Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-02-2015, 06:37 AM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 01:19 AM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 12:30 AM)pablo Wrote:  If I was a member of any organization that had several leaders either accused or convicted of molesting children, I would no longer be a member or support them in any way.

Can you please explain how you rationalize your continued support of the Catholic church and it's leaders, including the pope?

Well, first off, it's telling that you equate 'accused' with 'convicted', like, it doesn't matter whether they're actually guilty or not, but whether people accuse them of being so.

Secondly, by 'leaders' I assume you mean the bishops, and while the offenses committed by certain bishops are unforgivable, you're still ignoring the fact that the vast majority of them did not do such things, so there's no real need to rationalize it. Even if they did, however, it wouldn't matter. The Catholic faith is the true faith, it doesn't matter how corrupt the officials within the Church get at a specific point in time, the Church itself will never fall, and the Catholic faith will still be the objective truth. You don't abandon your country because it's gone down the tubes, you stay to improve it. Same idea.

Your rationalizations and denial are intriguing. Please stick around so we can fully expose the delusional thinking of Catholics - should be fun.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
26-02-2015, 07:43 AM (This post was last modified: 26-02-2015 08:24 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Quote:The Catholic faith is the true faith, it doesn't matter how corrupt the officials within the Church get at a specific point in time, the Church itself will never fall, and the Catholic faith will still be the objective truth.

That's what they all say. You just keep telling yourself that. The fact is there is no "deposit of faith". The Church has CHANGED radically many times over the centuries, and alterered the content of what they believe. Makes you feel good, right ? Real fanboi, I see.
In fact there is no such thing as the "Catholic Faith". Every human brain that thinks about that subject has a different view of almost every element in it.
The Episcopal Church says the VERY SAME CREED every Sunday. In saying the VERY SAME words, some believe in "transubstantiation" many do not. In fact the entire notion is preposterous. There is no "substance" of a thing, apart from the "thing". The notion that the "substance" of bread and wine are changed into the "substance of something else, is simply meaningless in 2015. It's an ancient dualism that no longer contains any meaning, at all.

The Constitution on the Church of Vatican II said that the Roman Church was "subsumed" by the Church of Jesus, (thus is NOT the "entire real church") and as a practical matter we KNOW Vatican officials (who are NOT "the church" ... the "Body of Christ" IS the "Church" and it thinks and acts VASTLY differently than the Vatican proposes they do) never agree on almost everything. For example :

(from a prior thread of mine) ... proof there is no "Catholic Faith" ... if THAT MANY experts can radically totally disagree with Rome ....

"There is also a completely artificial semantic game played by the Roman Church in it's creation of a "distinction without a difference" with birth control, when they say that "Natural Family Planning" is acceptable, as moral, even while maintaining, in their own Moral Theology, that the ultimate determining factor in a moral choice, is "intention". The "intent", no matter how it's done, by definition, of "Family Planning", is to MAKE A PLAN..an intentional act to prevent a pregnancy, which can include a whole series of intentional acts, (temperature taking, abstaining on certain days, even going to classes, etc etc,). Apparently they have a REALLY dumb god, who is unaware of their intentions.

The Pontifical Commission, set up by Pope John XXXIII, inside the Roman Curia, was given the job, back in the 1960's, to determine the impact of "artificial" birth control on the Roman Church. The disagreements within the commission ultimately led to the publication of the Papal Encyclical, Humanae Vitae, by Paul VI.

When birth control finally arrived, and gave women control over their reproductive systems, with the first oral contraceptives in 1960, dissenters in the Church argued for a reconsideration of the Church positions, on the subject and, in 1963 Pope John XXIII established the above commission, consisting of six European non-theologians to study questions of birth control and populations. After he died in 1963, Pope Paul VI added theologians to the commission and expanded it to 72 members from five continents (including 16 theologians, 13 physicians and five women without medical credentials, with an executive committee of 16 bishops, including seven cardinals).

The commission produced a report in 1966, proposing that ("artificial") birth control was not intrinsically evil and that Catholic couples should be allowed to decide for themselves about, or if, they wished to employ (any) method of birth control. According to the majority report, the use of contraceptives should be regarded as an extension of the already accepted cycle method:

Quote:
The acceptance of a lawful application of the calculated sterile periods of the woman--that the application is legitimate presupposes right motives--makes a separation between the sexual act which is explicitly intended and its reproductive effect which is intentionally excluded. The tradition has always rejected seeking this separation with a contraceptive intention for motives spoiled by egoism and hedonism, and such seeking can never be admitted. The true opposition is not to be sought between some material conformity to the physiological processes of nature and some artificial intervention. For it is natural to man to use his skill in order to put under human control what is given by physical nature. The opposition is really to be sought between one way of acting which is contraceptive and opposed to a prudent and generous fruitfulness, and another way which is, in an ordered relationship to responsible fruitfulness and which has a concern for education and all the essential, human and Christian values.

