Actually Francis I is ethnically Italian, a second (or third) generation Italian immigrant....so in some ways "same o same o"....
I am interested to discover just how much Liberation theology he has absorbed. His lifestyle seems to indicate that he may have drank deeply from that well. If that is the case, then he will have much in common with the Social Justice crowd and Barak Obama.
His past statements concerning homosexuality however would lead me to believe that it will be a very interesting understanding of Social Justice which doesn't share the secular arms crusade for gay rights. Only time will tell.
Hopefully his being raised in a non-European setting will speak to his prioritizing the needs of the developing world regarding HIV, hunger, famine, development and regional war. Personally I would take such a priority even if it were to overlook gay rights due to theological positions.
But before any of that it will remain to be seen how he handles the powers which will oppose him, the banking scandal and mostly the nightmare of the child molestation scandals.
After reading through this thread I wanted to state that I believe many people are outraged not only by the rampant abuse within the Catholic Church (after all it isn't as if Catholics are the only ones to abuse children). What really draws a distinction is the Church's attempt to cover up the abuses. Instead of taking a stand and bringing it into the light and stamping it out and making certain that the penalties were so severe that no priest would ever consider it again. It seems more like it was just swept under the carpet and denied in the hope that it would go away and do as little to the prestige of the institution.
Perhaps this Pope will bring a light to shine into the darkness and a set of big brass ones.....because he is really going to need it.
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: And like I said earlier, you tried. I understand that some people felt this was an ideal place to have a discussion with qualms with the Catholic church. I respectfully disagree -- I think you designed this thread as a place to celebrate a potentially brighter path for Catholics, expressed that desire when initial comments were aggressive in nature, and subsequently had your thread overtly steamrolled and your own wishes brazenly ignored or rejected. While the handing off of the torch is by all means a reasonable occasion for having discourse over what people would like to see a new pope do, I don't think this was the thread for it and I don't think it's been conducted in the best manner. I say that without personally following or adhering to the Pope.
There are ton of other threads that are prime for religious arguments. Sad that this had to become one of them. :(
I have found that if a thread is to survive then it requires a little controversy to fuel conversation. Otherwise there will be some back slapping...a little preaching to the choir....some glad handing.....then it will die.
I would venture to say that this thread has made it to six pages at this point thanks to some criticism of the Catholic Church. Surely after a millennia of criticism the Holy See can support the rabid musings and awkward analyses of a smattering of comic book enthusiasts.
I would venture to say that this thread has made it to six pages at this point thanks to some criticism of the Catholic Church. Surely after a millennia of criticism the Holy See can support the rabid musings and awkward analyses of a smattering of comic book enthusiasts.
I would venture to say that this thread has made it to six pages at this point thanks to some criticism of the Catholic Church. Surely after a millennia of criticism the Holy See can support the rabid musings and awkward analyses of a smattering of comic book enthusiasts.
@King Saturn: While I agree that some people in the church do not handle the matter well, I don't think people should blame the entire church for it. The pope has nothing to do with it, so when people insult or say something dickish about him, it ticks me off. @mrdecepticonleader said:
But its not just a few priests and why have they not been found brought to justice for their crimes? Hmm? Its been covered up and that is profoundly disgusting and it is just left to carry on.
Many of the priests have been brought to justice, and the others that haven't usually keep it between the one being assaulted and themselves. While there have been some who have covered it up in the church, that's really not the case for most of the incidents.
And what about the spread of sexual disease in Africa where the Catholic church has a strong influence and states that condoms are a sin or something those lines,all the deaths they have on their hands.And all this and we have the popes and cardinals draped in wealth and hold an influence over thousands of people.Its utterly ridiculous things need to change.
What's this have to do with anything? And what you're saying doesn't even make sense. Most of Africa is Muslim not Catholic. Even if it was mostly Catholic, what does the Church's view on condom's have to do with anything? African's don't have access to condoms. Even if they did, they couldn't afford them. So, how do they have any deaths on their hands due to HIV in Africa? Really, how? Also, bringing up the wealth of the cardinals and pope is also stupid. The current pope would use the bus to get to work. They don't act like millionaires. Plus, even though some do make a lot of money, Catholic charities so so much to help those in Africa (which kind of counteracts your other point). Food for the Poor has saved thousands of lives, the people who run it don't make much money at all.
