stigma is becoming less painful so that victims find it increasingly easier to come forward.

At the same time the churches are still denying and shifting offending priests to newer pastures without warning or penalty.

Sure, they throw one out to the wolves every now and again, meanwhile it is the same old game back at the cloistered halls.

Admit it Jade and perhaps you may yet redeem some of your credibility.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

Admit it Jade and perhaps you may yet redeem some of your credibility.

---

Crediblity? On this forum? You have got to be kidding. Who is credible up to this point so far to you since your are new Etheist? Are you a credible source?

Well to date, I believe I display a model much closer to credibility, reasoned and rational thought than do you or Gid.

Your ball.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

Oh for sure. You are more credible and smarter than I am. You and others have much more rational and reasoned thought to believe there is no God either. So why am I not convinced.

You who are without a sin, may you be the first to cast stones. Everyone has a chance to redeem themselves in this world. This is the basis for which Christ came into the world. To forgive, to wash away sin and to make new again. Did you ever read up on the Christian beliefs? It all about forgiveness and compassion. So, can you forgive when wrong is done against you? Or do you not believe in forgiveness. Besides its not up to you and me. Its up to Christ Jesus, who is judge and jury in the redeeming of sins. So I would say, stop trying to make judgements on the soul. Its not your place.

(Edited by jade on 02-28-2005 20:04)

quote:

---

...stop trying to make judgements on the soul. Its not your place.

---

...

quote:

---

Crediblity? On this forum? You have got to be kidding. Who is credible up to this point so far to you since your are new Etheist? Are you a credible source?

---

- Jade

quote:

---

Well to date, I believe I display a model much closer to credibility, reasoned and rational thought than do you or Gid.

---

- Ehtheist

quote:

---

So I would say, stop trying to make judgements on the soul. Its not your place.

---

- Jade

Uhhh...what does credibility, and reasoned and rational thought have to do with making judgements on the soul? I mean...I am not following you here, Jade. They just are not one and the same.

Also, DL not only has a very good point, but he has nailed your inability to face the facts and truths of the situation. Everytime you are called on these things, you do a "switch" - and throw something in that is entirely unrelated, and avoid answering the question altogether. Turning a blind eye makes one guilty - it is no longer a position of innocence.

Web where are you and DL getting your accusations against me not facing facts about the scandal of the church? I never have sanctioned it or approved of it. I was appalled as your were. Talking about putting words in peoples mouth. Its pretty ridicilous to believe I think the abuse and the cover up are ok. And have something to do with it. But think what you must, if it keeps me in a bad light and settles your preconcieved notions about me and all catholics in general. If you sleep better at night thinking your on the right side of the fence, good for you. If the abuse never happened, you would find something else to blame the catholics for? There are so many like you out there. Like tigers prancing around waiting to point the finger and judge given the opportunity so you all can wallow in self-rightousness.

Jade,

If one is not religious, one is without sin as sin is a religious crime.

Further since I accept neither the existance of your xist or the soul, such judgements by fictitious or at best a long-dead man affect me not at all.

But WS makes a good point, when the issue was raised the first thing you did was start talking about sexual abuse in families rather than espress your disgust with the church and your opposition to it's actions.

It is not until your last post you made a definitive statement about your position and that you were shamed into.

Self rigtheousness? I am afraid that is largely a siin of the religious;
self-right·eous (slfrchs)
adj.
Piously sure of one's own righteousness; moralistic.
Exhibiting pious self-assurance: self-righteous

Piety is pretty much associated solely with religion.

Good word though and describes well certain xians, some of whom tred these threads.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

Like tigers prancing around waiting to point the finger and judge given the opportunity so you all can wallow in self-rightousness.

---

What? No, I most certainly am not "wallowing" in self-righteousness. Why should I? In fact, I was appalled, shocked, and sickened by what seemed to be your inability to denounce these heinious crimes. If being physically sick to the stomach is wallowing in self-righteousness, then you can have it.

You are missing the point, once again. It is at least nice to see you say

quote:

---

I never have sanctioned it or approved of it

---

Now, why didn't you just come out and say that in the first place? That you were appalled and against the abuse and the cover-up.

By not doing so, and by constantly pointing the finger somewhere else, you gave the impression that you did not find it all that bad. And some of the comparisons that you made "Abuse in the home is worse than from a priest" - that just made the impression worse.

quote:

---

. If the abuse never happened, you would find something else to blame the catholics for? There are so many like you out there.

---

First of all, no, that is not true - I don't need to search for more - my people surffered enough at the hands of the Church. And no, there is no-one else like me out here. I am unique, just as everyone is.

And to answer one of your questions - I am Cherokee.

WS, native peoples all over North and South America were horribly abused by one sect of xianity or another and continue to be to this day in some parts, as I am sure you are aware.

You are doubtless aware too of the collusion between the Canadian Government and various churches here early in the last century in what was, for all intents and purposes, an attempt at genocide.

Sadly the government and the churches refuse to face up to their responsibilities on these matters and many lawyers are geting rich as a result.

Some natives 'foxed the churches though...I have read that many of the South American people, rather than continue to see their families murdered, adopted the Cathloic saints and ceremonies, then promptly introduced code words for their own faith. So while they were on their knees counting beads, they were in fact still worhipping their ancestral gods. Carved statues of many catholic saints could be turned around to view a depiction of an ancient native god.

Of course, penalties for getting caught with those could be severe.

A warm and loving religion I must say.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

The Vatican has just slapped in the face every person sexually abused by catholic priests.

Bernard Law has been invited to mumble some mumbo-jumbo related to the recent and too long delayed death of the Poop.

Law, you may recall is the chap who repeatedly transferred priests caught diddling kids and covered up their predation.

He should have been defrocked, instead he is rewarded.

This is a clear signal that the vatican does not consider sexual abuse by it's clergy to be a big deal at all.

Not that that is news, but it is good to have it confirmed.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Yes, I've read a few articles about it so far.

Truly apalling that this man has not been stripped of all title and status at the very least.

Absolutely mind-numbing that he was appointed by John Paul II to his post as the archpriest of Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome, after resigning his post in Boston because of his role in the child rape perpetuation.

Absolutely mind numbing...
And now he is part of ceremonies celebrating the life of the Pope.

Please, someone tell what conclusion anyone can draw about the catholic church in light of such things??

I thought I did that already.

The catholic church, from it's unholy seat in Italy, has just declared open season on catholic children.

A major, world-wide pedophile ring was recently broken up in a joint US-Canadian operation. Running the whole operation (allegedly), was...a catholic priest.

The message dear reader is this: not only is it ok to diddle the kiddies, but there is every reason to believe the church will do it's best to protect you from any earthly judgement, and there is every chance the church may also promote and reward you.

Why does anyone want to be part of systematic abuse of children?

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Ethiest - I know very thoroughly what conclusion to draw, and what these actions show the world. My statement was more a plea (or a challenge) to those who have supported the church through this whole affair.

I kow DL, I just had more to say:

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

I saw an interesting documentary on the Inuit people. They are slowly working their way back to their roots after this Catholic mission to the Inuit

Some of the most tragic of things was both the mention of how the Catholic Priests drove the Shamans almost to extinction, and the amount of child abuse that they said they had experienced.

And here is something else The Army of God

quote:

---

The stories are horrific: stories of child-priest orgies, of clerics employing holy oils as lubrication for attempted sodomy, of Church officials knowingly accepting pederastic priests from other diocese, then shuffling them from parish to parish whenever new accusations arose.

---

I seriously doubt that the Pope was not aware of the Pedophile issue in the Church. The scale and scope of it is just too great.

One other thing - why is this

quote:

---

5 "Kabed et avicha v'et imecha" - (Honor your Father and your Mother) - Revering and honoring one's parents is considered a basic commandment in Judaism from the perspective that there are three partners involved in the creation of a human being: one's parents and G-d Himself. That is why this Commandment is included with the first five, which are considered basically between Man and his Creator.

---

more important to god, than sexually abusing children? In fact, there is nothing against sexually abusing children in the Ten Commandments. One isn't allowed to commit Adultry, but nothing about sexually abusing children is in there.

(Edited by WebShaman on 04-12-2005 07:00)

go away Ehtheist

(Edited by cigam83 on 04-12-2005 07:00)

^Play nice...

I think the world and you guys included has seen the power of the church here on earth this last week and the week to come which surpasses any government and democracy.

For all the negative you percieve it has, it is the greatest institution on earth.

I was glad Cardnial Law was there. Why should he go hide in some dark corner? It shows forgiveness and that is what Christianity is all about. Jesus preached it and lived it. I am sure if he was guilty in anyway, Jeuse has forgiven him. And that is all that matters.

I am going to the Vatican next year and hope to get full of Catholicity.

I am completely speechless Jade....

Just...shocked to hell and back, Jade.

Wow.

Would you let this man anywhere near your children, unsupervised?

(Edited by WebShaman on 04-12-2005 16:09)

Yes

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

sexually abusing children is in there

---

Well, sexual immorality kinda covers the whole scope WS.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

Please, someone tell what conclusion anyone can draw about the catholic church
in light of such things??

---

The Catholic Church either does one of two things:
1. They forgive quickly
-This has its ups and downs. fogiveness can give someone reassurance and a sense of belonging. It was Jesus' heart to forgive, and in doing so the Catholic Church believes to be following Jesus' example by forgiving tresspasses. The flip side of this coin is that if offenses aren't resolved before a new appointment, then they could start again, possibly even greater.
2. The Catholic Church hides quickly
-The Catholic Church could be doing a bad job to hide/push aside the whole affair, in order to uphold the "righteousness" of the church. This is possibly the most dangerous, because that would mean that they are trying to shove aside offenses, and not meet and correct them. This could result in an unbalanced dictatorship which would turn most if not all Catholic leaders into hypocrites.

I hope for the first, because while it is still very dangerous, it means that the Catholic Church still has its heart in the right place (albeit too innocently). If the second is true, we have a very troubling future...

quote:

---

jade said:

I am going to the Vatican next year and hope to get full of Catholicity.

---

Catholicity...

DL, your challenge to the supporters of "the church," was that to supporters of the Catholic Sect or the Christian Church?

Ehtheist - Do you know who Lucretius is, or did you just like his quote?

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

You would let a man who was DIRECTLY responsible for moving child molestors from town to town, to allow them to continue their predation in secret, to be alone with your children?

Then on top of everything else, you are a complete fucking idiot.
Views like that are *exactly* why so many children have been raped over and over for decades throughout the country.

This man has been forgiven? What did he do to deserve forgiveness? Did he even confess anything, or apologize, or anything even remotely along those lines? Or did he simply run away to Rome for protection? (I ask because I don't know)

Your over dramatizing DL.

Yes. I would leave my child under the supervision of a priest & many priest. I, myself have been alone with many priest thur many years, from my childhood, adolesenct, teen to adult years. Nothing every happend to me. Every priest in the world is not a criminial.

Rape, molestation & abuse happens in all areas of life. More on the outside than in church. In all faiths. You don't seem so apalled at them too.

Men who use to be boys were and are raped more by their own flesh and blood fathers, uncles and teachers, strangers than priest.

My relative was moletesed as a boy scout in his teens by a boy scout leader. He was abusing many of the boys. No body told.
YOu don't even hear about it in the paper or news???????

quote:

---

The Catholic Church could be doing a bad job to hide/push aside the whole affair, in order to uphold the "righteousness" of the church. This is possibly the most dangerous, because that would mean that they are trying to shove aside offenses, and not meet and correct them. This could result in an unbalanced dictatorship which would turn most if not all Catholic leaders into hypocrites.

---

I think the over 1 billion catholics trust the church and its hierarchy. Look who the college of cardinals with the help of the holy spirit choose the last time? They are responsible for picking the "greatest man of the century" according to time magazine, etc al, who just happens to be a Catholic pope. So, they will preservere and choose well.

quote:

---

Every priest in the world is not a criminial.

---

But this one is! What the hell are you smokin' Jade????????

This man directly facilitated the continuous rape of children by these priests!

How can you make excuses????

quote:

---

YOu don't even hear about it in the paper or news???????

---

Yes, you most certainly do! It was in the news a *lot* a few years ago. And guess what? The Boy Scouts, unlike the Catholic Church, DID SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

It is appalling whenever, wherever, and however it happens.

But it is far more appalling when an entire organization plays a role in hiding the crime, hiding the criminals, and worse - actually facilitating the crime by putting the molestor in a new, fresh environment in which to continue unabated.

It is far more appaling when jackasses like you fight tooth and nail to support and play down the actions of these criminals.

If I were to pray, I would pray that have more regard for your children than to leave them alone in the presence of a person KNOWN to have facilitated many child molestors in the very recent past.

BTW - John Paul Paul II was not chosen as Time's Person of the Century - Albert Einstein was. John Paul is in the top 100.

Also note: it is not "greatest man". There are people on there who are very evil people. Read the criteria they use: it is not about positive actions it is purely about the impact on the world that a person had, for good or bad (note, for instance, that adolf hitler is on the same list that pope john paul is....).



(Edited by DL-44 on 04-12-2005 22:36)

quote:

---

But it is far more appalling when an entire organization plays a role in hiding the crime, hiding the criminals, and worse - actually facilitating the crime by putting the molestor in a new, fresh environment in which to continue unabated.

---

You are so wrong, the ENTIRE orgainiztion? Please just take off your "I despise the catholic church" lenses for just one moment and realize what your saying. Wait a minute, I won't even bother to address this, its so ludricous. How old are you? Honestly sometimes I think your level headed, then you slip back into form.


Well, I guess, I got the magazine wrong, but I have been reading it all over the internet. No doubt he will be regarded as man of the century for his holiness, compassion and spiritual message worldwide. Regardless, he will be recgonized as "John Paul the Great" in the future. Anti-Catholics, can't find anything else negative to say about the Roman Catholic church, so they have to scrounge around and come up with is the "Priest Scandal" for the 1000th time. How repeitious.

quote:

---

Also note: it is not "greatest man". There are people on there who are very evil people. Read the criteria they use: it is not about positive actions it is purely about the impact on the world that a person had, for good or bad (note, for instance, that adolf hitler is on the same list that pope john paul is....).

---

So your comparing Adolph Hitler to Pope John Paul? That makes sense coming from you in regard to making the same impact. In your eyes Pope John Paul must be evil.

quote:

---

So your comparing Adolph Hitler to Pope John Paul?

---

No. Read what I said.

Time magazine has the two people on the same list of "people of the century". This was stated to illustrate that being on that list does not make one a "great" person.

And, "for the 1000th time", when the church has actually addressed the issue of it's heirarchial members who have both raped thousands of children, and facilitated the rape of those children, at all levels of said heirarchy, and actually removed the offenders from that heirarchy and accepted and acknowledged the things that happened, and proven that they are willing and able to seriously deal with it....

Then I will stop bringing it up.

When the head of the organization protects someone like cardinal Law, who was instrumental in the "scandal" as you like to call it, and there are priests all over the US and bishops in charge of them involved, that's close enough to the "whole" organization for me.

If that's not good enough, let's outline it for you:

At the Top:

-The Pope
--Cardinals/Archbishops
---Bishops
----Priests
-----People like Jade who excuse, support, hide, and defend the actions of all those above

Looks like we've got the organization covered from top to bottom.

Does that now qualify as the whole organization?

quote:

---

And, "for the 1000th time", when the church has actually addressed the issue of it's heirarchial members who have both raped thousands of children, and facilitated the rape of those children, at all levels of said heirarchy, and actually removed the offenders from that heirarchy and accepted and acknowledged the things that happened, and proven that they are willing and able to seriously deal with it....

Then I will stop bringing it up.

---

We have dealt with it. We have adressed it. Its over. Except for you. It will never be over for you and your not even Catholic. I wonder why you care so much. Seems you have a personal war and vendetta. Cardinal Law doesn't have to answer to you or anyone else. Its over. Done with. They moved him. He isn't a threat. And he will help pick the next Pope. I can live with it. Why can't you. I should feel more betrayed than you. Remember " Your not Catholic". Your jumping on the bandwagon because the media still rides on the scandal. Nothing will suffice you.

It's not over for the thousands of victims, Jade.

*They* feel betrayed. You have no reason to feel betrayed - you're part of the problem.

(Edited by DL-44 on 04-13-2005 01:00)

Bicker, bicker, bicker...
Wow, this is going down hill fast...
I can see the cliff drop in the distance, too...

Listen, Dl, there is this thing that lots of Christians do called forgiveness. I believe it is not a new term to you, and that you have probably done it to someone or someones before, am I correct? Well, to Christians, forgiveness is a very high priorty, because Jesus made a huge presidence of it. Now, I will agree that not all Christians forgive well, and not all self proclaimed "Christians" do what is right, but there are at least a few out there still trying to be Christians and do things pro Christo. These Christians try to bring love to people, and you can't do that by condemning them every two seconds.

Granted, this priest, as far as I know, did not publically confess to his crimes, but does he have to? I know that it is a nasty crime, but depending on the guy, he might not have to. Here is my reasoning: this guy might be crushed by what he did. If he really feels remorse about it and has asked Jesus to forgive him and help him to conquor it, then I have no problems with him. He can help ellect the new pope too, for all I care. I know that I have done some things I would rather not have public, so if he can fix the problem, I see no reason to keep him from helping people.

But, if he does not have remorse for his crimes, if he did not repent of them with his heart, then I agree with you whole-heartedly DL. Now, I don't like to take people's word on things, eventhough sometimes it is necessary, so I wouldn't go on what the Catholic Church has said, nor what the media has said about his personal state. That is something for him alone to work out with his God.

Oh, btw DL, could you answer my other question please? I am getting a little anxious.

Jade, I really hope that when you said you were going to get filled up with Catholicism, you didn't mean what I think you meant...

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

oh please...spare me the lectures on forgiveness. I understand forgiveness quite well.

But tell me how forgiving someone equates to allowing them to retain the office that allowed them to commit the crimes in teh first place?

Let's give the whole situation the big rosy benefit of the doubt, and say that cardinal law is forgiven for his horrible horrible sin.

That has absolutely nothing to do with his gross inability to properly perform his duties.

Can anyone explain why it should mean that, in rational terms?

{{edit - Gideon, as to your question - about the meaning of my statement? It was aimed at anyone who felt they were in a position to defend the actions of the church in this case.



(Edited by DL-44 on 04-13-2005 04:05)

Well the apologists are certainly here.

It boggles the mind that someone can be such a zealot and a fundamenalist as to even talk about 'forgiving' child rape!

Certainly every priest and the cathoilics aren't the only one with the problem, is not a pedophile.

But the circle of responsibility expands with every one of them who knows about a predatory priest and either protects or fails to report him.

The circle of responsibility expands when the people at the top of the organzation, religious or otherwise, treat the matter as inconesquential.

Everyone who aids and abets a criminal is equally culpable.

By not de-frocking and having criminal charges brought against the offending priests and by promoting and rewarding Law, the Vatican delared it's total non-interest in the victims of this long-standing and continuing abuse.

Perhaps it is only the pedophiles who get to rise to the top and that is why they don't give a damn?

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

Yes. I would leave my

---

etc.

Thank bloody god for memory polymers.
My rubber jaw hit the floor so hard my lips are just now assuming something near their original fisog x-y's'. For a time there I didn't think they were ever coming back! =)

Jade, your statements and thought process here are ASTONISHING!!! Clearly you have no concept... not an inkling... no idea of what you have said... on several fronts. Here's one.

This 'Forgivness' business.
You clearly and unabashedly illustrate far better than any 'heathen'could, that this 'get out of jail FREE' card is absurdity defined. It's almost a god-send.' and I thank you. =)

last time i checked, 'justice' was a concept that featured highly in the bible, too.

It's...I don't know where to start, after reading all Jades remarks.

Jade, I take it that you are serious in your remarks.

I also take it, that your view is a mainstream view, of most catholics?

Are there any other catholics that disagree with Jade's views here? I would ask you to speak up now, please.

My people were right about the Chruch. It is a bad thing. As long as those who support the Church think like Jade, it will never be anything other than bad.

Serial Pedophiles cannot be cured. At least, all evidence thereof is in the contrary. Worse, pedophilia perpetuates itself - as those who are preyed upon, often become those that prey on others, later. So something very negative is being perpetuated by the Catholic Church.

I am shocked, disgusted, and just plain...relieved, that I am not a catholic.

Btw Jade - my wife thinks your fucking nuts. She says she'd never, ever let such a man anywhere near our children. And neither would I.

(Edited by WebShaman on 04-13-2005 06:42)

quote:

---

last time i checked, 'justice' was a concept that featured highly in the bible, too.

---

Last time I checked " Justice is for God alone"
Even my justice. Call me what you will, slander me if you want.
No. Don't you guys know any Catholics. The Catholics faith dictates we depend on priest as our spiritual fathers, confessors, advisors. We cannot separate them from the faith. So how can we not trust priest?
We must. You can see from the 2 to 4 million who came from all over the world for the funeral for the pope, that they still believe in the faith. Because its not the church that fails them, its humans.

But we must forgive and life goes on:

Matthew 6

14. For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:

15. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

We have to forgive to be forgiven.

Mark 11

25. And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.

26. But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

Without forgiveness there is no salvation, what holds us up is our sin, and what we need is forgiveness of sin.

We sin, Satan accuses, we ask forgiveness, Jesus stands in for us and profess the Blood, we are forgiven, God forgets and the next case comes up. But when we bring the sin up again, or just won?t let go of it for what ever reason,. this gives Satan a chance to accuse. But we do not ask forgiveness again, so Satan is able to get through our armor and give us hell. At least until we remember to ask for forgiveness, repent, or just pray the Lord?s Prayer and except our forgiveness.

If we truly believe the word of God we except our forgiveness and forget it. If you except your forgiveness and don?t hold on to the sin, but forget it, then you are cleansed, you are new, health and prosperity will come your way. The only other area of forgiveness that holds us up is forgiving someone else.

This is almost as hard as forgiving self. Let?s say a woman?s 3 year old is raped, and killed, and she does not forgive the person, what happens? Two things first she has given Satan a wide birth in her life and second it will eat at her until she is nothing but an empty shell.

What happens if she forgives the person?

First Satan has no way to get in to mess with her, and second God will help her over come.

Why should we forgive?

Because mankind was created in God?s image, meaning what we are, not our flesh, but our spirit. And since God is not evil, neither are we, but we do allow evil spirits and demons to enter and they do things that appears to be us doing them. But it is not our true selves. So we should forgive the sinner and love them while hating the sin and evil. You can hate, as long as it is directed towards evil and sin and not towards people.

The woman above if she would forgive would be forgiving the person, not the sin. And this would do more to help her. And if we truly believe in God, we believe in the next life. And if we believe in the next life, then there is no death, there is only a passing from this less than perfect world to perfection. Where we will meet those loved ones that left before us. It is only a temporary separation. In the measurement of time compared to eternity, it would be but a blinking of an eye.

So the true loss would be if the woman did not forgive, and allowed it to eat her up to the point of falling away and rejecting God. Because then she never would see her child again. And that is true grief, grief is only of a loss, and if you will see each other again, then there is no loss, just a short separation. How do you grow and allow this type of forgiveness to be in your life;

How often should we forgive?

Matthew:
18:21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

18:22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven. What is the only unforgiveable sin? and why?

Matthew:
12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.


Why? Because the only way to blasphemy the Holy Ghost is not to be of the Holy Ghost. And the only way to be forgiven is of the Holy Ghost, so if you are not of the Holy Ghost, you can not be forgiven.
So I say unto you now, forgive all unto all and accept your forgiveness.
Don't allow Satan another victory by consuming you with bitterness that comes from unforgiveness.

jesus, save me from your followers.

If mary could have forseen how her name is being used today she would have spontaneously aborted.

The truly scary aspect of poor jade's mindless maunderings and immutable faith is that she is not alone either in pathetic catholicism or many of the other rabid faiths which infect the world, but parts of the US in particular. One of the adherants to such a faith is currently the president.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

^ Great. Sounds good.

And when he is done with your kids, are you then going to turn around, and forgive him again?

I don't actually recall this particular person asking for forgiveness, nor the Pope announcing that this person (or the others involved) were forgiven. Can you supply this information, please?

He (and they) certainly have not begged for forgiveness, nor attempted to right the wrongs they did (atonement) to the victims that I am aware of. Maybe you have some information on that, as well?

WebShaman | Asylum D & D | D & D Min Page

I don't recall anything which might be contrued as an apology emanating from the vatican.

Nor a request for forgiveness. Which, in any event, would be a request for the unforgivable.

It is people like jade who allow such abuses to perpetuate through their willfull and mindless blindness.

I have another of her ilk on another forum who is every bit ignorant and he's here in Canada. The infection is widely spread.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Yes. He apolozized long ago. http://www.rcab.org/Pilot/2002/ps021108/Forgiveness.html

And so did the holy father Pope John Paul.

http://www.americancatholic.org/Messenger/Mar2000/editorial.asp

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/04/23/pope.scandal/

(Edited by jade on 04-13-2005 17:28)

ok, that's a start.

But it still doesn't respond to this -

quote:

---

But tell me how forgiving someone equates to allowing them to retain the office that allowed them to commit the crimes in teh first place?

Let's give the whole situation the big rosy benefit of the doubt, and say that cardinal law is forgiven for his horrible horrible sin.

That has absolutely nothing to do with his gross inability to properly perform his duties.
Can anyone explain why it should mean that, in rational terms?

---

Nowhere in those links, does the Pope apologize specifically for the Pedophilia of the Church.

Although they do make it crystal clear, that he was aware of it going on in the Church.

Yes. He has Webshaman. I remember even seeing it on the news.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ForeignBureaus/Archive/200204/FOR20020423g.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/11/23/MN172663.DTL

http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=5979

quote:

---

That has absolutely nothing to do with his gross inability to properly perform his duties.
Can anyone explain why it should mean that, in rational terms?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

What does this mean?? He is not over any diocese. His duties now are more administrative in the Vatican. He does not perform his prior duties.

quote:

---

Btw Jade - my wife thinks your fucking nuts. She says she'd never, ever let such a man anywhere near our children. And neither would I.

---

Web
So would you let a family male friend, brother, uncle, cousin, be alone with your son/daughter for a long length of time. Like lets say take him/her to the movies alone? Would you trust them 100 %.

Certainly not if they had been involved in something like Pedophilia!

I would never invite a weasel into a henhouse. I have namely seen what happens, when one gets in.

Well for sure they will not let you know they are pedophiles. Thats the point. You don't know.

jade: Don't make yourself look more stupid than you are.

We all know that some, many, too much, priests have had pedophilic behaviors and were covered by their hierarchy. Actually if the pedophilic priests were not covered by their superiors, their affairs would be similar to the other pedophilic affairs, but this perverted behavior have been covered for years by some authorities of the Church. This is what makes them even more disgusting and cast the doubt on the others priests and religious authorities.



(Edited by poi on 04-13-2005 23:17)

But we do know about these cases! It is not an unknown!

You have to take risks, there is trust involved in anything. But when you betray that trust you have to earn it back, and for some offenses you may never ever regain that trust. You might be forgiven in the eyes of god, but that doesn't mean that you have to trust in the individual. Trust and forgiveness are very different things.

If you are going to have your trust, have your trust in your god, but don't think that the same level of trust you can have in your god can be given to people no matter who or what occupation they have. Doing that is just foolish.

Dan @ Code Town

Yes. Its true the negligence on behalf of the church superiors. They are guilty.

Also, lets not rule out that pedophilia is all over cyberspace. And no one is seriously doing anything to stop it. You can download sites of little naked boys and girls in two minutes. No one seems appalled by this enough to make an national outcry. You can even download young girl teens girls pics in the public library. Where is the justice.

You can report the URLs of websites spreading illegal content ( be it warez, pedophilic, ... ) to the authorities that will make the site close and eventually take legal actions against the owners.

The problem with "cyber" crime is that it's really easy to put something online and/or to spread absolutely anything.

As for the ability to download porn content in public library, you should blame their sys admins for their incompetence.

quote:

---

Well for sure they will not let you know they are pedophiles. Thats the point. You don't know.

---

Jade: you were asked about a person who we *do* know was involved in knowingly providing child-rapers with new territory and new victims. And you still said "yes". That is seriously fucked up.

quote:

---

Also, lets not rule out that pedophilia is all over cyberspace. And no one is seriously doing anything to stop it. You can download sites of little naked boys and girls in two minutes. No one seems appalled by this enough to make an national outcry. You can even download young girl teens girls pics in the public library. Where is the justice.

---

Again you deflect!!!!!

Yes, there are such things, and yes, things *are* being done about it - you read about it all the time. There are also a great deal of police/fbi stings on the internet to catch people who try to arrange for sexual encounters with minors.

Not that I am an expert on such things, but the only "teen" sites I have seen state very explicitly that the girls in question are 18+, which regardless of your view on pornography is perfectly legal and involves legal consenting adults (not to say younger girls couldn't find their way into such places....we know it happens...but that is a different issue).

The mere implication of child-molestation or child-pornography among people other than the clergy - including politicians, prominent business men, actors, rock-stars, etc - is enough to very often destroy a person.
Yet you insist on claiming that we don't make an "outcry" about it. We don't make as much of an outcry because in most such cases justice, such as it is, is dealt.

That simply has not happened for the church still!

(bis)

The answer is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. You never allow pedophiliacs, repentant or not, to ever be in a situation where they could harm a child again. It horrifies me to know that there is debate on this point.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

quote:

---

It horrifies me to know that there is debate on this point.

---

I was shocked to even see the question.

I don't know what word would describe my reaction to the answer.....

^ "Gutted" works for me.

As I was reading Jade's post I felt as if I was being gutted.


And Jade... a question.
As you read the reaction to your position on this does it ever cross your mind, even fleetingly... you know something like ~thought bubble~ '... hmmmm I wonder if I've got something wrong here' ... or is it just 'we' who've got it wrong?

What appalling hypocrisy!

"The abuse which has caused this crisis is by every standard wrong and rightly considered a crime by society; it is also an appalling sin in the eyes of God."
? Pope John Paul II

Then he turns aroud and rewards Law.

What have they covered up which has yet to meet the public eye?

One of the methods a pedophile uses to get close to his victims is to ingratiate himself with the family.

Sounds as though you have a lot of trust in your priest jade, talked to your kids about him lately? They a little nervous around him, cast their eyes aside when asked questions, dodge the questions, resist opportunities to be alone with him? If not yet...well...keep an eye out for the symptoms, of which there are many more.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

Not that I am an expert on such things, but the only "teen" sites I have seen state very explicitly that the girls in question are 18+, which regardless of your view on pornography is perfectly legal and involves legal consenting adults (not to say younger girls couldn't find their way into such places....we know it happens...but that is a different issue).

---

This is a different issue for sure and getting off topic, but herein lies the problem or adds to it, which is "men & porn" Legal its still wrong on many fronts no matter what the laws are. Its degrading to the persons and very sickning to know grown adult men resort to porn literature and porn in cyberspace. Its an insult to the wife, girlfriend and little girls who are daughters. Continued viewing of porn can lead to one's destruction.

quote:

---

And Jade... a question.
As you read the reaction to your position on this does it ever cross your mind, even fleetingly... you know something like ~thought bubble~ '... hmmmm I wonder if I've got something wrong here' ... or is it just 'we' who've got it wrong?

---

I think it depends on what views you have about life. I think there are millions out there who think like me.

Jade, it is absolutely horrifying that you are right and there are millions out there like you. Though I believe using the word 'think' in that context is stretching one's credulity.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

Its degrading to the persons and very sickning to know grown adult men resort to porn literature and porn in cyberspace. Its an insult to the wife, girlfriend and little girls who are daughters. Continued viewing of porn can lead to one's destruction.

---

Blocks are mine.

I disagree vehemently.

Millions (if not more) view p0rn on a regular basis, without being "destroyed". I also disagree that it is an insult to the wife, girlfriend and little girls who are daughters.

My wife finds p0rn to be interesting and not at all "degrading". In fact, most Germans do not find P0rn degrading. Little girls who are daughters are not adults, and should not be viewing p0rn.

quote:

---

I think there are millions out there who think like me.

---

I think that is a major hurdle that the Catholic Church has.

Web, I mean the soul could be destroyed eternally. Satan does have very much control of the century. He throws feast when eyes and minds are committed to porn. Porn is one of the great evils.



27?You have heard that it was said, ?Do not commit adultery.?[a] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.
Divorce
31?It has been said, ?Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.?[b] 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

Footnotes:

Matthew 5:27 Exodus 20:14
Matthew 5:31 Deut. 24

Web, I mean the soul could be destroyed eternally. Satan does have very much control of the century. He throws feast when eyes and minds are committed to porn. Porn is one of the great evils.

In the Book of Matthew from the NT

27?You have heard that it was said, ?Do not commit adultery.?[a] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.
Divorce
31?It has been said, ?Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.?[b] 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

Well, since there is no proven soul to destroy, and Satan hasn't been proven to exist, I see no reason to believe that p0rn destroys. And since Hell hasn't been proven to exist, either...

Your points, based on facts and evidence, are non-existent.

As for this point on Divorce

quote:

---

But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

---

Do you hold that to be true?

I personally view that as the stupidest thing I have ever read. I am Divorced (becasue my ex-wife wanted to get divorced, and yes, she was unfaithful. But does that mean that the man who married her after me is commiting adultery? I see nothing there saying what a woman, or man is, when the woman divorces the man.

So I suspect that this is only valid in the context of when it was "modern" - i.e. for the Jews.

I heard some good news from South Smerica the other day. Seems catholics there are leaving the church by the hundreds. The bad news is, they are embracing certain evangelical strains of the infection.

But ya gotta take a little bad with the good I s'pose.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

So Jade - what about the millions of women who also watch and thoroughly enjoy pronography?

And what's your response to my other statements?

Not to mention, that as long as you accept Jesus as the Savior, and believe in God, it doesn't really matter what crimes you may commit, or tresspasses. Just beg for forgiveness, and repent your sins, and off you go to heaven!

So you might as well enjoy the p0rn, the booze, the children...

Heck, swing a few rounds with ol' Nick...you can't lose your soul, Jade, because you are firm in your beliefs.

Don't worry about the rest of us - we are doing just fine.

quote:

---

Do you hold that to be true?

I personally view that as the stupidest thing I have ever read. I am Divorced (becasue my ex-wife wanted to get divorced, and yes, she was unfaithful. But does that mean that the man who married her after me is commiting adultery? I see nothing there saying what a woman, or man is, when the woman divorces the man.

---

In Christianity, according to bible scripture, they are both committing adultery. There is no other way to interpret this. In the teachings of faith this applies to the men as well. Other Christian, Protestant faiths are suppose to adhere to this teaching also. This precept of the faith can never be changed, because it comes from scripture. In my faith, in the plea for remarriage after divorce, you must seek an annulment from the first marriage, then be given permission to marry again. Its very hard to be a true Christian in following the way of Christ, but scripture also says, that the pathway to God is very narrow not wide and some cannot fathom doing God's will and choose their own.

(Edited by jade on 04-14-2005 19:06)

quote:

---

Jade: you were asked about a person who we *do* know was involved in knowingly providing child-rapers with new territory and new victims. And you still said "yes".

---

No, Sorry, I did not mean yes to that.

No DL, I would not leave my child with a guilty convicted child rapist.

quote:

---

God, it doesn't really matter what crimes you may commit, or tresspasses. Just beg for forgiveness, and repent your sins, and off you go to heaven!

So you might as well enjoy the p0rn, the booze, the children

---

Web, That is another act of sinfulness according to the faith. It is called the "Sin of Presumption". When we know that God who is a loving God, we take for granted. Even Constantine, did not get baptized into the faith until his deathbead, because he didn't want to give up his excesses. According to Christian belief God knows the heart, mind & soul completely. So to sin all you life out of ignornace, maybe you will not be judge as harshly, but to sin and know who God is and what is will dictates and continue to sin is a different matter altogether.

quote:

---

So Jade - what about the millions of women who also watch and thoroughly enjoy pronography?

---

Porn is porn no matter what gender watches it. Women are as much at risk in losing their souls.


This is part of faith teaching so you will know where I am coming from:

What is the single greatest gift a man and woman can give each other in marriage? It is their holy purity or chastity. Without holy purity, human love ? popularly known as ?sex? - becomes corrupt. There is no true human love without holy purity.

What is the single greatest virtue a young man and woman find most difficult to practice in this 21st century? It is the virtue of holy purity or chastity.

The sixth and ninth Commandment of God teaches us specifically against sins of the flesh. Without a knowledge and great love for God, holy purity will be very hard to maintain. St. Paul teaches us that chastity is a ?fruit of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, what about the countless temptations that seemingly are everywhere?

The best defense is a good offense ? maintain a holy attack against impurity. Often times, when resisting the sins of the flesh, persons will develop a divided heart. Having become lukewarm from serving two masters ? the desires of the flesh and the service of the Lord ? people run the risk of seeking approval from their peers rather than from God. The Virtue of purity requires an undivided heart.

Saint (Mother) Theresa of Calcutta had this advice for young people:

~You are the future of family life.

~You are the future of the joy of loving.

~You are the future of making your life something beautiful for God?a pure love.

~That you love a girl or that you love a boy is beautiful, but do not spoil it, do not destroy it.

~Keep your heart pure?Keep your heart virgin.

~Keep your love virgin, so that on the day of your marriage you can give something beautiful to each other?the joy of a pure love.



What is the one thing in this free world, thanks to the press and television, that is the major interest to the young? It is sex. So, let?s talk about it.

Today, sex has become almost mental. Every advertisement has to use it so that you are inclined always to think about it. What is it really?

Well, the reason you want to know about it is that it is a mystery. What is a mystery? Well, a mystery is a Sacrament. As a matter of fact, the Greek work ?mysterion? is the Latin word ?Sacramentum? and the English word ?Sacrament.?

Now, what is a Sacrament? Then we will understand sex.

Every Sacrament or every mystery has two elements. First, physical; second, spiritual. Something that is visible; something that is invisible.

Take for example, the Sacrament of Baptism. What is the physical side of Baptism? Water. What is the invisible side of Baptism? The cleansing of the soul to make us children of God.

A word is a sacrament. Because there is something audible and then there?s something invisible about it, namely, the meaning of the word.

Sex is a mystery. There is something physical about sex. Everyone is either male or female. It is that simple. Period. Not at all complicated.

What is the invisible sign of sex? What is the mystery? It is the mystery of love and it stands for something spiritual.

First, sex stands for God?s creative power given to people. He gives the creative power to a husband and wife, instead of directly creating us Himself alone. He says to a father and mother, "I will let you share my creative power and you will give life." This is the spiritual side of marriage and of sex, but it also stands for something else.

When girls and boys get older, someday they will come to the altaer. Will be married and there will be a reading from St. Paul?s letter to the Ephesians and this is what you will be told. Every bride stands for the Church, every groom stands for Christ. Think of it.

God intended that in marriage, the husband would stand for Christ; the bride would stand for the Church. Does that mean that the man is the head of the woman in the sense of domination? No. The man is the head of the woman in the sense of sacrifice.

So, as Christ gave himself up for his spouse, his bride, which is the Church, so the husband sacrifices himself for the wife.

Now, that?s the spiritual side of marriage and of sex. It, therefore, refers to love, human love between husband and wife, the love for God, the love for the Church.

Parents find it very difficult to teach their children the complete mysteries of sex. They can communicate the physical side of love ? that is easy ? but to communicate to you the mystery, the deep profound love that is involved, well, that is something that is almost impossible to describe.

Therefore, there will always be a difficulty in the way of explaining the mystery of love.

please, no more! Where is the vomitus slimy?

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

~That you love a girl or that you love a boy is beautiful, but do not spoil it, do not destroy it.

---

Mother T endorsing homosexuality?!?! Now that really & truley is a 'miracle.'

quote:

---

What is a mystery? Well, a mystery is a Sacrament

---

You think so? Please don't tell Miss Marple... she's been working the whodunnit angle.

(Edited by NoJive on 04-15-2005 05:57)

quote:

---

please, no more! Where is the vomitus slimy?

---

I double that...it becomes sickening to read your posts, jade. You have truly sad way of thinking...

This could be possibly one of the reasons, the teachings majority of religious american parents pass onto their children, simply confuse the hell out of them.

quote:

---

Well, the reason you want to know about it is that it is a mystery. What is a mystery? Well, a mystery is a Sacrament. As a matter of fact, the Greek work ?mysterion? is the Latin word ?Sacramentum? and the English word ?Sacrament.?

Now, what is a Sacrament? Then we will understand sex.

Every Sacrament or every mystery has two elements. First, physical; second, spiritual. Something that is visible; something that is invisible.

Take for example, the Sacrament of Baptism. What is the physical side of Baptism? Water. What is the invisible side of Baptism? The cleansing of the soul to make us children of God.

A word is a sacrament. Because there is something audible and then there?s something invisible about it, namely, the meaning of the word.

Sex is a mystery. There is something physical about sex. Everyone is either male or female. It is that simple. Period. Not at all complicated.

What is the invisible sign of sex? What is the mystery? It is the mystery of love and it stands for something spiritual.

First, sex stands for God?s creative power given to people. He gives the creative power to a husband and wife, instead of directly creating us Himself alone. He says to a father and mother, "I will let you share my creative power and you will give life." This is the spiritual side of marriage and of sex, but it also stands for something else.

---

This is all supposition. Your belief. Not mine. And not a lot of others.

That being so, don't you think that maybe you might want to consider things from other perspectives as well?

quote:

---

Everyone is either male or female. It is that simple. Period. Not at all complicated.

---

Not everyone who enters this world is so well defined.

Talk to someone who works in a special care nursery. To you, 'gods will' , I suppose.

quote:

---

That being so, don't you think that maybe you might want to consider things from other perspectives as well?

---

You know me by my post Webshaman, how should I? Should I step out of my faithwalk and consider that porn might be a good thing for me.

My belief is that the body is the holy dwelling place of the Lord. A temple of the housing of the spirit of God. For me its sacred in that whatever the body does immorally on the outside, it affects the inside. The soul. To view a person or persons using their bodies as instruments or tools in erotic bars, cyber or magazines to give sexual gratification in the most intimate public way is contrary to moral teaching. It degrades the human person because they are called for greater things not of this world. They are called to holiness.

Are you aware, and I am sure you are how porn can cause damage in relationships. Persons become additcted, that they no longer want to engage in physical love with their spouse because they become obsessive to porn. Or they cannot engage in physical love without viewing some kind of porn. In a sense they become handicapped.Yes, its easy to give into sins of the flesh, but it sure hard to let go of it.
It can become a terrible damaging habit than can lead to perverse actions. Its something that committed pesons can't totally focus on each other but instead bring someone else or many persons in their most private intimate life in order to function.

*sigh*

quote:

---

Persons become additcted, that they no longer want to engage in physical love with their spouse because they become obsessive to porn. Or they cannot engage in physical love without viewing some kind of porn.

---

Such behavior is abnormal (abberant) behavior, Jade, and applies to many different things, not just p0rn.

Also, such behavior does not reflect the norm.

Basically, we are talking about human behavior (abnormal behavior, actually) here. P0rn in and of itself is not to blame for this.

Yes, Jad - what you are talking about is a symptom of the person affected, and not a symptom of any one external stimulus.

People become addicted to a great many things that are not in and of themselves bad things.

People become obsessed with all sorts of odd unexplainable things, as a result of some sort of need or other that they think they can fill with their obsessive behavior.

The target of their obsessive behavior is not to blame for their behavior.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

about the meaning of my statement? It was aimed at anyone who felt they were in
a position to defend the actions of the church in this case.

---

Christian or specifically Catholic?

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

Without a doubt the 'dirtiest' book ever written.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/spp.htm

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

The target of their obsessive behavior is not to blame for their behavior.

---

IMO, I view that it is.



Well, lets give an example, if you go to a girlie bar of your own free will, your going to expose yourself to a woman whose purpose is to dance erotically to stimulate you in the sexual way so you can give her some dollars and so the owner can make money off drinks. Right? Now, she has made a decision of her own free will to entice you which will affect your behavior, just as you allow yourself to be stimulated. According to you, there is no blame on the dancer because she is just the tool which controls you to act. But I say, both are used in the act to achieve gratification, therefore both are at risk.

Nudity in itself is not ugly, its just that some in the world use the body for ugliness. I have to believe the body, no matter what age, shape, form, missing limbs, fat or skinny, or race is a masterpiece of God's handiwork. Therefore, its beautiful! My faith says to use the body for pleasures, other than what the body was intended for, is to go against the natural law of God.

So...

You are saying that nudity in itself is not ugly. And the movments of the body are natural, right?

So how is viewing it going against the natural law of your god?

quote:

---

So how is viewing it going against the natural law of your god?

