The Catholic church seems to be on the verge of imploding
- Thread starter shank hawk
- Start date
Jesus, was the Son of God, who had a 3 year public
ministry during his 33 years on this earth.. He came to
our earth to die for the sins of humanity and to rise from
the grave for victory over death. The Son of God in his
brief time on this earth never intended to be a role model
for husbands and nobody expected him to get married.
ministry during his 33 years on this earth.. He came to
our earth to die for the sins of humanity and to rise from
the grave for victory over death. The Son of God in his
brief time on this earth never intended to be a role model
for husbands and nobody expected him to get married.
The two religious literalists are at-odds! Progress!
Brian has even managed to try to drag Jesus into the cover-up of priests molesting kids! If you have contempt for their actions, and the church's cover-up, then ipso-facto you hate Jesus! Good job, Brian! Jesus still loves you, but you're working his last goot' nerve.
Brian has even managed to try to drag Jesus into the cover-up of priests molesting kids! If you have contempt for their actions, and the church's cover-up, then ipso-facto you hate Jesus! Good job, Brian! Jesus still loves you, but you're working his last goot' nerve.
The Catholic "notion" has never been that people aren't sexual; the Catholic idea is that people should use their sexuality in the correct manner.
The reason for celibacy is because of Jesus and it's the same with women not being able to be Priests; Jesus chose men to be his disciples. That doesn't mean he was sexist.
http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/love-and-sexuality/index.cfm
Just because porn is a huge moneymaker, doesn't mean it's a good thing. Crack is a huge money maker, too...
Porn is just an example of our flawed nature and our propensity to use other people for our own interest.
Last edited:
Then, you must be. I'm just repeating your comments.
Why do you even care if Catholicism dies-out? Unless... it's the church and the religion that you're really worshiping.
Did you read my links?
First, sex abuse scandals happen more in schools than they do in the Catholic Church. Perhaps we should allow teachers to get married? (Oh wait, they already are)
https://www.investors.com/politics/...amp-down-news-of-children-abused-by-teachers/
Second, what does the divorce rate have to do with anything? Practicing Catholics have a lower divorce rate than the general population.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholics-continue-to-have-lowest-divorce-rates-report-finds
Third, what does males watching porn have to do with anything?
Of course, not everyone lives up to the moral teaching. That doesn't mean we should change Jesus's teachings just to form to our inherent flaws.
The Protestant denominations did that and most of them are dying...
Your links consists of quips and propaganda. I don’t know when you were born but I doubt that claim is remotely true. You also haven’t addressed the fact that it was covered up by the church hierarchy and accused priest were reassigned and still allowed to be around children etc. I’ll repeat myself, do ever consider that your apparent unquestioning belief in Catholic teachings and the vareacity of Catholic theology contributes to the problem.
The John Jay report isn't propaganda, it's facts based on an exhaustive, academic investigation. Here you go:
http://www.newsweek.com/priests-commit-no-more-abuse-other-males-70625
Some of the Church hierarchy did cover up abuse and moved Priests to other parishes. That is a fact. It also was a small percentage of clergy.
I was born in 1983 and 75% of the abuse accusations happened before that.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8654789.stm
You are falling into the illogical trap of judging all clergy based on those that failed the moral teachings. The vast majority of clergy adhered to the moral teachings.
Why judge all the clergy based on the people that fail? How is that logical or fair?
No, I don't believe that I've contributed to the problem. I had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Do you think you contributed to the public school teacher epidemic because you attended public schools?
That's the same exact logic as you are using. It makes literally no sense.
Brianole, you once again link to an article by a columnist that supports your basic assertions. You still haven’t addressed the fact that these crimes went unreported and accused priests were reassigned and allowed to be around children. You, also, were alive when the current pope had to apologize for comments that defended accused priests accused of abuse.
That's because the facts support my basic assertions. Can't you see that? I posted links to Newsweek and the BBC; those are hardly Christian news outlets.
Some Priests and clergy were evil and allowed abuse to continue. That's a fact. That doesn't mean we should trash the 90%+ of Priests and clergy that were good.
The best way to judge a religion is by it's teachings, not by its worst members.
If 10% of school teachers abused kids, does that mean we should judge all school teachers as evil? That seems to be your logic here.
Yes.
What percentage of clergy were involved in it?
I don't defend evil clergy, just like I don't defend evil teachers or coaches or counselors, etc.
You still haven't addressed why you're judging all clergy by the actions of their worst. That's no different than racism or bigotry.
I did, repeatedly.
Scroll up and read.
I'm just pointing out the logical flaws in your argument; some clergy were bad, therefore, the entire Catholic Church and it's teachings are bad, in your view.
I didn’t say the entire clergy or teachings were bad, but the fact of the matter was a supposed holy institution covered up for pedophiles and knowingly put their followers in harms way. There are two crimes, knowingly allowing pedophiles to be assigned to parishes and a hierarchy allowing it. Thousands aren’t abused in Australia, hundreds if not thousands at a school for the deaf in Milwaukee etc. if non pedophiles but hardly religious people aren’t enabling the abuse.
Some in the institution covered up for pedophiles. A small minority.
I'm not excusing it, but it's not logical for you to trash the entire institution based on a small, evil minority that didn't obey it's teachings.
The facts are that the vast majority of Priests are good people and they have a higher life satisfaction that almost any other vocation or profession.
I am an ordained Deacon of the Presbytary, and I find several posters on here very distasteful in their interpretation of God's word. I'll just leave it at that.
Okay, google the international accusations against the church and the number of countries facing complaints. Then calculate the potential number of victims that potentially happened in Catholic Churches, schools and affiliated institutions and then tell me you’ll write off the scandal as an aberration.
No this is wrong. The official position was to cover up. It matters not how many individuals were involved. Even the Church acknowledged this and asked forgiveness. You need to come to terms with what the church did as an institution.
4% of Priests were accused of abuse. That's according to the John Jay Report from New York University.
That's 4% too many, but you are trashing the other 96% based on the actions of the minority.
Regardless, what is your point here?
Do you think the Catholic Church should be outlawed or no one should go to Mass because of the 4%?
Even the Church is saying they're guilty. Brian refuses to accept that!
No, I don't.
My goodness...you are such an awful poster.
One of the worst in HROT history...easily.
No, of course the Catholic Church shouldn’t be outlawed, but once again the hierarchy covered up the crimes. 4% of priests were accused how abuses were covered up for and you seem to not acknowledge the number of victims. My point is that blind faith in a supposed holy hierarchy has been proven to be uplifting in some situations but potentially sinister in others.
So... you're going to pop-in to offer that you know God's word "better" than any one of us because of your "Deacon in the Presbytary" status? If you're not implying that, what exactly was the point of your comment?
Or, are you just going to "leave it at that" and stay quiet?
I agree that one shouldn't put blind faith into humans.
All humans are flawed, of course.
Opinions are like assholes. I get more likes when I respond to your childish rants. If that makes me the worst, in your opinion, that's fine with me. You get pwned in one religious thread after another. Every time it makes you and your papal obsession look worse and worse. You're digging a hole with a backhoe. Keep on digging.
Nope.
I'm the only one that posts links to factual sources. You don't know anything about religion or anything else really. You simply post the same 3 statements over and over again. You have the I.Q. of a houseplant.
And you need a new strategy, because your Like to Post ratio still sucks...
New strategy? This is all you have... over and over
Non-biased sources? Dude, even your fellow Catholics see your "sources" as pro-Catholic propaganda. You get your clock cleaned every time you do this. It's never any different.
Dude...the John Jay Report. You don't read.
You're not bright. I don't know why I respond to your posts.
You're not bright. I don't know why I respond to your posts.
Brianole, the Catholic hierarchy paid a million dollars for the report. It also has been criticized for stating that the abuse happened in the sixties. Now I understand you assertion that it happened when you weren’t alive. Google, criticisms of the John Jay report, remember it isn’t one of the gospels and maybe just maybe it may provide perspective for you.