Are you serious? This is the problem with a lot of westerners. They think that Africa is all savannah's and desert, their are freaking modern city's with skyscrapers there.
These are some images of Kinshasa, a modern city in DR Congo.
The Ivory Coast,
Accra Ghuna,
And the list goes on and on.
I find the misconception of people in Africa only living in huts to be one of the most ignorantly raciest things around. Most people in Africa live in cities where condoms would be easily available and also affordable.
Mum was convinced it was gonna be Cardinal O'Malley
Turns out Pope Francis came in second place the last time but even then, it was still a surprise he was chosen.
He has an interesting bio though. He has a palace that he could live in -- is able to take a car and driver -- and yet he lives in a very modest apartment and takes public transit everywhere. He's done this since 2001 when Pope John Paul II made him a cardinal.
Interesting. So this one "walks the walk," so to speak. That's very refreshing. I always find it a bit silly when those in power (and I'm not referring to just religious leaders) go on and on about helping the poor, when most of them have no idea who the poor are or how they have to live.
And on the flip side of this, has said that gay couples adopting and raising children is discrimination against kids and child abuse
"At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”
Can I celebrate? No I cant I might when some of the ill doings in the Catholic church is brought to justice,when children are not sexually abused anymore etc.But until them just another pope added to this out of date institution.
You're an idiot. Just because a few priests are dirtballs doesn't mean the whole church is. Their are parents who do that sh!t to their kids, but does that make all parents horrible? Hell no.
Personally, I like the new pope. And I definitely like his name choice.
but it isn't just a few priests... it's multiple priests... and when we see child molesters in our own community we get those muthafooks sent to jail... we don't just try and cover that sh!t up like the catholic church was trying to do...
Ok, so what about the:
Protestant practitioner child molesters
Anglican practitioner child molesters
Calvin practitioner child molesters
Pentecostal practitioner child molesters
Baptist practitioner child molesters
Methodist practitioner child molesters
Morman practitioner child molesters
Jehovah's Witness practitioner child molesters
Sha'iyah Islam practitioner child molesters
Sunni Islam practitioner child molesters
Azraqiah Islam practitioner child molesters
Najadat Islam practitioner child molesters
Hamziyah Islam practitioner child molesters
Ma'badiyah Islam practitioner child molesters
Jubbaiyah Islam practitioner child molesters
Hujjatiya Islam practitioner child molesters
Yaqubiyya Islam practitioner child molesters
Confucius practitioner child molesters
Taoist practitioner child molesters
Buddist practitioner child molesters
Shintoist practitioner child molesters
Daoist practitioner child molesters
Hindustan practitioner child molesters
Jainist practitioner child molesters
Shikist practitioner child molesters
Vuudooist practitioner child molesters
Atheist practitioner child molesters
Scientology practitioner child molesters
Don't forget about those guys.
this only enhances my point... all religious sects are corrupted with the issue... that why I said usually when we find child molesters in our communities we don't try to cover it up... but churches do and have... and since this is a thread talking about the catholic church the point is very valid... so thinking you somehow scored points with pointing out that all religious sects have issues with child molestation only shows that religion in general is corrupted and to get out of those churches... because if you are around a faith that will cover up people having sex with children you are associated with sick people.
Actually Francis I is ethnically Italian, a second (or third) generation Italian immigrant....so in some ways "same o same o"....
I am interested to discover just how much Liberation theology he has absorbed. His lifestyle seems to indicate that he may have drank deeply from that well. If that is the case, then he will have much in common with the Social Justice crowd and Barak Obama.
His past statements concerning homosexuality however would lead me to believe that it will be a very interesting understanding of Social Justice which doesn't share the secular arms crusade for gay rights. Only time will tell.
Hopefully his being raised in a non-European setting will speak to his prioritizing the needs of the developing world regarding HIV, hunger, famine, development and regional war. Personally I would take such a priority even if it were to overlook gay rights due to theological positions.
But before any of that it will remain to be seen how he handles the powers which will oppose him, the banking scandal and mostly the nightmare of the child molestation scandals.
After reading through this thread I wanted to state that I believe many people are outraged not only by the rampant abuse within the Catholic Church (after all it isn't as if Catholics are the only ones to abuse children). What really draws a distinction is the Church's attempt to cover up the abuses. Instead of taking a stand and bringing it into the light and stamping it out and making certain that the penalties were so severe that no priest would ever consider it again. It seems more like it was just swept under the carpet and denied in the hope that it would go away and do as little to the prestige of the institution.
Perhaps this Pope will bring a light to shine into the darkness and a set of big brass ones.....because he is really going to need it.
Based on his history in Argentina -- the new Pontiff has been accused of covering up and assisting in the kidnapping of two fellow priests during the 1970's -- participated in the forgiving of torturers through confession to wipe clean their atrocities in the kidnapping of hundreds of young men -- not too clean a slate but how could he have one? Does anyone, really? He was active in attempting to prevent children born out of wedlock from having equal inheritance rights and threatened to assist in ex-communicating government officials when secular education was being considered (amongst other things like gay marriage and adoption by gay as pointed out by @Ellie_Knightfall) when democracy returned to the country.
@Vortex13 said:
@blackadamFTW said:
@King Saturn: While I agree that some people in the church do not handle the matter well, I don't think people should blame the entire church for it. The pope has nothing to do with it, so when people insult or say something dickish about him, it ticks me off. @mrdecepticonleader said:
But its not just a few priests and why have they not been found brought to justice for their crimes? Hmm? Its been covered up and that is profoundly disgusting and it is just left to carry on.
Many of the priests have been brought to justice, and the others that haven't usually keep it between the one being assaulted and themselves. While there have been some who have covered it up in the church, that's really not the case for most of the incidents.
And what about the spread of sexual disease in Africa where the Catholic church has a strong influence and states that condoms are a sin or something those lines,all the deaths they have on their hands.And all this and we have the popes and cardinals draped in wealth and hold an influence over thousands of people.Its utterly ridiculous things need to change.
What's this have to do with anything? And what you're saying doesn't even make sense. Most of Africa is Muslim not Catholic. Even if it was mostly Catholic, what does the Church's view on condom's have to do with anything? African's don't have access to condoms. Even if they did, they couldn't afford them. So, how do they have any deaths on their hands due to HIV in Africa? Really, how? Also, bringing up the wealth of the cardinals and pope is also stupid. The current pope would use the bus to get to work. They don't act like millionaires. Plus, even though some do make a lot of money, Catholic charities so so much to help those in Africa (which kind of counteracts your other point). Food for the Poor has saved thousands of lives, the people who run it don't make much money at all.
Are you serious? This is the problem with a lot of westerners. They think that Africa is all savannah's and desert, their are freaking modern city's with skyscrapers there.
These are some images of Kinshasa, a modern city in DR Congo.
The Ivory Coast,
Accra Ghuna,
And the list goes on and on.
I find the misconception of people in Africa only living in huts to be one of the most ignorantly raciest things around. Most people in Africa live in cities where condoms would be easily available and also affordable.
Thank you for pointing this out.
The issue of condoms when it comes to the Catholic Church is that they are against the use of the life saving (and preventing) invention. Affording them isn't so much expensive as it is against canonical law. For those who can't afford it - the condoms are available for them through other NGO's in the regions where it's needed. It that these people refuse to use them based on their religion which is heartbreaking.
@kuonphobos said:
I have found that if a thread is to survive then it requires a little controversy to fuel conversation. Otherwise there will be some back slapping...a little preaching to the choir....some glad handing.....then it will die.
I would venture to say that this thread has made it to six pages at this point thanks to some criticism of the Catholic Church. Surely after a millennia of criticism the Holy See can support the rabid musings and awkward analyses of a smattering of comic book enthusiasts.
Important topics for discussion I prefer to encourage, regardless if those participating have a true and/or full understanding of it. Any dialogue is worth it. I would much prefer people be active in making change (or defending status quo) in a productive, tangible way but if they don't -- I think that's okay (not saying you implied otherwise.) Better than silence.
As for a millennia's worth of criticism, I think the extreme past (as in the last fifty years) has been most influential. Considering that former popes had mistresses and children flagrantly and were not challenged by the masses, I think it's safe to say the same actions wouldn't be tolerated today and that's mostly because of the strides humanity has made in terms of equality within its ranks.
@Vortex13: The people living in the cities aren't the people most affected by HIV. Even if they are exposed to HIV, they still have access to condoms, and the religion certainly doesn't hold them back.
most ignorantly raciest things around
That means it's sexual (;
And yes I get your point, but I know people who have been to nice parts of Africa, so I don't believe that type of stereotype.
@mrdecepticonleader While I still disagree with you A LOT, I really don't feel like arguing. I don't even know why I started arguing in the first place. I find people who argue about religion really stupid, so I guess that makes me an idiot...
@blackadamFTW:Fair enough,but I find people who think others stupid for discussing such things a religion more so ignorant than those who do talk about them.And calling people stupid or doing such just seems ignorant and a little insulting.
It will be very interesting as stories concerning what occurred in Argentina begin to come to light. Any one interested might wish to watch the films Evita, and to a lesser degree Salvador (by Oliver Stone) and Romero (starring Raul Julia) to get some context along with their entertainment. In those days one man's communist rebel was another man's freedom fighter for social justice. Not saying what occurred was moral, only that the circumstances were/are murky.
I think that the Church finds itself in a very difficult place regarding it's theological stance on contraception and the reality of pregnancy out of wedlock and HIV. Personally I would side with the position which promises the most hope of saving lives (contraception) coupled with intense education, but I can understand the theological conundrum.
And I completely agree that yesterday's Church greatly benefitted from the separation of the clergy from the masses, superstition and an elitist position afforded to them by those same masses. One of the hopeful things that one could take from all of this is that, as you said, the strides humanity has made regarding equality. I can only hope that such strides continue in a way that maintains each person's right to personal choice in all aspects of their lives. Less government whether it be secular or "sacred".
@blackadamFTW:Fair enough,but I find people who think others stupid for discussing such things a religion more so ignorant than those who do talk about them.And calling people stupid or doing such just seems ignorant and a little insulting.
Yeah, at this point I definitely consider myself a dick/idiot. Starting a religious debate is pretty stupid, though. It's bound to bring hate, and it's a total waste of time, so, personally, I think that fits the definition of "stupid" pretty well.
@blackadamFTW:Fair enough,but I find people who think others stupid for discussing such things a religion more so ignorant than those who do talk about them.And calling people stupid or doing such just seems ignorant and a little insulting.
Yeah, at this point I definitely consider myself a dick/idiot. Starting a religious debate is pretty stupid, though. It's bound to bring hate, and it's a total waste of time, so, personally, I think that fits the definition of "stupid" pretty well.
Well I never started a debate I simply stated my thoughts.If people want to reply to my post in disagreement then that is on them.But I have every right to state what I think regardless if people agree with me or not.
I don't agree I think discussion and debate is both inevitable when bringing up a topic like this and also interesting.If you don't want to be a part of it fine but don't assume that others are idiots or anything along for those lines for doing otherwise.
You create a thread with a conservative "christian" theme without the expectation of alternate opinions being expressed? St. Patrick's Day is coming up; any idea what he did to the pagans of Ireland? Happy Hitler Day, everyone!
You create a thread with a conservative "christian" theme without the expectation of alternate opinions being expressed? St. Patrick's Day is coming up; any idea what he did to the pagans of Ireland? Happy Hitler Day, everyone!
Alternate opinions are one thing. Constant attack isn't.
And how do you get off writing stuff like this and still expect this to be a discussion. However, a few "pagan" religions and institutions practiced killings before the evil Christians decided to walk all over the place.
For example, the Roman Empire started killing the Northern European "barbarians" well before Christianity took hold. Most Christians where subsequently murdered themselves in the empire because they where seen as rabble-rousers.
The Spartans had a real habit of killing babies they "examined" and deduced as being unworthy and overall wasteful.
Of course that bit of information will get ignored. It always does.
Celebrate? There is nothing to celebrate when the Catholic Church will hold back all progressive changes while doing nothing but spewing nonsense from their mouths.
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: "And how do you get off writing stuff like this and still expect this to be a discussion. However, a few "pagan" religions and institutions practiced killings before the evil Christians decided to walk all over the place."
Firstly, I'm not getting off; my hands are occupied with typing. Secondly, pagans do not celebrate the worst, most vicious murderers who coerced conversion at sword-point. Thirdly, current pagan sprirituality and practice are Earth-based and peaceful; at worst, adherents will peacefully demonstrate at ecological rallies. Groups who claim the 'christian' mantle, such as your catholic church, actively and vehemently continue to bar equal rights for all of God's children.
This new pope seems to be a good man. He use to take the bus to work, kiss the feet of children with AIDS, and even pays his hotel bill in person with his own money.. That's something you don't see often with such an high 'official' in the Church.. Hope he continues to do good work and be and inspiration to all the believers and non-believers..
Also, I know you're entitled to your own opinion, but are the 'God is fake, and who gives a sh*t' comments really necessary?
Can I celebrate? No I cant I might when some of the ill doings in the Catholic church is brought to justice,when children are not sexually abused anymore etc.But until them just another pope added to this out of date institution.
It will be very interesting as stories concerning what occurred in Argentina begin to come to light. Any one interested might wish to watch the films Evita, and to a lesser degree Salvador (by Oliver Stone) and Romero (starring Raul Julia) to get some context along with their entertainment. In those days one man's communist rebel was another man's freedom fighter for social justice. Not saying what occurred was moral, only that the circumstances were/are murky.
I think that the Church finds itself in a very difficult place regarding it's theological stance on contraception and the reality of pregnancy out of wedlock and HIV. Personally I would side with the position which promises the most hope of saving lives (contraception) coupled with intense education, but I can understand the theological conundrum.
And I completely agree that yesterday's Church greatly benefitted from the separation of the clergy from the masses, superstition and an elitist position afforded to them by those same masses. One of the hopeful things that one could take from all of this is that, as you said, the strides humanity has made regarding equality. I can only hope that such strides continue in a way that maintains each person's right to personal choice in all aspects of their lives. Less government whether it be secular or "sacred".
Oh -- and as for anyone being "attacked" on this thread, if you believe women choose abortion for selfish reasons and "cold" feet --- bring up capitalism and make fun of those less fortunate and throw in irrelevant comments in response to proven and ongoing wrongs done by the Catholic Church yet expect people to celebrate yet another "leader" of thisreligion -- it's all on you.
The defense "oh -- other religions do it too!" just further demonstrates this point.
I point my finger at the Roman Catholic Church and I demand they recognize and hold accountable everyone in their institution that not just participated in sexual abuse of children (and others by the way --), but make real amends and overhaul this secrecy and rug covering history, not just media hyped photo ops and priests sporadically visiting some victims and expressing sympathy.
Just who was attacked? So far, it's been a whole slew of groups --- from pro-choice, the impoverished, "liberals", etc, not just Catholicism. (The list of other religions were provided as well plus countries. and on and on.)
I like facts, not ill-informed and agenda driven opinions encouraging people to remain and even more disgustingly, become ignorant. Emotional arguments are acknowledgments of defeat in terms being considered pertinent contributions to a discussion/debate.
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: "And how do you get off writing stuff like this and still expect this to be a discussion. However, a few "pagan" religions and institutions practiced killings before the evil Christians decided to walk all over the place."
Firstly, I'm not getting off; my hands are occupied with typing. Secondly, pagans do not celebrate the worst, most vicious murderers who coerced conversion at sword-point. Thirdly, current pagan sprirituality and practice are Earth-based and peaceful; at worst, adherents will peacefully demonstrate at ecological rallies. Groups who claim the 'christian' mantle, such as your catholic church, actively and vehemently continue to bar equal rights for all of God's children.
You have a problem with rights, take it up with the liars in charge of the government. In America, no religion owns the place. It's part of the reason why I wasn't big on Rick Santorum; too much religion in politics destroys rather than heals.
Catholics follow the teachings of Christ. The Old Testament was strife with problems that lead to a corrupt system in Jerusalem under rule from Herod and the Romans, an example being that if you didn't do what they said, you were to be stoned. Jesus tried to teach that the ways deemed fit in the temples where not the real way to believe in God, and was crucified as a result.
Unless now I'm to believe he deserved to get crucified.
Oh -- and as for anyone being "attacked" on this thread, if you believe women choose abortion for selfish reasons and "cold" feet --- bring up capitalism and make fun of those less fortunate and throw in irrelevant comments in response to proven and ongoing wrongs done by the Catholic Church yet expect people to celebrate yet another "leader" of thisreligion -- it's all on you.
The defense "oh -- other religions do it too!" just further demonstrates this point.
I point my finger at the Roman Catholic Church and I demand they recognize and hold accountable everyone in their institution that not just participated in sexual abuse of children (and others by the way --), but make real amends and overhaul this secrecy and rug covering history, not just media hyped photo ops and priests sporadically visiting some victims and expressing sympathy.
Just who was attacked? So far, it's been a whole slew of groups --- from pro-choice, the impoverished, "liberals", etc, not just Catholicism. (The list of other religions were provided as well plus countries. and on and on.)
I like facts, not ill-informed and agenda driven opinions encouraging people to remain and even more disgustingly, become ignorant. Emotional arguments are acknowledgments of defeat in terms being considered pertinent contributions to a discussion/debate.
My opinion.
Yes, it's your opinion.
And if you like facts, then you shouldn't just single out the Catholic church but every individual pedophile across the globe. The pedophiles that hide behind a religion and the pedophiles that don't even believe in a god.
@lykopis said:
The defense "oh -- other religions do it too!" just further demonstrates this point.
I point my finger at the Roman Catholic Church and I demand they recognize and hold accountable everyone in their institution that not just participated in sexual abuse of children (and others by the way --), but make real amends and overhaul this secrecy and rug covering history, not just media hyped photo ops and priests sporadically visiting some victims and expressing sympathy.
Okay, and why not point the finger at Islam and all its other 72 branches of the Prophet Mohammad that teaches this practice out in the open and when someone questions about how wrong it is, they get in denial, or sometimes telling others that they are wrong for not following their practices?
The Fundamental Mormons (who are not Catholic) are part of the Christian branch, but they didn't get their idea of polygamy and child marriages from the Catholic Church, they got it from Islam. Just because one man thought Islam practices was a good idea, but instead of using Muhammad, they still choose Jesus Christ. And the reason why Mormonism choose this rout is because the Catholic 900 years before them, condemned Polygamy and Child Marriages 900 years before. But it even extends further down to 33 AD because the Catholic Church is not the 1st Christian Church. I just don't get why the average liberal thinker find it necessary to single out just the Catholic Church only or how it fairs singling them out when in other practices do it worst. And especially ignoring that people that don't even believe in a god practices it too. All of these should be pointed the finger at. Not just one group.
This thread is about the new Pope. Celebrating the new Pope. Not about some Imam somewhere, or Mormon Big Daddy of any other group.
We are discussing the Catholic faith -- you want to talk about other religions? Hey -- I hear you. I agree with you. I did in an earlier post. Do you really think I hold only the Catholic Church in contempt in terms of abuses? Do you really think I hold only Christianity? Wait until someone makes a thread about the Archbishop of Canterbury and I would be just as interested and willing to discuss issues with Protestantism.
As for Islam --- it is horrific. We could go on and on and on about that religion. I would LOVE to. In this thread? Maybe not -- wanna make a thread about all the points you bring up? I will be a very enthusiastic participant.
"I just don't get why the average liberal thinker find it necessary to single out just the Catholic Church only or how it fairs singling them out when in other practices do it worst."
This is untrue of me -- and of others here and what the heck is this continued fascination with the word "liberal"? Talk about pointing a finger at only one group.
(Edited: And your logic means that lucky people like you and I shouldn't bother standing up against violence perpetrated on youth etc because hey -- look at what's going on around the rest of the world. Best to shut up because pointing out that one in four women who are sexually assaulted in North America is peanuts compared to the number in Asia. <----- this is an example of information attempting to take away points you have just made. All very true, but what does it have to do with what we are discussing outside of thinking to misdirect focus on the topic at hand.)
@Necrotic_Lycanthrope: "And how do you get off writing stuff like this and still expect this to be a discussion. However, a few "pagan" religions and institutions practiced killings before the evil Christians decided to walk all over the place."
Firstly, I'm not getting off; my hands are occupied with typing. Secondly, pagans do not celebrate the worst, most vicious murderers who coerced conversion at sword-point. Thirdly, current pagan sprirituality and practice are Earth-based and peaceful; at worst, adherents will peacefully demonstrate at ecological rallies. Groups who claim the 'christian' mantle, such as your catholic church, actively and vehemently continue to bar equal rights for all of God's children.
You have a problem with rights, take it up with the liars in charge of the government. In America, no religion owns the place. It's part of the reason why I wasn't big on Rick Santorum; too much religion in politics destroys rather than heals.
Catholics follow the teachings of Christ. The Old Testament was strife with problems that lead to a corrupt system in Jerusalem under rule from Herod and the Romans, an example being that if you didn't do what they said, you were to be stoned. Jesus tried to teach that the ways deemed fit in the temples where not the real way to believe in God, and was crucified as a result.
Unless now I'm to believe he deserved to get crucified.
It was the Orthodox Church back in 33 AD. So the Catholics are Orthodox Christians that believed they needed a central Leader chosen by the Clergy, which the Orthodox did not want. A handful of Bishops left the Orthodox Church in 1050AD and created the Catholic Church in Rome. Point is that these two entities teach as a fundamental, to be humble.... Simple as that.
Some ill-informed will crawl out of the wood-works and say, "No, the Catholics were the ones that started this whole problem of the world we have now." "They stated the war of the Crusades, and they call that being humble." "They started child molestation rings. All of which are false.
The Crusades for example, all the Christians were being slaughtered by the Eastern beliefs. They were being slaughtered because they would not fight back. But the Kings of Europe did not want to go down without a fight, so the Kings broke out of the fundamental pacifistic humble belief of Christianity and created armies of warriors whom also believed that their faith fight back to preserve their religion and their people and country. Thus the Crusader Knight was born. The Pope didn't create the Crusader Warriors. The Kings did. And the Crusades itself was not initiated through Europe by the Catholics.... It already had been going 600 years before the Catholic Church was even established.
Catholic Church started child molestation rings? Come on now people - Get real.
I'm not going to actively check this thread, because it never really makes me feel good at all, and I tend to argue with people I'd rather not.
One thing which seems to be generating confusion, however, is the notion of who's blaming what here. Those singling out the Catholic church are not suggesting that only Catholicism has had child molesters within its ranks. They are specifically enraged by the (and this is specific to the Catholic bureaucracy) intentional cover-up, stifling, and power plays which have been made and uncovered pertaining to child molestation.
Because of the immense power possessed by the Vatican, and because of its ostensible adhesion to the principles of Christ and His gospel, the notion that they have done anything less than obliterate the reputations and positions of these people, made an example of what happens when you so grossly abuse a position of trust (and in the name of God, no less) -- that is what gets people riled up. The dynamic of power is unique to the Catholic church. Its abuses throughout history extend well beyond just the child molestation things (there are plenty of egregious economic situations as well, to point to one example), but this happens to be the point that is being focused on.
I still maintain that this thread has primarily consisted of the OP being pummeled (this is anything but a fair/even conversation, and the dissenting voice is far stronger here, nearly drowning out any actual respect for Catholicism). I don't think starting a thread with a religious subject should necessarily imply that religious debate is appropriate. I don't think a person who happens to mention they are Catholic "is asking for" harsh and unending diatribes against Catholicism. Some people here seem to believe that. That saddens me deeply. If I start a thread, and I ask people not to take it down a certain road, I expect that to be respected. If my thread inspires a different line of conversation, and people want to have a new thread to discuss that, then that's fine -- but if I ask explicitly not to have my own faith trounced upon in my own thread, I will absolutely get angry at people who ignore me. I fully empathize with OP and would have already asked to have this thread closed had it been my own. Yes, there are important issues and ignorances that should be addressed and which have come to light via this discussion -- but I fundamentally disagree with the position that they have been dealt with admirably here.
It was the Orthodox Church back in 33 AD. So the Catholics are Orthodox Christians that believed they needed a central Leader chosen by the Clergy, which the Orthodox did not want. A handful of Bishops left the Orthodox Church in 1050AD and created the Catholic Church in Rome.
...That's completely NOT what happened.
@TheSecondOpinion said:
The Crusades for example, all the Christians were being slaughtered by the Eastern beliefs. They were being slaughtered because they would not fight back. But the Kings of Europe did not want to go down without a fight, so the Kings broke out of the fundamental pacifistic humble belief of Christianity and created armies of warriors whom also believed that their faith fight back to preserve their religion and their people and country. Thus the Crusader Knight was born. The Pope didn't create the Crusader Warriors. The Kings did. And the Crusades itself was not initiated through Europe by the Catholics.... It already had been going 600 years before the Catholic Church was even established.
That's also completely not how it happened. Jesus, I was thinking of singling out all the wrong things in this post, but I'm having a hard time finding anything right in it.
Who said Catholics are the ones who started "pedophile rings'?
I suspect you have a list you want on here -- and I suspect you are imagining accusations that are not there.
It's getting harder and harder to communicate with you when you are shut in some kind of singular bubble.
@akbogert said:
I'm not going to actively check this thread, because it never really makes me feel good at all, and I tend to argue with people I'd rather not.
One thing which seems to be generating confusion, however, is the notion of who's blaming what here. Those singling out the Catholic church are not suggesting that only Catholicism has had child molesters within its ranks. They are specifically enraged by the (and this is specific to the Catholic bureaucracy) intentional cover-up, stifling, and power plays which have been made and uncovered pertaining to child molestation.
Because of the immense power possessed by the Vatican, and because of its ostensible adhesion to the principles of Christ and His gospel, the notion that they have done anything less than obliterate the reputations and positions of these people, made an example of what happens when you so grossly abuse a position of trust (and in the name of God, no less) -- that is what gets people riled up. The dynamic of power is unique to the Catholic church. Its abuses throughout history extend well beyond just the child molestation things (there are plenty of egregious economic situations as well, to point to one example), but this happens to be the point that is being focused on.
I still maintain that this thread has primarily consisted of the OP being pummeled (this is anything but a fair/even conversation, and the dissenting voice is far stronger here, nearly drowning out any actual respect for Catholicism). I don't think starting a thread with a religious subject should necessarily imply that religious debate is appropriate. I don't think a person who happens to mention they are Catholic "is asking for" harsh and unending diatribes against Catholicism. Some people here seem to believe that. That saddens me deeply. If I start a thread, and I ask people not to take it down a certain road, I expect that to be respected. If my thread inspires a different line of conversation, and people want to have a new thread to discuss that, then that's fine -- but if I ask explicitly not to have my own faith trounced upon in my own thread, I will absolutely get angry at people who ignore me. I fully empathize with OP and would have already asked to have this thread closed had it been my own. Yes, there are important issues and ignorances that should be addressed and which have come to light via this discussion -- but I fundamentally disagree with the position that they have been dealt with admirably here.
I respectfully but with as much vigour, disagree with this portion of your post. The OP invited people to "celebrate" the choosing of a prominent figure of a religion -- suggesting atheists should be able to as well. Same OP then took this thread to other topics to which I already pointed out and to what I have responded to.
This is a public forum and as such, invites conversation from everyone -- and that includes people with differing views on said subject. Was this a RESPECT thread for Catholicism? Did the OP specifically and clearly state this? No -- but the OP was quite willing to place judgement on other topics such as poverty, liberalism and abortion.
I will respond as I see fit.
Your general brushing of every post here as being disrespectful of Catholicism shows a seemingly intolerance of free dialogue.
By all means, shut this thread down since it belongs to only those who agree with whatever the OP brings up throughout. I enjoy participating in the new thread which should be much more inviting and egalitarian in terms of open and free conversation.
Correction: You did not state every post as being disrespectful of Catholicism. I apologize. I was addressing this comment: "Yes, there are important issues and ignorances that should be addressed and which have come to light via this discussion -- but I fundamentally disagree with the position that they have been dealt with admirably here." Your opinion has been duly noted.
Log in to comment