Catholic church and child abuse.

His basic message was that it is up to all Catholics to stand up for what they belive in and stand against the 'monsters' that have infiltrated the church.

And that's exactly what I said on page 1!

His basic message was that it is up to all Catholics to stand up for what they belive in and stand against the 'monsters' that have infiltrated the church.

Including the Pope?

But did he mention his anger about the supposedly infallible Pope, who has been shown to be complicit in covering up child abuse?

Nope, but at that time I don't think the allegations about the Popes knowledge and involvment had come out. Be interesting to see what he says this sunday; it's difficult to tell, and I'm sure it is for him at the moment, but I do not think he would try to defend or gloss over any abuse of power.

Calm down? **** off woppit.

uh, I don't want to labour the point, but Jesus says "Turn the other cheek" – which I do despite my disdain for religion.

He's not devout though.

"uh, I don't want to labour the point, but Jesus says "Turn the other cheek" – which I do despite my disdain for religion."
Sometimes, simon, were all infallible. It had been a long day, I shouldnt have bitten, etc, etc. Do I have to beg your forgiveness now?

Lifer – Member

barnsleymitch – Member
So let me get this right lifer – you initially criticise me for being a catholic, and now you're criticising me for not being a devout catholic. Which one is it, or are you just arguing (or is that debating) for the sake of it?

I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from. Do you not have to receive the sacraments in order to have a chance of 'salvation'?

Or is arguing on a forum that 'Even though I don't go to church it's unfair of you to tell me that I can and should do something about these scandals by registering my disgust with my congregation/priest/bishop/cardinal' enough to get you to paradise these days?

Is my point that every Catholic responsible okay now that a priest has said the same?

Do I have to beg your forgiveness now?

Careful bm, sfb will get quite excited by your using words like that. 🙂

FWIW, I commend you on your unceasing patience yesterday…I can't believe it took you that long to bite.

Sometimes, simon, were all infallible

Not the pope though remember.

"I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from. Do you not have to receive the sacraments in order to have a chance of 'salvation'? Or is arguing on a forum that 'Even though I don't go to church it's unfair of you to tell me that I can and should do something about these scandals by registering my disgust with my congregation/priest/bishop/cardinal' enough to get you to paradise these days?"
I didnt say that I dont attend church, I said that I dont go as often as I should. This is due more to the fact that I often work on sundays, I dont follow a regular shift pattern and I often have to look after the kids while my wife's at work – it's what's called real life. I personally dont expect to 'get to paradise' merely by attending church on set days each week, so please stop talking to me as if I'm some sort of gullible idiot. I'm not even sure why I'm carrying on rising to your bait, to be honest, as I feel you're now just trying to score points, or have I got that one wrong as well?

But did he mention his anger about the supposedly infallible Pope, who has been shown to be complicit in covering up child abuse?

as little as I'm inclined to defend heirophants, the central tenet of the church is to save people's immortal souls, so one might expect its adherents to be slightly unworldly and inclined to forgiveness – following Jesus's exhortation

"All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope."
On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17

"The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth."
Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous"

"The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth…by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth." Quoted in the New York Catechism.

These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: "To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical."

So when the Pope helps cover up child abuse, he is acting in the place of Jesus Christ on earth? Seriously doesn't this call into question the entire Catholic religion? Either you believe that the Pope isn't really God's representative on earth, or that he is but God doesn't mind child abuse?

so one might expect its adherents to be slightly unworldly and inclined to forgiveness

Except for homosexuals and people who use condoms or have abortions?

or have I got that one wrong as well?

Yes, you do realise you don't have to attend mass on sundays?

And 'attending church' is not one of the sacraments.

I've been told on this thread that I don't understand, I'm 'hideous in my vitriol' when the worst I have said is that every religious person is misguided.

I don't think I've been baiting, I think I've been asking pertinent questions. Like –

Is my point that every Catholic responsible okay now that a priest has said the same?

Couple of questions for barnsleymitch, not having a go, just interested…

Can you seperate your faith from the Catholic Church as an organisation?

In other words, would there come a point at which you could walk away from the church as an organisation, but still satisfy your …um.. spiritual needs?

..and leading on, is catholicism as a religion totally dependent on the whole Vatican/Pope business?

I should really know more about it, but is this sort of thinking something to do with Martin Luther?

Do I have to beg your forgiveness now?

I wasn't berating you, it was more of a rueful observation. I think we're able to forgive ourselves.

<vicreeves>You wouldn't let it lie!</vicreeves>

"Is my point that every Catholic responsible okay now that a priest has said the same?"
No, because I dont need a priest to tell me whats right and wrong. As I pointed out yesterday, I work with both perpetrators and victims of sexual abuse, and during counselling work, etc, will always point out the fact that we all have and make our own choices, and have to take responsibility for what we've done, in spite of our circumstances or experiences. I will not be held responsible for another's actions, and will not accept that I am complicit in covering up these acts.

crikey – Member

Couple of questions for barnsleymitch, not having a go, just interested…

Can you seperate your faith from the Catholic Church as an organisation?

In other words, would there come a point at which you could walk away from the church as an organisation, but still satisfy your …um.. spiritual needs?

Here's a famous voice on that subject:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032502363.html?hpid=topnews

Again from page 1 –

"You can sit there wringing your hands saying how terrible it is and needs addressing now, but you should be lobbying your priests, bishops, cardinals, pressing for action to be taken.

Without the followers the leaders are nothing. Every catholic gives the church it's power and so every catholic is responsible."

Has Sinead O'Connor got a time machine?

If you want to keep up with the debate in the larger world outside the forum, here's a useful resource:

http://www.secularism.org.uk/

I note the latest tactic by "House Ratzinger" is to blame the media. Presumably he is hoping that shooting the messenger will work for him because, unlike his predecessor, the media doesn't have a magic female ghost protecting it… 😉

Although I've been willing to extend Ratziger the benefit of the doubt, nearly everything I've ever read about him reveals an unpleasant individual – and if such can become pope then hopefully the entire dysfunctional edifice will collapse in upon itself, leaving the grass roots Catholics to rebuild something more closer to the principles offered by Jesus.

principles offered by Jesus

Would that be "Believe in me or you're f**ked"?

Stay calm…

Does Christ actually give any 'rules' as such in the Bible?

I think SimonofBarnes is more correct to call them principles.

The rules came later when mortal man stuck his oar in.

Would that be "Believe in me or you're f**ked"?

well, I was thinking more along the lines of "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" and "Love thy neighbour as thyself" 🙂

Stay calm…

hey, I have no investment in this at all – I'm willing to believe in any number of gods, but until they get in touch I shall return their ignoral, and even then worship is out and compliance moot.

Just being nice to each other would be a good start, if they had stuck with that without all the other damnation shite things could have been a whole load better.

But then it wouldn't be a useful political tool (yeah I freaking went there)

"Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" and "Love thy neighbour as thyself"

And "Take no thought for tomorrow". And so on…

Why anyone thinks these trinkets are in any way valuable remains a mystery.

And, as I said, "The only way to the father (sic) is through me".

Ravings of a lunatic.

Edit: Before I forget – just my opinion, don't take it personally, I'm not shouting or anything. O.K.? ("Those with ears" etc).

Why anyone thinks these trinkets are in any way valuable remains a mystery.

well, if nothing else they act as a useful test of devoutness for those claiming Christianity as a justification for their actions

Good point.

Fine illustration of why it fails – set the game up so you can't win it, then demand that you do. Bit like the way "god" works…

Morning folks. Too many posts last night for me to refer to individually, apart from this one:

I haven't sworn at you, insulted you personally or done anything else to spark such an extreme reaction as far as I can see.

You insulted BM's beliefs which is a pretty big insult to be honest mate. I'm offended and you weren't even directing it at me.

So anyway, Woppit, here's the thing:

Your world view appears to be based on rock solid evidence. You place the highest value on observation and verification of ideas. That's okay, that's a choice you've made. Other people however think of things differently. They feel that something else is more important – tradition, heritage, faith, spiritualism, whatever it is. Now that is their choice (albeit influenced by upbringing and others) and you have to respect that. You must NOT jump down their throats, attack them and make them feel like crap to score some kind of point. It is not how we should behave in a nice kind society.

My point is that your choice of value system is in principle no different to anyone else's. You are rubbishing the religious viewpoint based on lack of evidence, but the value of evidence is inherent in your own viewpoint. So from the purely objective standpoint, you are both the same.

You demand evidence; but if you were really honestly interested in understanding the other side's point of view, you could have found out a lot more and NOT sparked a massive acrimonous argument by asking a lot more nicely (and without the sarcasm about smililes and whatnot).

Perhaps something like this: "Barnsleymitch, I see that your faith is very important to you. I'm really interested to try and understand what this means to you and how you reconcile the differences between Catholic doctrine and the scientific body".

If you can avoid really pissing people off, you tend to get a lot better responses from people.

You insulted BM's beliefs which is a pretty big insult to be honest mate

since beliefs are both abstract and necessarily unsupported conjecture, they cannot really be insulted. Believe whatever suits you but don't expect anyone else to agree or not ridicule

You insulted BM's beliefs

You must NOT jump down their throats, attack them

Make your mind up.

As to the rest, what are you, my Mother?

If my style of dialectic upsets you, don't put yourself in danger of becoming upset, is my advice. Steer clear. Be a shame though, I love these STW barneys. Don't you?

simonfbarnes – Member
since beliefs are both abstract and necessarily unsupported conjecture, they cannot really be insulted. Believe whatever suits you but don't expect anyone else to agree or not ridicule

QFT

Believe whatever suits you but don't expect anyone else to agree or not ridicule

This is about playing nicely and not upsetting people. I fundamentally believe that not upsetting people is good, unless they have done something really bad; but to be honest Barnes you are not the most sensitive of people when it comes to emotions.. 🙂

Woppit – what do you mean make my mind up?

And yes, I do feel like a bloody schoolteacher on here sometimes. I find it hard to believe how small minded and base some people's thought processes can be when they act intelligent in other ways. I'm trying to drag you up to a higher level of critical thought here; and yes that is an insult!

Woppit – what do you mean make my mind up?

You can't have it both ways. 1: I'm attacking the belief, 2: I'm attacking the person.

Which is it? I maintain that it's the first condition that applies. As to whether or not it's ethical so to do, I refer you to simonfbarnes' excellent and illuminating note above.

I find it hard to believe how small minded and base some people's thought processes can be when they act intelligent in other ways. I'm trying to drag you up to a higher level of critical thought here; and yes that is an insult!

Pot. Kettle.

Just hope one day an extra terrestrial shows up and we can be done with all this religious nonsense for ever.

Thought Darwin might have helped, but seems that evolution can be explained away.

(Purely as a matter of human interest and not as part of any argument), is the amount of time you're devoting to this an indication that you're currently waiting to start something new, or is the "endgame" still playing out? I hope the former. 🙂

but to be honest Barnes you are not the most sensitive of people when it comes to emotions…

of course, but I think the responsibility lies with the believer not to get upset if their beliefs are questioned