---

Its not bad as long as your looking at your own.

narrower and narrower. Soon jade your mind will be able to pass through the eye of a needle.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Jade - understand that I don't consider suc things a "risk to the soul". Given that, I don't care about who's at risk in that regard.

The point I make is very simple: people have these obsessions with all kinds of different things - there are large numbers of people who have addictive personalites. Such behaviors will show through regardless of the target item.

Whether someone displays this behavior in regard to pornography, gambling, alcohol, drugs, religion, self mutilation, or stockpiling cans of chicken noodle soup (it happens...) - the behavior is the same, and the addictive personality is to blame for such obsession. It's not because pornography is so evil that it forces addiction onto people...

And yes, there are studies, tests, and ass-loads of facts to back that up - again...pysch 101 (maybe 102...).

quote:

---

My faith says to use the body for pleasures, other than what the body was intended for, is to go against the natural law of God.

---

And uhhh...what exactly is the body intended for, according to your "natural" (bullshit!) law of god?

void(0);



(Edited by poi on 04-19-2005 18:29)

The new pope has been chosen. A German. I am happy we have a new pope. A scholar. Well, so was John Paul. I hope and pray he unites us all. He is a traditionalist, as John Paul was. I know it will be hard to fill the shoes of John Paul, but already some are speculating that this Pope Benedict will be a great pope too. I was hearing in the news that already Germany is rejoicing in the pick of a German. They are proud.

Mummy, Benedict XVI aka Joseph Ratzinger, is also a dope.

Why poi? How do you come to the conclusion without knowing who the new pope is that he is indeed a "dope". You don't come across with a valid reason why? What is it?

He is a hard conservative, declared repeatedly that birth control is evil, said the RC is the only form of Christianity ( thus insulting all other forms like Orthodox, Protestants, ... ), wrote that homosexuality is a "tendency" toward an "intrinsic moral evil" and both an "objective disorder" and a "moral disorder", is against marriage of the priests. That's more than enough to qualify as a dope in my eyes.

quote:

---

How do you come to the conclusion without knowing who the new pope is

---

And how do you come to conclusions about how much a person may know about the new pope?

quote:

---

poi said:

He is a hard conservative, declared repeatedly that birth control is evil, said the RC is the only form of Christianity ( thus insulting all other forms like Orthodox, Protestants, ... ), wrote that homosexuality is a "tendency" toward an "intrinsic moral evil" and both an "objective disorder" and a "moral disorder", is against marriage of the priests. That's more than enough to qualify as a dope in my eyes.

---

So if someone has different beliefs then yours, they're a dope?

Nope. IMHO, if someone's set of mind comes from Middle Age ( in the sense : is retrograde and has no grasp on the reality of our time ), he/she is a dope. I force no one to agree with me. This is just my own humble opinion.



(Edited by poi on 04-19-2005 21:25)

So if someone has different beliefs then yours, they're a dope? I guess you're one of the enlightened members.

That's not what I said.

Although I not always get the point of some systems of beliefs ( which we already discussed in other threads ), I respect other's beliefs and right to believe. Nonetheless I can't understand/bare retrograde opinions.

How can anyone consider, and claim, homosexuality is a flaw ? As for birth control, I and actually most people in France ( and obviously the feminist movements ), consider it as a fundamental right of the women, giving them full control of their own body.

We have to be realists and live in our time, not in the Middle Age or Stone Age.



(Edited by poi on 04-20-2005 00:43)

Rather interesting...

--------------------------------------------------------
"Abortion clinics are like expressways to heaven."

He was known as "God's Rotweiler" and the pope's "Enforcer". Interesting images for a religion exhalting the 'Prince of Peace".

It is the first time in a thousand years a Deutch pope has been chosen. From the sound of the man, his attitudes are a millenium out of step with modern times.

I predict a dismal time for catholic adherants.

I predict as well, a return of the inquisition.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

"Eggs", if the '3 score and 10' bit is to be believed , is past his 'best before date' by more than a few days. And the unwavering position of the church on anything remotely progressive, which he clearly endorses, is even more outdated.

As with any institution that refuses to evolve it will, sooner or later, collapse. With the election of Eggs, the church has taken another 'One step over the line sweet jesus.' Strike up the band!

(Edited by NoJive on 04-20-2005 04:21)

I disagree in this case.

I think the catholic church would disintegrate very quickly if they attempted to 'keep up with the times'.

From the religious point of view, it is absurd to think that policy allegedly designed by god should progress with the human perspective.

The church stands for a lot of things that would be meaningless if it were to embrace a modern liberal point of view.

The only shame is the strong hold that the church has over so large a part of the world's population.

What's even scarier, perhaps, is the thought of what the sheep would flock to if not this....we know they would still flock to something...and we know it would not be rational thought and general goodwill toward the world...

FWIW

Nojive...in the past, I think (therefore I am), the cards have appointed someone they don't expect to live long for specific purpose. If he has the temerity to live past the point in time which the cards had in mind, history has shown he has been 'hastened' towards his great reward (oblivion).

Even in relatively modern times (last century).

DL, without going back through countless empty posts by jade or gid, something in the lizard brain suggests one of them (at least) may have hinted that their myth does progress with humanity.

I agree with your analysis though and in that light the current Incarnation of Perpetual Ignorance is a fine choice.

As to what the sheep will flock to to be sheered: apparently in South America, where catholicism was adopted more as a method of survival than conversion, many are abandoning
catholicismin favour of....Evangelism!

Benny Hinn must have found out the peons have a few coins he might suck out of them.

BTW Pope the Rat or Benedict the Arnold was a member of the Hitler Jugend.

The mind-set suits catholicism to a "T"...for terminate.

The inquisition looms, fortunatley that despicable religion no longer has the power to abuse any but it's own adherants.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

This Pope is a disaster.

quote:

---

He has since said that although he was opposed to the Nazi regime, any open resistance would have been futile

---

That is a big load of bullshit. It is a cop out. It is covering the true reason - either he was too afraid, OR rebellion against the father? At that age, and with his father being openly anti-nazi, having to move frequently...a young man, uprooted again and again...in a time of war, where patriotism, etc, was preached on every corner...
Wouldn't surprise me if he actually joined freely, just to piss his old man off.

Recently, Germany is showing more and more signs of facism. A return to the roots, so to speak. The CDU is showing a lot of signs of rolling back a lot of things, if they get voted in in the next elections. And seeing how the SPD is running the country, there is no doubt that the CDU will win, IMHO.

A Neo-Nazi party actually is sitting in the Government of Dresden now. Neo-Nazi groups have joined their networks together, and are actively helping one another all over Germany.

And now a Deutsche (Ehtheist, that is how it is spelled) as Pope, that was in the Hitler Jugend, AND participated in the war. What a great "sign" to all those Neo-Nazi's (and potential Neo-Nazi's) out there.

Wonderful.

Pardon me while I go puke up.

DL: I think that's what I was trying to say but as my 'best before' closes in, clarity at times.... mercy?? =)

It's been quite interesting hearing the analysis from all quarters.

The fact a woman can/will never be boss is reason enough to never sign up..or leave. I mean just think what "Martha" could do with the interior of that joint. =)


WS

quote:

---

Pardon me while I go puke up.

---

If you do this run quickly. If you don't scientific evidence strongly suggests its going to come 'down' on you. =)

(Edited by NoJive on 04-20-2005 08:29)

I can agree with much of DL's post. The Church doesn't conform to the world view. THe Church evangelizes to have the world conform to its view. The church cannot change its doctrine on women in the priesthood. The pope doesn't have the power to do this. I was watching all kinds of analyst and news persons talk about what the church needs to change or soften its position on last and this week. It will not happen. The rock on which the institution stands will not be shaken in its position. Some faithfull will leave, some will stay. The RC church will still have a faithfull flock in the many many years to come.
Possibly two thousand more years. IT has faced harder schisms and wars and dissenters within who want change in its history and still it survies.

quote:

---

I can agree with much of DL's post.

---

- Jade

I never thought I'd see the day, when that happened!

Has hell frozen over?

Careful WS, it is a ploy to set you off your guard.

Thanks for the spelling correction too.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Careful WS, it is a ploy to set you off your guard.

Thanks for the spelling correction too.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

The church cannot change its doctrine on women in the priesthood.

---

This, to me, is one of the biggest issues as far as church doctrine gone wrong.

Can you please explain to me what this is based on, and how it can be considered a legitimate view despite the lack of scriptural support?

To me, this is an issue based soley on social propaganda of the time (giving - for the sake of argument - the benefit of the doubt concerning the basis of the christian faith...).

Given that, it is one of the doctrines that *shuold* by all rights change.

Again, to clarify: please explain what this doctrine is based upon, and how it can be considered legitimate in any way.

And the absense from sex for clergy did not come until like 12th century or something. Some pope just decided it to be so over night.

There are differing levels of "certainty" that the Catholic leadership place on doctrines of the church.

Women being excluded from the priesthood is arguably right at the top "de fide" which means that comes straight from God through the Magisterium. When you hear of doctrines being "ex cathedra" or "from the chair" it means that the Pope is uttering them with infallibility. I'm not sure if this doctrine is truly that level or not but let's say that it were. When jade says that the Pope has no power to change it, she means that if he were to do so, one of the pillars of the church would crumble to the ground, namely, that the Magisterium are the legitimate successors to the apostles and ultimately Christ himself as far as authority in matters of faith and morals. So you will not see women priests anytime soon without a major upheaval in the RC church.

Ruski brings up the celibacy issue. Well, that one is not "de fide" so it most certainly can change. The current Pope could rescind that one today if he saw fit to do so.

DL-44, I don't really know if this is the answer for the RC church on women priests or not. But what I can offer you is why many of the churches from which my congregation stems do not allow women leaders either. Here is some of the scriptural support they would cite:

quote:

---

As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. --1 Corinthians 14:34-35

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. --1 Timothy 2:12-12

---

I no longer believe that women are to be excluded from preaching or leadership in the Christian church. There are other passages that demonstrate, at least to my satisfaction, that these prohibitions were localized to specific regions and situations and not a blanket prohibition for all churches in all cultures.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Interesting.

will skip to the second part of the post for the moment -

1) Don't Paul and Jesus both iterate many times throughout the new testement that men and women stand on equal ground? I have no source to cite just now, but I will see what I can find - I know that I have read a *great* deal of scriptural quotes emphasizing the equality of men and women in the eyes of god, and many reports of many female leaders of Pauline churches.

2) The section of Timothy that quote is from is one of the things that has been shown (with general scholarly agreement) to be a forged passage. It is both stylistically and theologically inconsistent with the rest of the piece, and with the rest of Paul's verified writings.

Now, when you talk about Magisterium, are these things from the pope...or some other source - I'm not sure I fully follow here. Is it that a pope once delcared women couldn't be priests, and so that cannot be contradicted?

I understand that the pope is seen as totally infallible when he speaks of theological issues (and only on theological issues...how convenient...). So basically nothing any pope has ever decalred can be negated? Or, really, it's just a matter of finding the right loophole. I am quite certain that there *must* be plenty of cases where a papal edict has been later contradicted.

Though I suppose, if there is one thing catholics as a whole are good at, it is twisting the truth to fit an argument rather than facing it...



So what would happen if the pope *did* alter such a declaration? Would we see pure chaos? Would he burned at the stake?

1. I'm not immediately familiar with verses where Jesus specifically mentions men and women being equal. But the most notable that comes to my mind from Paul would have to be:

quote:

---

27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. --Galatians 3:27-29

---

2. I'll have to look into the point you make on this passage. I would like to check with my sources about this section of Timothy. As you know, there are conservative and liberal scholars and everything in between. I'll get back to you on this one

Ah yes, the Magisterium would be the Pope along with all of the bishops and that group being the teaching authority of the church. I am pretty sure you've got it right about some where back there a pope or some decree was made that prohibited women from the priesthood. I would have to do some digging to find it. Perhaps jade will chime in with that for us.

Nothing the pope has declared ex cathedra can be negated. That's the key, it has to be an edict that was uttered infallibly. If at any time the church has accepted a doctrine as "de fide", then by definition it is from God and therefore unchangeable (without toppling that pillar I mentioned before that is)

What would happen if that pillar toppled? I honestly believe they would find a way to explain why it didn't topple at all and smooth it over all the while following church law to the letter. That is just my gut feel on how it would be handled and I seriously wonder if I'll live to see such a day where the RC church would have to face that situation.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Lets remember the faith arose in a part of the world where, to this day, women are considered chattels. I suspect this may have quite a bit to do with this antiquated notion. As is so much of the bible and it's intepretations, a very retrograde idea.

I believe there are a number of xian cults which allow women priests and so far rhe end of the world has not arrived due to the practice.

I heard on the radio the other day that poopes used to often be married and that at least one of them had something like 14 kids through his various concubines. At least that one had some sense of reality.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

That's exactly the quote I had in mind Bugimus (among others), but I have very little grasp on what sayings came from which books at this point.

I will try to dig up some sources regarding the passage in timothy.

Your summary of how the church would handle such a fallacy is exactly what I meant in my last statement as well.


I would certainly like to hear something specific about the gender inequality in the church - Jade, any references on the subject?

Etheist - while you are correct in general, it is important that there were purportedly many female leaders in the Pauline churches in his time (something else I will have to try to find more info on), and Paul himself, as shown in the quote above, promoted gender equality.



(Edited by DL-44 on 04-21-2005 15:17)

Hmm, I seem to recall from the misty, musty depths of memory reading something about female priests/clerics in the early days.

I recall reading many decades ago. a book written in the early 50's in which the author (both book name and author now escape me) revealed his theory that the reviling of women in xianity became popular with the adoption of the Garden Of Eden Myth.

You know, it was women got us kicked out.

Prior to that in many societies women were essential. While the men were busy preparing for war, warring or recovering from war, the women were running he estates, businesses, families etc.

Barring any evidence to the contrary modern refusal by churches to recognize women as full equals is nothing less than brutal stupidity.

Some Mormom sects still practice the 'chattel' approach to women.

Here in BC we have a place called Bountiful where children as young as 10 or 12 are forcibly married to men as old as 50 or 60. Young girls are in fact traded across the border with similiar-minded sects in the states. This is nothing less than human slavery and child sexual abuse.

In order to insure there are lots of young girls for the trade and to service the elders (all male) young boys are often expelled from the community to make their own way in the world without education or knowledge of what the real world is like.

So far, governments on both sides of the border have expressed horror...and done nothing to stop it.

The mormom Church in salt lake has declared these sects are not part of the church, though they clearly reflect church doctrines. This is a cowardly way of avoiding any responsibility.

While this is an extreme instance of abuse of women by churches, it is not a matter of degree, but whether.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Yes. Bugs is correct in explaining the teaching the position the Church has on the ordination of women into the priesthood.

I have always agreed with the view the church's teaching on this issue. Out of maybe ignorance when I was younger, I thought only for the reason in regard to God's design of the domestic family church. I believed God created each gender for different roles. The male in its many physical attributes was the stronger while women the weaker for Gods plan. Though I believe both equal in intelligence the roles God determined thru divine wisdom in the spirit of the church. I felt if a woman were to be a priest, how could she care for her flock in the Catholic way? Would she leave her children sick to minister to a sick person in the hospital, or give last rites. Would she leave her babies to minister to prisons, to minister in war time? Would she leave her family to do missionary work like the twelve apostles did? I felt the female/mother/woman is the heart of the family, the breast feeders, nurturing mothers, who keep order in the household. And if the roles were reversed, could or should the women leave home and fight the wars. In defense of family, could the woman defend in case of attacks. So if I believed that God created men/women for their own creative roles, I had to believe he chose men to be apostles for his plan.

The ordination of men as priest only also has deep theological roots as well as scriptural. We think everyone agrees that the Catholic Church will one day ordain women. Surely it?s just this pope who is holding things back? The next Pope is bound to change the rule. Our times have favored a female priesthood and never more so at the time when Christ ordained his first priests, nearly 2,000 years ago. Think about it. Virtually all the pagan religions of his day had priestesses, so it would have been normal and natural for him to choose women for this task. He had a number of excellent potential candidates, from his own mother, who accompanied him at his first miracle and stood with him as he suffered on the cross, to Mary Magdalene or the women of Bethany. But instead, he chose only men, and he remained immovable on this, continuing right to the end by training and sending them all and leaving a Church which turned out to be safely founded on a rock. From those twelve men a direct line of apostolic succession has given the Catholic Church the bishops and priests it has today.

The Catechism of the RC states:
Only a baptized man receives sacred ordination. Jesus chose men to form twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose successors to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college until Christ?s return. The Church recognizes it to be bound by this choice made by the Jesus Christ, himself. For this reason the ordination of women cannot be possible. Christians believe God to be the essence of divine omnipotence. He doesn?t make mistakes. When he was incarnated as a human being, he did so at a precise time in our human history, which was planned from all eternity. He could of chose to come during the height of the feminist movement. From the beginning, God had chosen that there would be a Jewish people, among whom his divine Son would be born. We get our priestly traditions from Jewish priestly traditions and it formed part of our background and culture which would help all and others to see and know God. Every detail about the Incarnation was known in the mind of God. He was born into the fullness of time. So this being said, Christ Jesus would have chosen Mary Magdeline, the Virgin Mary or Martha for that matter as one of the twelve. We know God is pure spirit . Neither male nor female. So why should he design to come as a human man instead of woman?

In choosing His apostles, Christ was not awarding them the priesthood as a reward for good behavior: courage, intelligence, or skill. Peter, the rock on which the Church was to be founded denied him, another Thomas doubted his resurrection, and one even Judas betrayed him. The priesthood is not a badge of good-conduct , but just as bread and wine are the essential ?matter? of the Eucharist, so are men the ?matter? to the priesthood.

In another theological aspect, which is at the heart of Christian faith and I have posted this before is that in a Catholic wedding you will hear the beautiful scriptural, and profound statement that the relationship of a bridegroom and his bride is like that of Christ and his Church. Notice the order of things. Christ and his Church came first. They were an idea in the mind of God from the very beginning. And we, as human beings, when we unite together and marry, are an image of the ultimate Bridegroom and Bride. We also speak of her as being our Holy Mother Church. She is indeed a Bride who has become a mother ? and we are all her children, the fruit of that union she has with Christ. Perhaps because we are so used to this belief, most of us do not think about it very deeply. Christ began his public ministry at a wedding. We mostly miss the point because are intrigued by the story of water turning into wine, . But the wedding is a central part of the event. It was a genuine wedding. We don?t know the names of the young couple getting married, but they had invited Jesus and Mary, and it was evidently a happy and important occasion with food and drink and plenty of guests. But it was more. The whole story is of great theological significance. When Mary told Jesus that the wine was running out, He answered, ?My time is not yet come.? Whenever Christ mentions his ?time,? he means his passion and death according to Catholic interpretation of Scripture. Mary told the waiting servants, ?Do whatever he tells you.? That word ?do? also will be heard again, when Christ?s time indeed has come. At Cana, they "do" as he tells them, and water is turned into wine. At the Last Supper, once again there is a commandment to ?do,? and this commandment also has been obeyed down the centuries, with another transformation wine into Christ?s own blood. The wedding message from Cana is central to Calvary. This male/female imagery going right through our redemption history. It is at the heart of Christ?s being born among us as a man. When he founded his Church, it was with the love of a bridegroom for a bride, and when he gave us the Eucharist, it was as a nuptial feast. This bride/bridegroom imagery was completed on Calvary. We are speaking here of holy things at the very heart of our faith. Even Paul speaks of this as being ?a great mystery.? It gives a meaning and a great dignity to the human reality of male & female. It is in this way that we can see not only the importance of a male priesthood, but also the importance and beauty that the Church attaches to purity, to fidelity in marriage, and to the fruitfulness of married love. Also Catholic great women have played a central role in the life of the Church. I could go on an on but am limited by time. The Church must think of other issues that will arise out of sex & gender in our society like homosexuality, transvestites, the idea of ?same-sex marriage,? the legitimization of sado-masochism as an ?alternative lifestyle,? and so on and so on. The Church?s purpose is to relay that God has a meaning and purpose in the way he created us. We must offer spiritual reason and sanity for a confused people who seek truth. So not any time soon will we have a female pope.

I refer to this site here is a famous apologist, Patrick Madrid site on the issue better than I could:

http://www.catholic.com/library/Women_and_the_Priesthood.asp

(Edited by jade on 04-21-2005 21:14)

Thank you for the explanation Jade.

Do you have anything more concrete as far as there being an actual edict, proclamation, or something of that nature? Or is it simply a matter of standing tradition?

The institution of the church stands on the collaboration of tradition/scriputre/magisterium to decree its teachings on the priesthood. There are derees and edicts regarding the priesthood through out the centuries. I will see what I can find offically and get back to you.

As I recall one of the things the Pope will say when discussing these types of doctrines is " the church has always held". I would guess that this one falls into that category where it is assumed this was in place from virtually day one of the new kingdom.

And, yes, thanks very much for that explanation, jade.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Like most of us, I didn't know who the next pope would be, but I know there is one particularly qualified and distinguished man who will *not* be selected. Archbishop Hans Grapje was raised in a Catholic school in The Hague, Netherlands. As a young man, he aspired to become a priest, but was drafted into the army during WWII. He spent two years flying aboard B17s as a co-pilot until, in 1943, his aircraft was shot down and he lost his left arm. Still conscripted, Hans spent the remainder of the war as a chaplain, giving spiritual advice and consolation to dying soldiers, allied and enemy alike.
He was renowned for his ecumenical tenderness and compassion. After the war, Grapje became a priest and served as a missionary throughout Africa. In spite of his handicap, he was noted for piloting his own bush plane into the deepest, most primitive villages to spread the church's message and charity to the impoverished.



In 1997, then Archbishop Grapje was serving at an outpost in Zimbabwe, when an explosion in one of the country's vast silver mines caused a catastrophic cave-in. The archbishop, in spite of his seniority, went down into several of the shafts to administer last rights to those who would never escape. He was in one of these shafts when it partially caved in, trapping him and several rescuers. Although he was rescued three days later, he suffered several painful injuries, including one that cost him his right eye. Additionally, the silver content in the shaft's air supply had poisoned him, causing his skin to take an indigo hue - a condition known as conjunctiva - that persists to this day.

Although the Cardinal has devoted, and indeed risked, his life in the service of God for nearly 70 years, as a scholar, a mentor, and the epitome of a holy man, church politics preclude his ascension to the Papacy.

Church leaders have made it clear they don't want a one-eyed, one armed, flying, purple, Papal leader.



"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

At this point I just want to say this.

The scandal of pedophilia that the Roman Catholic Church is hopefully dealing with by now was perpetrated by individuals in that organizatio. Yes it was extremely wrong and those who are guilty of the crime should burn in Hell (sorry Ehtheist I know you don't believe in Hell but please bare with me by ignoring your scathing and blinding prejeduice against all christians and religions for this moment) (thank you). However it is unfair to say that all roman catholic priests are guilty of the crime perpetrated by some. That is like saying all Germans are Nazis, this is not true.

If we are going to say that all roman catholic priests are pedophiles (which it seems like we are to me) than we might as well accuse all men and women of all the crimes ever commited throughout the course of time. After all if one human commits a crime that means all humans must be guilty. As far as the pope knowing or not. I don' t think he really knew for sure. He might have had an inkling or a growing suspicion but I don't think he knew completely. As far as Ehtheist applying laws, well, the Vatican has differant laws than other places. Just because one country says 'knows or ought to know' (not in actual legal speak and probably a state law) doesn't mean that the Vatican laws do. If he did know for sure than he should have done something as soon as he did.

It also seems to me that some of us are making the assumption that since Pope John Paul the Second was the leader of the organization he knows all that goes on in that organization at all times. As if he is some benevolent power instead of the normal human being he was. Question:
Does your boss know everything that goes on at work at all times 24 hrs. a day?
Does your boss know what you are doing in your personal time 24hrs. a day?
Does your boss want to know?
If you answered no to any of these questions you have just proved my point.

History is nothing but a fable that has been agreed upon.
-Napolean Bonaparte

Well thanks Sang...I think (therefore I am).

quote:

---

Yes it was extremely wrong and those who are guilty of the crime should burn in Hell

---

If they believe in it, they will, but only until they die.

quote:

---

However it is unfair to say that all roman catholic priests are guilty of the crime perpetrated by some

---

I agree and neither myself nor anyone else here, that I recall, has made that blanket statement.

Perhaps you needed to see it that way?

quote:

---

[As far as the pope knowing or not. I don' t think he really knew for sure. He might have had an inkling or a growing suspicion but I don't think he knew completely

---

Well, the only way he could not know is if he were completly insulated from world news.

Would you have us believe he is fed only 'good news' by his handlers?

The rest of your argument in this vein is dismissed by the above and I must say you sound very much as though you are trying to be an 'apologist' for the vatican. An ambition doomed.

The phrase "knew or ought to have known" is not particular to Canadian law. It is certainly used and applicable in the US, Britain, S A, Australia, New Zealand and like countries. That something having the same intent and meaning , may well exist in other countries laws would not surprise me at all.

The Vatican has always worked outside the laws of Italy and every other country.

This is why it is so thoroughly mistrusted and hated.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)
[Edit - quote tag fixed]

(Edited by WebShaman on 04-25-2005 06:15)

quote:

---

If we are going to say that all roman catholic priests are pedophiles (which it seems like we are to me)

---

You need to go back and read the individual posts more closely. NOone has said this.

quote:

---

It also seems to me that some of us are making the assumption that since Pope John Paul the Second was the leader of the organization he knows all that goes on in that organization at all times.

---

Noone has stated this, either.

So, what exactly is your point?

WebShaman | Asylum D & D | D & D Min Page

As I suggested, Sang is desperately trying to be an...apolgist?...No...m ecusist.

Or, perhaps sang is starting to feel the pangs of reality?

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

If we are going to say that all roman catholic priests are pedophiles (which it seems like we are to me)

---

You must be reading a different thread...because none of us has said this.

As for whether the pope knew or not - he may or may not have known while things were happening, but he certainly knew after the fact, and the only supportable position IMO would have been for him to instantly remove anyone involved from any form of church office. Instead he did the same thing the local bishops did - he shuffled people around a little bit.

He condemned it with words but not with actions.

Forgiveness? That's all well and good. But get the people involved out of the organization.

^ AMEN!!

Stepping back slightly, I think it is extremely important to point out, as I am quite sure that many people do not realize this, that throughout the history of the church, pope's have constantly pushed for various reforms in the church, and pope's - like any other political leaer - would often undo the actions of a former pope.

Pope's would often be voted in specfically because of their reformist agenda.

It has *always* been a matter - as in the secular world - of retaining the historic founding that supports the current view, and ommitting the history that contradicts it.

The idea of a consistent view since day one is purely silly, no matter what aspect of the religion we're talking about.

From reading this: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0005chap.asp

One comes away with the impression the RC church feels a need to try to get in on the 'fallacy of fastest growth'.

One also believes the author revealed more of church attitudes than he intended to.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)