The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > It's time for the Catholic church to change.

It's time for the Catholic church to change.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 12
  11. 13
  12. 14
  13. All
Herman
Yo have to be the most bigoted simpleminded catholic putz I have eve r come across, unless of course you’re posting al this papist garbage as a joke. Unfortunately I don’t think this is the case. As for the Manhattan declaration you can shove that where the sun doesn’t shine / it’s the vilest, most pernicious load of catholic cr*p vie read since I last read the bible.
How dare you post yourself as a Christian thinking person when you put forward such obvious garbage its pain to read?
Posted by thomasfromtacoma, Saturday, 28 November 2009 10:21:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner,

I have commented in the past on OLO that with say a million priests world-wide that statically there are bound to be some perverts and paedophiles. Yet, the more I read about it, it would seem that the word "systematic" is not an exaggeration and more apt. It is more than the odd rotten apple.

Recently, from Ireland, we have the following case:

http://news.google.com.au/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn&q=catholic

[video is under Catholic church admits child abuse]

The State is unwilling to put on trial the cardinals, archbishops and bishops who cover-up the these vile crimes.

One sees Christians often very vocal in public on an issue like gay marriage between consenting adults,yet the same people never muster and as group confront their clergy on these matters. So, it isn't that Christians wont organise and voice an opinion, rather Christians wont organise and voice an opinion against the crimes of Church leaders. For goodness sake, don't these Christians see their hypocracy?

In the above case, there are at least four archbishops named in the inquiry claimed to have covered up sex abuse crimes. Do you not feel these Church leaders should be facing a jury rather than a congregation?

How many OLO posters, whom claim to be Christians, would not try and root-out the perverts in their midst by attacking their Church leaders and bring these sickos down?

If archbishops were/are aware of cover-ups, it would be naive to assume the Vatican was/is unaware.
Posted by Oliver, Monday, 30 November 2009 12:11:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Runner,

I appreciate your input into these discussions. The only religion outsiders wish to dictate to is Christianity and particularly Catholicism. However I find your assertion that Catholicism is unbiblical to be insulting, annoying and inaccurate. It will take a lot of words to give even a cursory reply so I am going to focus completely on that. I have ignored it enough in similar threads.

Religious beliefs cannot be inferred from the behaviour of the adherents. You cite 2.5 examples of unscriptural behaviour by Catholics and infer that the religion is therefore unscriptural. If that was possible then the brand of Christianity subscribed to by ‘born agains’ could be inferred to include adultery, dishonesty and divorce (given the high rates). That would be very unscriptural.

To put it into perspective you are slandering a 2000 year religion currently with 1.5 billion adherents as unscriptural due to bad behaviour in past history. Bad behaviour is a people thing. There is good and bad in every group. While the Catholic Church has had its share of saints the sinning started pretty quickly. Before the Church got off the ground Judas was despicable. You cite 2 examples (the half is the hiring comment but since Jesus hired Judas I won’t pursue it) which directly relate to bad behaviour.

Anti Semitism in history. There have been Popes who clearly weren’t anti-semitic at very anti-semitic times in history. Our Church was started by a Jewish man (who we have always worshipped) who appointed other Jewish men to carry on his earthly work and our clergy are their successors. That doesn’t mean there has been no anti-semitism but it definitely isn’t part of the faith.

Killed for disbelief. A good example of Catholics killing others would be the British monarchy. There was a historical period when it was pretty much a given that if a protestant monarch got in they would kill unrepentant Catholics and vice versa if a Catholic monarch got it. Nevertheless I assure you that killing people who disagree isn’t part of our religion.

CONT
Posted by mjpb, Monday, 30 November 2009 12:36:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suze on line and others,

I had no intention of implying gays were more likely to be paedophiles. Irrespective of the propensity of gays to paedophilia, any institution that excludes normal heterosexual relations to enter an order exclusively male is going to skew the intake. The proof of the pudding is that while it happens in other denominations it is comparitively rare.

The result can be seen in all male prisons and on the sailors. The difference is that sailors and prisoners are not put in positions of trust over children.

I imagine a paedophile with a predeliction for boys could not find a calling with more opportunity and cover.

While I agree that it is for the Catholic Church to implement change, I would also argue that because of the decades of covering up the truth, the Catholic church has come to the end of the tolerance that it can expect from the community. The Church has a small window to implement internal change before society does it for them.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 30 November 2009 12:43:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Regarding Mary the Queen title is a scriptural inference. Are you are familiar with the Old Testament practice of the mother of the King rather than wife being the Queen by contrast to the more modern approach (eg. Jeremiah 13:18, 20 which talks about the throne and crown of the mother of the King)? That explains why every time a new King is introduced in 1 Kings and 2 Kings his mother is mentioned as well and why in 2 Kings 24:12 the mother of the King is listed among the members of the royal court and why Bathseba sat at King Solomon’s right. The right hand seat is the place of greatest honour and authority for anyone but the King.

Isaiah 7:14 while prophesizing about the future Messiah pledges that the Davinic dynasty will continue. (A woman bearing a King son in the Davidic dynasty would be a Queen mother.) Matthew 1:23 reveals that to be a prophesy about Jesus. Matthew associates the mother and son 5 times in the first two chapters just like the Book of Kings. Gabriel seems to use strong Davidic innuendos when he describes a woman from the house of David with a royal son whose kingdom will have no end. Then of course Elizabeth describes Mary as “The mother of my Lord”. If you look at 2 Samuel 24:21 you will see that the Davidic Kings were described as my Lord. The mother of my Lord at that time would be the Queen. Topping it off of course is Revelation 12 which describes "And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars she was with child…”. Since the child is King Jesus the imagery sure appears like a Queen in Heaven. That interpretation appears consistent with the earlier scriptures I cited. Now unlike the Old Testament Queens our Church firmly gives a subordinate role to Mary one of honour rather than worship. But why is it unscriptural to honour her with that imagery?

CONT.
Posted by mjpb, Monday, 30 November 2009 12:45:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
thomasfromtacoma,
When Perry Como sang "The rudest guys you've never seen are in Seattle",
I'm sure he had you in mind.
Posted by HermanYutic, Monday, 30 November 2009 12:51:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 12
  11. 13
  12. 14
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy