quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I never thought of the hypocrisies of the Mother Church as a reason to stop going to mass, but I guess it was the hypocrisy of some of the members of the parish that bugged me.

I would switch churches if it was simply a problem within a specific church. Since the issues I had was with actual Church Dogma, switching churches wouldn't have helped a bit. Switching to a faith whose dogma didn't have blatant hypocrisies was my response. I have yet to find one that doesn't, however. Some are worse than others.

quote:

As a child, I got half answers. That didnt work when I became an adult.

Me: Why do you pray to Mary?

Them: "She was Jesus' mother."

Me: So what?

Them: "You listen to your mother, don't you?"

Me: What?!?!?
______

Me: Why do you pray to Mary and the Saints?

Them: "For help."

Me: Do they, themselves, help you?

Them: "No. The help comes from Jesus."

Me: Why don't you just pray to Jesus?

Them: <hem, haw, stammer> "Because having more people asking Jesus for you is better."

Me: Huh?!?
____

Me: Why do I have to go to a priest to ask forgiveness?

Them: "So he can molest you"... NO!! That wasn't the answer! "He represents God."

Me: So? He can't absolve me of my sins, or forgive me.

Them: "He stands in for God and represents your forgiveness to God."

Me: What happens if I pray to God, directly, and ask forgiveness of my sins?

Them:

Right now my biggest problem is with organized religion, all of em claim to believe in the bible, but it seems that each one has a different one... or more precisely, they all have the same one, but some of the things I have heard various denominations say that the bible says, never jived with what I read.

The problem isn't that they all have their own version of the Bible. The Bible itself isn't different (though translations are supposed to be written to assist people in understanding what is written), but the translations are. You can be essentially kicked out of a church if you're not preaching their chosen translation. I've seen that happen. It would be as if you could only preach Billy Graham's interpretation and not Benny Hinn's. That's where I tend to bug out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

Most of the priests, unless my understanding is wrong, were moved to positions with less opportunity to continue molesting kids.

Which is THE PROBLEM. Those priests SHOULD HAVE been arrested, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law FOR RAPING CHILDREN....
"Moving them around" to conceal their CHILD RAPE, and protect them from the legal ramifications of their choice to RAPE CHILDREN, is clearly supporting their actions.
Otherwise, don't you just call a cop and tell him that Priest ABC is raping children?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Priest's used to be married.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Hold on a second. How does your response have anything to do with my statement you quoted?

Because you stated....

quote:

Was there some sort of memo passed down to all the members of the cloth? If not, how is it that every person within the hierarchy knows? Yes, the Pope knew. Yes, the Pope didn't do enough (or much) about it. That isn't enough to claim that every single leader of every single church within the Catholic religion knew and did nothing.

The Pope is the final law and word of that religion. You cant have that kind of power without the responsibilities behind it. HE knew... HE did nothing.. therefore the CHURCH supported that position.

quote:

Or are you saying that Papal law and decree mean nothing anymore?

quote:

quote:

I am not supporting the response by the Pope. I am not supporting the blind eye turning by all who knew. I'm claiming that every cloth member of the Catholic faith didn't know, so you can't paint the entire Church the same way.

When one is in charge, making all the decisions, and has the power to stop something, and does nothing to stop it, then that organization IS allowing it to happen.

quote:

quote:

I'm going to assume you are referring to me, because I'm the only one that you're arguing with about PP. And, I'm not sure why you singled me out when the OP set the PP:abortion :: Catholic Church:pedophilia analogy. I responded against the OP's assertions, and then you say I'm the one that "went to such great pains?!?!?"

Because your views on abortion tend to paint your posts any time its brought up.

quote:



Oh? And, what are my views on abortion that "paint [my] posts?"

quote:

PP isnt just a "provider of abortive services". That was a very deep dig at an organization that does a whole lot more for the community it serves, while trying to excuse/ignore the very real abuse done by another.

It wasn't a dig at all. My first post stated this:

quote:

Perhaps a goal of the Catholic Church isn't to molest children? And, what are the odds that the percentage of Planned Parenthood locations participate, actively, in helping obtain abortive procedures, compared to the percentage of Catholic Churches that participate, actively, in helping priests molest children?

If you are complaint in this thread is about the lack of other services PP provides other than abortive services, then you need to get on farglebargle's case, not mine. He set the parameters.