Paul VI chose to reject the Majority Report, and issued Humanae Vitae, (and disregard the opinions of his OWN eminent theologians and experts), inexplicably.

There is evidence in the Vatican archives, and elsewhere, that Pope JohnPaul I, during his brief reign, was about to reverse the ban, or at the very least, downgrade it to a non-serious matter, and indeed the night before his death, (murder), the papers doing so were seen lying on his desk, in the "appartamento pontifico", in the Apostolic Palace, and have since disappeared, and never been found. The fact that the events observed by the Benedictine nuns in the Papal household, during the evening hours the night before, and during the night of the murder, were sealed forever, and lost to history, by the insistence of the Cardinal Camerlengo, (the Cardinal who stands in for the Pope after his death, during the "sede vacante"..the period of the "empty chair" http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/SV1978.html ), Jean Cardinal Villot .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marie_Villot.....

(...who indeed was fired the day before the murder, from his position as Secretary of State, along with his co-conspirator, Sebastiano Cardinal Baggio, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastiano_Baggio ), who also was removed from office the day before the murder, and when told he was reassigned to the vacant seat in Venice, (the seat Luciani (JPI) had held), to become the Patriarch of Venice, had simply flatly refused, and said "no I won't go"...to the Pope !!!, (the same Pope who was held in such condescending contempt (as "that hick from Venice", by the inner Patrician power circle in the Vatican). He along with Villot, was involved with the American Bishop, Paul Marcinkus, (The President of the Vatican Bank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Marcinkus, who for many months, evaded arrest by Italian authorities, by making sure he did not set foot outside of Vatican City), in drug dealing, and other questionable financial deals, which led, ultimately, to the bankruptcy of the Banco Ambrosiano, (in Milan), which was detailed by David Yallop, in his book, "In God's Name", and confirmed by Paul L. Williams in his book "Money, Murder, and the Mafia, ...the Vatican Exposed".

.....that what the nuns had observed during that night concerning Albino Luciani..JPI..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_Paul_I), were to remain forever secret, and that they take a vow of perpetual silence concerning their observations, leads one to believe that the reversal of the ban on birth control was seen by the right wing in the Vatican to be of such huge importance to the Roman Curia, that they could not accept the changes, and saw the immanent threat, for what it was. Since he had so upset the apple cart in only one month of service as Pontiff, (refusing coronation, receiving the Socialist/Communist politicians from South America), they saw him as a very serious threat. They simply got rid of him.

Thus, the fact is, if the murder had not happened, the Roman bishops today, would not be "teaching" what they are "teaching". and in fact, would be defending precisely the opposite position, and using the arguments of their own theologians to argue precisely the opposite position, because the duly elected Pope had made the (supposedly "divinely" directed) decision to "teach" precisely the OPPOSITE position. Of course this also raises the question whether God intended the murder to happen, and would be seen as His will, thus raising the whole question of "free will" but we'll leave that can of worms for another time, except to say, that science has now proven, by MRI, (Magnetic Resonance technology), that decisions are made before humans are conscious of the decision, thus "free will" is yet another large crack in the foundation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6S9OidmNZM , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ4nwTTmcgs , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ_YMPxkfXM , thus further invalidating the "salvation" paradigm, (which historically arose is Christianity long after the death of Yeshua..introduced first by Saul of Tarsus, (St. Paul)..many years after his, (Yeshua's) death..but that also will be left for another time). (The "priest" may have an obsolete job description). "

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
26-02-2015, 11:47 AM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 04:26 AM)ivaneus Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 12:19 AM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  See previous post. The amount of priests that actually get convicted of the child abuse are much lower than the general populace, and what's more, 'victim-advocacy' groups such as BishopAccountability.net or SNAP have been found either fabricating false convictions or listing priests who were long dead, and thus, couldn't defend themselves from such charges. It's all in the link provided in the previous post.


There was never concrete proof for any sort of cover-up one by the Vatican.

and the evidence gathered means nothing to you, then?

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-n-re...ren-n22531

If we get to it, I'll explain why the U.N. is an evil empire-esque piece of shit later, but suffice to say, I don't see a bunch of bureaucrats that retroactively declared themselves as the moral authorities of the entire world based on absolutely nothing, as reliable about anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 11:49 AM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 06:37 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 01:19 AM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Well, first off, it's telling that you equate 'accused' with 'convicted', like, it doesn't matter whether they're actually guilty or not, but whether people accuse them of being so.

Secondly, by 'leaders' I assume you mean the bishops, and while the offenses committed by certain bishops are unforgivable, you're still ignoring the fact that the vast majority of them did not do such things, so there's no real need to rationalize it. Even if they did, however, it wouldn't matter. The Catholic faith is the true faith, it doesn't matter how corrupt the officials within the Church get at a specific point in time, the Church itself will never fall, and the Catholic faith will still be the objective truth. You don't abandon your country because it's gone down the tubes, you stay to improve it. Same idea.

Your rationalizations and denial are intriguing. Please stick around so we can fully expose the delusional thinking of Catholics - should be fun.

Is there some sort of disconnect when it comes to the world "rationalization", because I don't think atheists ever know what it means when they use it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 11:57 AM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Quote:Oh really? I wonder why that is? Dodgy

You do realize that's not an answer? Also, the amount of accusations are also lower than the general populace, despite how the media likes to drum them up.

Quote:So what?

That is an indicator of how long it takes victims to recover sufficiently from the trauma to be able to face going public.

Dodgy Dodgy

You do realize that making an accusation against someone who can't defend themselves, and then, as a result of the lack of trial, declaring them guilty by default IE without an actual conviction, is a thing that only a dishonest, slimy bastard would do, right? That would be like if I accused Christopher Hitchens of eating babies, and since he's dead and can't defend himself in a court of law, automatically declared that he was guilty of it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 12:00 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 11:49 AM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 06:37 AM)Chas Wrote:  Your rationalizations and denial are intriguing. Please stick around so we can fully expose the delusional thinking of Catholics - should be fun.

Is there some sort of disconnect when it comes to the world "rationalization", because I don't think atheists ever know what it means when they use it.

Speaking of disconnects, why is it you will deny evidence presented to you, yet completely believe in the fantastical when you have no evidence whatsoever?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 12:07 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Quote:In fact the entire notion is preposterous. There is no "substance" of a thing, apart from the "thing". The notion that the "substance" of bread and wine are changed into the "substance of something else, is simply meaningless in 2015. It's an ancient dualism that no longer contains any meaning, at all.

No it's still valid. Sorry.

As for the rest of it, you don't have to tell me that Vatican 2 is a shit council that changed the Church radically, and for the worse. However, you're ignoring the fact that Vatican 2 was largely a pastoral council, and the two dogmatic constitutions within it, only repeated previously held dogma. In other words, unlike pretty much all other Church Councils, this one is not infallible, and is liable to change by proceeding Councils. That's pretty much the key thing here, as Vatican 2 does contradict previous teaching, however, it's largely non-dogmatic, which is expected, as it would be literally impossible to declare the same things in an entirely dogmatic Council. So, in short, Vatican 2 is a shit modernization of the Church, but we can still fix it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 12:09 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 12:00 PM)pablo Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 11:49 AM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Is there some sort of disconnect when it comes to the world "rationalization", because I don't think atheists ever know what it means when they use it.

Speaking of disconnects, why is it you will deny evidence presented to you, yet completely believe in the fantastical when you have no evidence whatsoever?

1) I don't deny any evidence, sorry.

2) The Bible has mountains of historical attestation to prove itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 12:14 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 12:07 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
Quote:In fact the entire notion is preposterous. There is no "substance" of a thing, apart from the "thing". The notion that the "substance" of bread and wine are changed into the "substance of something else, is simply meaningless in 2015. It's an ancient dualism that no longer contains any meaning, at all.

No it's still valid. Sorry.

As for the rest of it, you don't have to tell me that Vatican 2 is a shit council that changed the Church radically, and for the worse. However, you're ignoring the fact that Vatican 2 was largely a pastoral council, and the two dogmatic constitutions within it, only repeated previously held dogma. In other words, unlike pretty much all other Church Councils, this one is not infallible, and is liable to change by proceeding Councils. That's pretty much the key thing here, as Vatican 2 does contradict previous teaching, however, it's largely non-dogmatic, which is expected, as it would be literally impossible to declare the same things in an entirely dogmatic Council. So, in short, Vatican 2 is a shit modernization of the Church, but we can still fix it.

So in other words, the Vatican is evolving to better suit the times?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 12:18 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 12:09 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 12:00 PM)pablo Wrote:  Speaking of disconnects, why is it you will deny evidence presented to you, yet completely believe in the fantastical when you have no evidence whatsoever?

1) I don't deny any evidence, sorry.

2) The Bible has mountains of historical attestation to prove itself.

Then you accept the fact that numerous catholic priests are guilty of molesting, and that the church covered it up?

The bible is fiction, not a good source of evidence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: