Dawkins to arrest Pope

Originally posted by Starrman
Okay, well we disagree about the validity of the evidence. However his subsequent acts are of no import to the case in question.

Sure. But, as I pointed out, Ratzinger was not responsible for cases of clerical abuse until 2001 with the publication of Gravioribus Delictis.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
If any organization that was charged with taking care of children was caught with as much as what priests in the church and the catholic church itself has done then it would have been disbanded a long time ago.

The only reason it's still in existence is because it represents the religion that so many hold on to.

The one thing Ratzinger hasn't done ...[text shortened]... ly face justice. Getting suspended from the church is a slap on the wrist for these monsters.

The one thing Ratzinger hasn't done that Conrau hasn't mentioned is openly given all information to legal authorities so these priests can truly face justice. Getting suspended from the church is a slap on the wrist for these monsters.

What makes you think Ratzinger has any information? As it is, cases of clerical abuse must be handled by local authorities first and the ordinary of the diocese must inform police. Cases of clerical abuse come to the CDF after this process.

Originally posted by galveston75
I agree about the media with the point that they do harm at times. But on the other hand they've done good in exposing many bads that should be brought to light.
But I feel this is in God's hands. If he wants this exposed, it will be.
And I'm still a litttle confusd about this infallibility issue with the Pope. You say from your explination that he ...[text shortened]... 's covered up this issue to protect the church in his view, why is this not a spiritual one?

And I'm still a litttle confusd about this infallibility issue with the Pope. You say from your explination that he can make mistakes as a human but cannot make mistakes with spiritual issues. Where does this issue with sex abuse fit in here? It is a physical one for sure but if he's covered up this issue to protect the church in his view, why is this not a spiritual one?

No. As I have explained in the past, the Pope is only infallible in regards to doctrines of faith and morals and only when he makes it clear that he is invoking his authority as successor of St Peter. Only then do Catholics believe that he cannot err. The distinction is not between physical and spiritual.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
If any organization that was charged with taking care of children was caught with as much as what priests in the church and the catholic church itself has done then it would have been disbanded a long time ago.

The only reason it's still in existence is because it represents the religion that so many hold on to.

The one thing Ratzinger hasn't done ...[text shortened]... ly face justice. Getting suspended from the church is a slap on the wrist for these monsters.

There is no difference between the Pope and Michael Jackson other than the Pope having a little more clout to avoid prosecution. Its all about power and money man.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Revenge? What did the church do to him that he wants revenge for?

What did the church do to Galileo? What did the church do to Darwin? The church has been at war with percieved scientific heresies and Dawkins has taken up the torch in this regard. Again, it has nothiing to do with religion, rather, it is about Christiandom. Of course, it does not help matters as he buys into many of their theologic misconceptions by making statements like evolution proves to him that the Bible is a hoax. Just as the Bible does not say that the universe revolves around the earth as they claimed in the days of Galileo, neither does it claim that evolution is pure bunk.

Originally posted by whodey
There is no difference between the Pope and Michael Jackson other than the Pope having a little more clout to avoid prosecution. Its all about power and money man.

Come off it. The Pope has never slept with any children and the Vatican is certainly not as rich as Michael Jackson.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Come off it. The Pope has never slept with any children and the Vatican is certainly not as rich as Michael Jackson.

Of course, I am not the one saying the Pope is guilty, rather, I am saying that if he is he has a bigger shield than MJ. What I do know is that there are those within Catholosism that are guilty. So what is the Pope doing about it or what has he done in the past? It seems to me that even if the Pope has not commited these crimes, he is at least partly to blame by covering them up in the past.

Originally posted by whodey
What did the church do to Galileo? What did the church do to Darwin? The church has been at war with percieved scientific heresies and Dawkins has taken up the torch in this regard. Again, it has nothiing to do with religion, rather, it is about Christiandom. Of course, it does not help matters as he buys into many of their theologic misconceptions by mak ...[text shortened]... earth as they claimed in the days of Galileo, neither does it claim that evolution is pure bunk.

You're right that the Bible doesn't say that evolution is pure bunk - after all, it was written centuries before evolution existed. Evolution does contradict some things in the bible though, and that's where you get into trouble.

The thing is, the catholic church accepts evolution so that really doesn't have anything to do with this.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
You're right that the Bible doesn't say that evolution is pure bunk - after all, it was written centuries before evolution existed. Evolution does contradict some things in the bible though, and that's where you get into trouble.

The thing is, the catholic church accepts evolution so that really doesn't have anything to do with this.

What exactly does evolution contradict in the Bible, especially since the Catholic church accepts evolution?

Originally posted by whodey
There is no difference between the Pope and Michael Jackson other than the Pope having a little more clout to avoid prosecution. Its all about power and money man.

Yeah.. the pope has apologists and a huge organization with vested interest in keeping the church in tact.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Yeah.. the pope has apologists and a huge organization with vested interest in keeping the church in tact.

The irony here is that this self preserving behavior will probably be the thing that weakens them the most. If there is a God, as they proport, then truth comes before power and money, especially when it comes to the poor and innocent. God help them all.

Originally posted by whodey
What exactly does evolution contradict in the Bible, especially since the Catholic church accepts evolution?

Evolution contradicts the existence of the literal story of Adam & Eve for one.

Originally posted by whodey
The irony here is that this self preserving behavior will probably be the thing that weakens them the most. If there is a God, as they proport, then truth comes before power and money, especially when it comes to the poor and innocent. God help them all.

Well, with this scandal people are starting to see what's behind the curtain.

I'm afraid this will just blow over and people will start thinking that the catholic church is some actual moral authority.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Evolution contradicts the existence of the literal story of Adam & Eve for one.

Adam was made from the dust of the earth, was he not? You assume to much from the story.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Well, with this scandal people are starting to see what's behind the curtain.

I'm afraid this will just blow over and people will start thinking that the catholic church is some actual moral authority.

People should get a clue and read who Jesus attacked. It was the religious leaders of his day. The moral authority does not come from the Pope.