20 Jun 07
Originally posted by RagnorakWhat kind of sick society places fear of religious ridicule over family member's welfare?
Unless of course you had a child out of wedlock (even if it was due to rape), in which case your family generally shipped you off to a lifetime of slave labour at the Catholic run Magdelene Sisters.
What kind of sick society places fear of religious ridicule over family member's welfare?
Do you not think that a child repeatedly brutalised and sodo ...[text shortened]... ophiles and slave drivers, who push alcohol on children, then that's your choice.
D
Ever opened a copy of Cosmo? What kind of sick society places fear of public ridicule about one's appearance over one's well-being?
Of course, we can point the finger at individual bad apples, and say these instances weren't representative of Catholicism, or we can look at the truth of the matter and discuss how known paedophiles, were shipped from diocese to diocese to prey on further victims rather than be kicked out of the Catholic church.
Sure. But do you want to claim that these priests were representative of Catholicism and Catholic teaching?
My personal experience with Catholic teachers was of brutality, plain and simple. Listening to my older family members, some of whom (a woman) had 14 teeth knocked out from a punch by a Catholic Priest when she was 9 (this is only 30odd years ago) says that things have probably got better.
I'm sorry to hear that. I've been a Catholic all my life and I daresay I have met not a few Catholic teachers, priests and sisters myself -- and I have never had (or heard of firsthand) an experience like this. What does that tell us about our respective experiences?
20 Jun 07
Ragnorak, sorry do you have any grasp of transubstancation, a grasp of Catholisim- obviously not. The wine is no longer alcohol but the blood of Christ. In many Churches pioneer priests use non-alcholic wine. Ok.
What do you expect the Roman Catholic Church to do in an effort to prevent mass-attending recovering Catholic alcoholics to do. Take away one of the seven sacraments, the focus of mass.
By sayng Catholism didn't hold anyone back (I apolgise for not explaining myself well enough to begin with) I meant in an educational sense. I know in NI, top schools ( on the criteria of grades) are often Roman Catholic supported.
Yes you are rght the Celtic Tiger is part of the reason, but 90% of the Irish (those who live in the Republic) are Catholic, so seemingly this has not had to much of an adverse effect
Your personal experiance, well I know lots of Catholic good teachers. (Again I am not biased I am not a Catholic). That is bad what happened to your aunt, but lots of children have suffered violence at the hands of both Catholics and non Catholics. Think of the wide spread usage of corporal punishment in the past in all beliefs. Should we use isolated extreme cases to base laws upon.
I could respond by listing violent attacks instigated by non-Catholics.
To conclude yes there are problems within the Catholic Church but there are more problems throughout society.
I see your point about the Magdalene laundries but consider the slavery trade that was slave labour
As for the words pregnant girls were generally send away- well some when to England then returned. I agree the stgmatisation in those times were extreme, but do you actually understand the reasons for the ban against fornification before religion.
20 Jun 07
Originally posted by 123rocoNo, the wine still is wine and still is alcholic. It has not been transformed. In transubstanciation the form stays exactly the same, but the substance of what it is is changed. It becomes the blood of christ in essence, but not form. Not to say that Catholics don't fully believe that it is Christs blood, it just doesn't share its form.
Ragnorak, sorry do you have any grasp of transubstancation, a grasp of Catholisim- obviously not. The wine is no longer alcohol but the blood of Christ. In many Churches pioneer priests use non-alcholic wine. Ok.
21 Jun 07
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerRe Cosmo, I don't get your point. Because we have 1 type of sick society, are you saying we can't have another?
[b]What kind of sick society places fear of religious ridicule over family member's welfare?
Ever opened a copy of Cosmo? What kind of sick society places fear of public ridicule about one's appearance over one's well-being?
Of course, we can point the finger at individual bad apples, and say these instances weren't representativ ...[text shortened]... thand) an experience like this. What does that tell us about our respective experiences?[/b]
Re the teaching of Catholicism and whether the violent, child abusing, slave drivers are representative of Catholicism is irrelevant IMHO. We can talk about an abstract idea, or we can talk about facts. In abstract form, communism is great, but most people associate Stalin and Mao and mass murder with Communism.
What does that tell us about our respective experiences?
I don't know, what does it tell us?
D
21 Jun 07
Originally posted by 123rocoI believe Jake has explained that wine is still wine even after the transubstatiation.
Ragnorak, sorry do you have any grasp of transubstancation, a grasp of Catholisim- obviously not. The wine is no longer alcohol but the blood of Christ. In many Churches pioneer priests use non-alcholic wine. Ok.
What do you expect the Roman Catholic Church to do in an effort to prevent mass-attending recovering Catholic alcoholics to do. Take away one o ...[text shortened]... , but do you actually understand the reasons for the ban against fornification before religion.
What do you expect the Roman Catholic Church to do in an effort to prevent mass-attending recovering Catholic alcoholics to do. Take away one of the seven sacraments, the focus of mass.
Look, to put it another way, would you be happy if I praised and exalted marijuana in front of your 4 or 5 year old children?
I could respond by listing violent attacks instigated by non-Catholics. And I would respond by listing more violent attacks instigated by Catholics like the Crusades.
I see your point about the Magdalene laundries but consider the slavery trade that was slave labour
I don't get what you're trying to say. Are you saying that locking somebody away and forcing them to work without pay isn't slavery?
I agree the stgmatisation in those times were extreme
In those times? The last Magdelene Sisters closed in the 1990s.
D
21 Jun 07
Originally posted by RagnorakRe Cosmo, I don't get your point. Because we have 1 type of sick society, are you saying we can't have another?
Re Cosmo, I don't get your point. Because we have 1 type of sick society, are you saying we can't have another?
Re the teaching of Catholicism and whether the violent, child abusing, slave drivers are representative of Catholicism is irrelevant IMHO. We can talk about an abstract idea, or we can talk about facts. In abstract form, communism is great, ...[text shortened]... hat tell us about our respective experiences?
I don't know, what does it tell us?
D[/b]
No -- society will always find a way to have sicknesses; religion or no religion.
Re the teaching of Catholicism and whether the violent, child abusing, slave drivers are representative of Catholicism is irrelevant IMHO. We can talk about an abstract idea, or we can talk about facts.
Sure -- let's talk about facts. What % of Catholic priests in the US are child abusers (the difference between someone who abuses a 7-yr old and someone who has sex with a 17-yr old notwithstanding)? What % of Catholic priests worldwide satisfy this criteria?
You're picking the very worst apples of what is generally a pretty good bunch and tarring the entire harvest. Unlike Communism (where a non-abusive government is the exception rather than the norm), you're simply engaging in scape-goating, not facts.
You strike me as a reasonably smart guy -- surely you can see that (whatever other gripes you have about Catholicism) your stereotyping of Catholic priests is irrational and counterfactual.
I don't know, what does it tell us?
Maybe you're just shutting your eyes to reality to accomodate a simplistic ideology.
21 Jun 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerIs it counterfactual that orders came from the very highest authority in the Vatican, that instead of expelling bad apples from the priest hood, they'd shift them from diocese to diocese to hide the bad acts of these Catholic Priests.
Sure -- let's talk about facts. What % of Catholic priests in the US are child abusers (the difference between someone who abuses a 7-yr old and someone who has sex with a 17-yr old notwithstanding)? What % of Catholic priests worldwide satisfy this criteria?
You're picking the very worst apples of what is generally a pretty good bunch and tarrin ...[text shortened]... /b]
Maybe you're just shutting your eyes to reality to accomodate a simplistic ideology.
Now, unless you show me that paedophile priests WEREN'T moved to hide their misdemeanours, then I will continue in my assumption (based on the fact that orders came from the top) that the Catholic Church not only hides, but supports (inadvertently or not. Doing it to save the reputation of their church doesn't make them innocent) paedophilia and child abuse.
How we talk about the facts of what percentage of priests are child abusers? The only fact that we talk about it the number who have been caught. Not who has actually committed a crime.
I have nothing against the Catholic Church apart from their employment of slave labour for their own profit, their greed (it's now €50 to have a mass dedicated to a loved one) the long and sordid list of paedophilia and acts to hide paedophilia, their child abuse, their victimisation of young rape victims and their pushing of alcohol, all the while maintaining a holier than thou attitude.
D
21 Jun 07
2 edits
Originally posted by RagnorakHow about its repression of women and its fanning the flames of AIDS in Africa? How about its political manipulation of people, withholding Holy Communion from people who don't conform to its own political views, one of the most vile carrot and stick contraptions ever fabricated?
I have nothing against the Catholic Church apart from their employment of slave labour for their own profit, their greed (it's now €50 to have a mass dedicated to a loved one) the long and sordid list of paedophilia and acts to hide paedophilia, their child abuse, their victimisation of young rape victims and their pushing of alcohol, all the while maintaining a holier than thou attitude.
D
21 Jun 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI didn't want to come across as anti-Catholic.
How about its repression of women and its fanning the flames of AIDS in Africa? How about its political manipulation of people, withholding Holy Communion from people who don't conform to its own political views, one of the most vile carrot and stick contraptions ever fabricated?
D
21 Jun 07
Originally posted by RagnorakIs it counterfactual that orders came from the very highest authority in the Vatican, that instead of expelling bad apples from the priest hood, they'd shift them from diocese to diocese to hide the bad acts of these Catholic Priests.
Is it counterfactual that orders came from the very highest authority in the Vatican, that instead of expelling bad apples from the priest hood, they'd shift them from diocese to diocese to hide the bad acts of these Catholic Priests.
Now, unless you show me that paedophile priests WEREN'T moved to hide their misdemeanours, then I will continue in my ass ...[text shortened]... ms and their pushing of alcohol, all the while maintaining a holier than thou attitude.
D
The very highest authority in the Vatican is the Pope. Do you have evidence that Pope John Paul II (or his predecessor Pope Paul VI) ordered abusive priests moved between dioceses?
Now, unless you show me that paedophile priests WEREN'T moved to hide their misdemeanours, then I will continue in my assumption (based on the fact that orders came from the top) that the Catholic Church not only hides, but supports paedophilia and child abuse.
Since your assumption is based on the allegation that "orders came from the top", you'll have to present evidence for that allegation first.
How we talk about the facts of what percentage of priests are child abusers?
There are a few studies -- you can look them up.
I have nothing against the Catholic Church apart from their employment of slave labour for their own profit ...
What are you talking about?
their greed (it's now €50 to have a mass dedicated to a loved one)
You do realise that priests do not have an alternate source of income, don't you? And that, if you simply tell them you can't afford it, they are nevertheless obliged to say the mass for your loved one anyway?
the long and sordid list of paedophilia and acts to hide paedophilia, their child abuse, their victimisation of young rape victims and their pushing of alcohol, all the while maintaining a holier than thou attitude.
Once again, unless you want to present evidence that this is endemic in the Catholic Church (or even a bigger problem than the public school system, for instance), I'll just have to comment that this is more politikal rhetoric than an argument.
21 Jun 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesWhat's wrong with a church deciding who it does and does not want to give its communion to?
How about its repression of women and its fanning the flames of AIDS in Africa? How about its political manipulation of people, withholding Holy Communion from people who don't conform to its own political views, one of the most vile carrot and stick contraptions ever fabricated?
As to "fanning the flames of AIDS in Africa", do you want to present statistics to back your claim, Doctor? This claim is even more ridiculous because the Church is one of the largest organisations taking care of AIDS patients in Africa; its campaigns with similar minded partners have been the most successful ones at turning the tide.