And, unless you are going to disagree with my statement that "PP is a provider of abortive services," we have nothing more to discuss about that. At no point in time did I state that PP only provides abortive services. Never. Not once. Not twice. Not three times, a lady. Ahem. Sorry for channeling Kenny...

I look forward to your views on my abortion beliefs. This, too, shall be instructive.

_____________________________

What I support:

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

(in reply to tazzygirl)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Why not switch to something that doesn't have a Bible or a holy book as such?

quote:

In my early years I was sent to Sunday school every single week.
Every Sunday afternoon wrecked by religious studies that I didn't want or care for.
And, like you, got really peeved at not getting answers or answers that made no sense to me.
After a short time, I was almost sleeping in the sermons and only looked forward to the activity sessions afterwards - colouring books, glue and glitter! lol.
Then there was the obligatory 30 minutes of school prayers every bloody morning and those sanctimoneous Religious Education lessons three times a week.
By the time I reached 10 years old, I was thoroughly sick of it all and all the other dogma that was attached to various other religions.
Jumping from one faith to another was akin to jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
So, for another few decades, I was a firm atheist.
These days I'm not an atheist as such but I still don't support any particular rigid religion.

In my meanderings through life, I have come across several types of people...
1) Religious nuts. I really don't have time for them even as individual people because they can't leave their religion out of anything. JW's particularly annoy me.
2) Those that blindly follow religion because that's how they've been brought up and don't appear to have any backbone to consider anything else. Religion used as a convenience because they can't be assed to work out their own answers to life.
3) Atheists and agnostics. These people can be just as defiant in their views as the religious nuts although most I have met don't hold such vehement views.
4) Those that think religion in general is evil because of what it has done to the world - satanists, witches etc.
5) And last, but not least, those that wander through life not thinking about religion or anything to do with it but aren't particularly atheist or agnostic. These people follow their own pattern and goals in life and fuck anyone else that doesn't agree with them.

quote:

What was I originally?? Church of England (protestant).
I also saw many of my friends who were catholic and jewish go through similar torture.
What am I now?? That's a good question!!
Something akin to a neo-pagan I guess.
A bit of a mixture between druidism and paganism.
Why? Because I happen to like the idea that things have a natural cycle - Growth of new things and death of old things, in a yearly cycle.
No, I don't go round hugging trees or beholding to the various bits of paganism to the letter.
But, in my world, *I* am my own god and I try not to deliberately damage the planet or it's living things.
For the first time in many decades, I am at peace with my world and the people around me (in general).
That suits me and I'm happy with it.

quote:

And to keep on topic, I happen to agree with tazzy.
Yes, many things happen in all religions - both good and bad.
But isn't it strange that the catholic church seem to have more than it's fair share of paedophiles?
And the more you dig, the more of them you find?
Then you find out that the church obviously knew about it and gave those people a sideways promotion - and not always in 'better' positions so as not to continue their horrendous activities.
And what's more, apart from some very recent examples that have hit the headlines, everything is dealt with behind closed doors within the church itself to circumvent the authorities and the law.
That, to me, stinks of a knowingly blatant cover-up by the church authorities and by their actions, condoning the practice.

quote:

You don't here so much of it happening in other religions.
Just my

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

So, every person that worked for AIG, Enron, Arthur Andersen, etc. bears liability for the illegal activities within the organization, regardless of whether or not they knew about, or took part in, the activities. Interesting. Be careful with whom you associate, tazzy. Those views can come back to haunt you.

quote:

Wrong. You have just condemned every single person who works in or for a Catholic Church. If the Pope does or doesn't do something (generality, not just specific to this topic) he should/n't, that's on the Pope. Unless you can show me that everyone in the employ of the Catholic Church knew and did nothing, you can not blame the entirety of the Catholic Church.

quote:

You're asking the opinion on Papal law/decrees of a person who left Catholicism over hypocrisy issues?!? Those things mean nothing to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

So, every person that worked for AIG, Enron, Arthur Andersen, etc. bears liability for the illegal activities within the organization, regardless of whether or not they knew about, or took part in, the activities. Interesting. Be careful with whom you associate, tazzy. Those views can come back to haunt you.

Nope... nor does a corporation run the same way the Church does.

quote:

quote:

Wrong. You have just condemned every single person who works in or for a Catholic Church. If the Pope does or doesn't do something (generality, not just specific to this topic) he should/n't, that's on the Pope. Unless you can show me that everyone in the employ of the Catholic Church knew and did nothing, you can not blame the entirety of the Catholic Church.

I dont need too. Papal Infallibility.

quote:

"when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church"
He speaks for the entirety of the Church. He makes the rules for the entirety of the Church. And, considering the Pope cannot be fired or impeached, he is unlike any CEO I have ever heard of.

quote:

quote:

You're asking the opinion on Papal law/decrees of a person who left Catholicism over hypocrisy issues?!? Those things mean nothing to me.

And they mean everything to the Church.. and to many courts of law.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

That would be their own problem, then, wouldn't it? And, if you believe, or someone believes in Papal Infallibility, and treats it as law, then the actions taken by the Pope aren't available for question, no?

quote:

Where did a Pope define a doctrine condoning pedophilia? I'd love for you to provide a link to that.

quote:


Report: Accused priests shuffled worldwide
DALLAS (AP) — An international movement of Roman Catholic priests out of countries where they have been accused of abusing children has continued even after the abuse scandal that swept the U.S. church in 2002, The Dallas Morning News found in a yearlong investigation.
Hundreds of priests accused of abuse have been moved from country to country, allowing them to start new lives in unsuspecting communities and continue working in church ministries, the newspaper reported in Sunday editions.

The priests lead parishes, teach and continue to work in settings that bring them into contact with children, despite church claims to the contrary, the newspaper said.

Vatican officials declined to comment Friday after an overview of the investigation was featured on National Public Radio.

In one case, the Rev. Frank Klep, a convicted child molester who has admitted abusing one boy and is wanted on more charges in Australia, was placed in Apia, Samoa, in the South Pacific. Australia has no extradition treaty with Samoa.

Klep told the newspaper that neither he nor the church feels an obligation to tell anyone about his past. Few, if any, locals are aware of his history.

"I'd prefer to just leave it," Klep said. "If I felt I was still a risk to their children, then I'd think differently. But I don't think I am at risk anymore."

The Morning News said Klep's order, the Salesians of Don Bosco, has long moved priests accused of sexual abuse from country to country, away from law enforcement and victims.

"For me it would be a tragedy to reduce the role of a pastor to that of a cop," said Salesian Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez of Honduras, who has been mentioned as a possible successor to Pope John Paul II. "I'd be prepared to go to jail rather than harm one of my priests."

quote:

And, I care not one whit what your quote (nor the source from which you pulled the court) states. The Pope is not the shepherd, nor teacher for all Christians.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Perhaps because I am still a Christian, by choice?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
What about 6) Mono-deists? 7) Poly-deists?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I don't fit in any of your 5 listed categories. I am not an "in your face" religious nut (like my Mom). I am not blindly following anything. I am neither an atheist, nor an agnostic, nor do I believe religion, in and of itself, is evil. Since #5 doesn't include people who do think about religion and stuff to do with it, but aren't in any other category above, I don't fit into your list.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
We are not so different, you and I (at least regarding this). We may not believe in the same God, but we are both "practicing" in very similar ways (generally speaking). Have you been to Stonehenge on whatever the most important day is? I find that to be fascinating, personally.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, the big question is, then, does every priest within Catholicism support pedophilia because some % engaged in it and there is proof of knowledge of pedophilia by priests known within the hierarchy, up to, and including the Pope? What of the priests who did not engage in pedophilia, didn't know that it was going on until it all came to light, and is diligently tending his flock, trying to guide them through the mess that he had no part in?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I suppose there shouldn't even be a Catholic Church because of the history with the Inquisition, the Crusades, etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I am simply going to respond with one of my favorite words: yet.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You didn't see so much of it happening in the Catholic Church before it all came to light, either. Doesn't mean it isn't there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Really? Gimme a break. Does PP offer abortive services? Absolutely, they do. Do Catholic Churches offer Child Molestation Services? Absolutely not.

LOL... yes. Sorry, by switching around known pedophiles, they are offering just that

Really? I'm sorry, tazzy, but you're absolutely full of shit on that one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Priest's used to be married.

Yes, until right after whats his name Borgia was pope. I mean the guy had mistresses, was supposed to have slept with Lucretia, arranged the murders of two sons in laws.

Not to mention he ran a brothel out of the Vatican if I remember right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

That would be their own problem, then, wouldn't it? And, if you believe, or someone believes in Papal Infallibility, and treats it as law, then the actions taken by the Pope aren't available for question, no?

Exactly... that is my point. So saying because all the members of the organization may not have known it was happening doesnt cut it.

quote:

quote:

Where did a Pope define a doctrine condoning pedophilia? I'd love for you to provide a link to that.

He condoned it by doing nothing to prevent further abuse with that same Priest.
He condoned it by making investigations into the matter extremely difficult.
Pope Paul VI was told about this back in the 50's. This didnt start with Benedict.

quote:

quote:

And, I care not one whit what your quote (nor the source from which you pulled the court) states. The Pope is not the shepherd, nor teacher for all Christians.

Nope, he isnt. Nor do I care one whit what your belief in the church is about. Its how the CHURCH views itself.. as a law above all else.
He IS the "shepherd" and "teacher" for the CHURCH.. which is what I am talking about.
No corporation is ran like this... none are allowed too.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

Sure it does. You can't damn all within the Church if they aren't all in the know, can you? Sorry, poorly worded question. Of course you can, and you are. I'm disagreeing with you.

quote:

No, this didn't start with Benedict, nor with his predecessor, who didn't do enough or soon enough in Benedict's eyes. And, now that the guy at the top - Benedict - is no longer turning a blind eye, and has been actively investigating, is the Church still, as you seem to think, in the business of offering child molestation services?

quote:

Notice I didn't disagree with his being the shepherd and teacher for Catholics. I simply pointed out that the Pope is not the shepherd/teacher/leader/Grand Poobah for all Christians.

And, now that the current Pope is cleaning things up...

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Perhaps because I am still a Christian, by choice?

That is, of course, your choice, and I respect your choice to be so.
However, if that choice causes you some discomfort because of the religion you choose to follow and their antics, shouldn't you do something about it?
The church/religion isn't likely to change, so that leaves you, personally, to make changes to your choices - or live with your disappointments within it.
I chose to jump out of ther frying pan and make my own fire. lol.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
What about 6) Mono-deists? 7) Poly-deists?

Notice I didn't name any particular religion or culture - so they would still be encompassed somewhere in the list, whatever '~eist' they are.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I don't fit in any of your 5 listed categories. I am not an "in your face" religious nut (like my Mom). I am not blindly following anything. I am neither an atheist, nor an agnostic, nor do I believe religion, in and of itself, is evil. Since #5 doesn't include people who do think about religion and stuff to do with it, but aren't in any other category above, I don't fit into your list.

I think you fit squarely into #2.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
We are not so different, you and I (at least regarding this). We may not believe in the same God, but we are both "practicing" in very similar ways (generally speaking). Have you been to Stonehenge on whatever the most important day is? I find that to be fascinating, personally.

I have, indeed (twice) - many years ago before they put up all that godawful double fencing and security.
Staying there all night with like-minded people, sharing food, drink, song and general merriment.
Then, to stand with everyone, in complete silence, and watch that magical moment that we only see on TV these days.
It was a very uplifting experience that has always been with me to this day.
And I think it was this experience that turned me from being atheist to what I am today.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I am simply going to respond with one of my favorite words: yet.

quote:

The catholic church (along with the mormons) have been one of the most secretive organisations in the world.
Even modern-day 'secret services' are more transparent than the catholic church.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You didn't see so much of it happening in the Catholic Church before it all came to light, either. Doesn't mean it isn't there.

So can you explain, that even with all the secrecy of the church, that the catholics seem to have the monopoly on this activity??
Perhaps because it doesn't happen to such an extent everywhere else as it does in the catholic church?
Food for thought methinks.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
So when a bishop moves a known pedophile from one parish to another without restricting his access to children or warning the new parish, as has happened at least thousands of times, what is it?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Sure it does. You can't damn all within the Church if they aren't all in the know, can you? Sorry, poorly worded question. Of course you can, and you are. I'm disagreeing with you.

You can disagree all you want. It wont change how many, many people feel.

quote:

No, this didn't start with Benedict, nor with his predecessor, who didn't do enough or soon enough in Benedict's eyes. And, now that the guy at the top - Benedict - is no longer turning a blind eye, and has been actively investigating, is the Church still, as you seem to think, in the business of offering child molestation services?

Pope Benedict XVI failed to act over complaints during the 1990s about a priest in the US who is thought to have abused some 200 deaf boys, victims say.
As head of the Vatican office dealing with sex abuses, the then Cardinal Ratzinger allegedly did not respond to letters from an archbishop on the case.
A Church trial of the priest was halted after he wrote to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger pleading ill health.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8587082.stm

quote:

The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano said there was no cover-up, denouncing the allegations as "clearly an ignoble attempt to strike at Pope Benedict and his closest aides at any cost".
The Pope's official spokesman, Federico Lombardi, called it a "tragic case", but said there was no provision in Church law for automatic punishment.
He noted that police did investigate the allegations at the time but did not press charges.
The papal spokesman said the Murphy case had only reached the Vatican in 1996 - two decades after the Milwaukee diocese first learned of the allegations and two years before the priest died.
The diocese was asked to take action by "restricting Father Murphy's public ministry and requiring that Father Murphy accept full responsibility for the gravity of his acts", he added.

quote:

So, which is it? Did he act as the CHURCH told him to act then and do nothing, thus the CHURCH allowing the abuse of over 200 children to continue?
Or did HE allow the abuse to continue while HE wasnt responsible?
Which is it? You cant have it both ways.
Either way, the CHURCH is responsible.
And, as someone else pointed out, you gotta be nuts to believe the rest of the Church didnt know... of course they knew. It wasnt quiet.

quote:

Notice I didn't disagree with his being the shepherd and teacher for Catholics. I simply pointed out that the Pope is not the shepherd/teacher/leader/Grand Poobah for all Christians.
And, now that the current Pope is cleaning things up...

The current Pope who was in charge of the investigations in the 90's, and covered it up then?

quote:

In 1996, Cardinal Ratzinger failed to respond to two letters about the case from Rembert G. Weakland, Milwaukee's archbishop at the time. After eight months, the second in command at the doctrinal office, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, now the Vatican's secretary of state, instructed the Wisconsin bishops to begin a secret canonical trial that could lead to Father Murphy's dismissal.
But Cardinal Bertone halted the process after Father Murphy personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger protesting that he should not be put on trial because he had already repented and was in poor health and that the case was beyond the church's own statute of limitations.
"I simply want to live out the time that I have left in the dignity of my priesthood," Father Murphy wrote near the end of his life to Cardinal Ratzinger. "I ask your kind assistance in this matter." The files contain no response from Cardinal Ratzinger.

quote:

Prior to 2001, the primary responsibility for investigating allegations of sexual abuse and disciplining perpetrators rested with the individual dioceses. In 2001, Ratzinger convinced John Paul II to put the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in charge of all investigations and policies surrounding sexual abuse in order to combat such abuse more efficiently.

quote:

Although many cases could not be prosecuted because the statute of limitations in civil law, the Church's canon law allows for prosecution of many of those cases.[citation needed]
The Catholic Church responded to the scandal at three levels: the diocesan level, the episcopal conference level and the Vatican. Responses to the scandal proceeded at all three levels in parallel with the higher levels becoming progressively more involved as the gravity of the problem became more apparent.
Before the Boston Globe coverage of the sexual abuse scandal in the Boston archdiocese, handling of sexual abuse allegations was largely left up to the discretion of individual bishops. After the number of allegations exploded following the Globe's series of articles, U.S. bishops felt compelled to formulate a coordinated response at the episcopal conference level.
Although the Vatican did not respond immediately to the series of articles published by the Boston Globe in 2002, it has been reported that Vatican officials were, in fact, monitoring the situation in the U.S. closely.[43] Over time, it became more apparent that the problem warranted greater Vatican involvement.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I will, at some point in my life, make it to Stonehenge (and the other -henges in the area). It's a "bucket list" item. Though I most likely won't attend on that special day, not being one to enjoy a crowd so much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Again, I state, "yet." How much was heard about James Bakker before it was brought into the light?
It's entirely possible it doesn't happen outside the Catholic Church as it does there. However, that doesn't mean it isn't happening, hasn't happened, is still happening within the Catholic Church, etc.